Demonstrates the influence of sex and body characteristics on outrigger canoe performance, indicating the need for tailored assessments.
The relationship between laboratory-based ergometer performance, body size, and on-water outrigger canoe (OC) racing remains unclear. This study examined associations between anthropometric characteristics, ergometer-derived performance, and on-water endurance performance in OC athletes using a sex-specific approach. Competitive paddlers (22 males and 16 females) completed anthropometric assessments, an incremental test, a 1000-m time trial, and a maximum paddling power test on an OC-adapted ergometer, as well as a 4.18-km simulated on-water race. Sex-specific statistical analyses, including allometric scaling and regression models, were used to identify determinants of on-water performance. Male athletes exhibited greater body mass, height, lean body mass, and superior performance in all ergometer and on-water tests compared with females ( p < 0.01). In females only, body mass and lean body mass were moderately to strongly associated with ergometer-derived power outputs (r = 0.66–0.85, p < 0.01), whereas no such relationships were observed in males. Significant allometric scaling effects were identified exclusively in females for power-based ergometer variables, indicating disproportionate increases in power with increasing body and lean mass. No anthropometric variables were associated with on-water performance in either sex. In regression analyses, incremental peak power was the strongest predictor of on-water performance in males (adjusted R 2 = 0.69), whereas in females, 1000-m mean power allometrically adjusted for body mass best predicted on-water speed (adjusted R 2 = 0.67). These findings emphasize the importance of sex-specific interpretation of ergometer assessments and consideration of body size when relating laboratory performance to real-world OC racing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Costa et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: