Why the study?
Does the Triple-120 meter shuttle test validly measure anaerobic endurance compared to the Wingate 60-second cycle test in amateur football players?
Does the Triple-120 meter shuttle test validly measure anaerobic endurance compared to the Wingate 60-second cycle test in amateur football players?
The Triple-120 meter shuttle test is proposed as a valid, sport-specific test of anaerobic endurance for rugby league players based on heart rate responses, despite a lack of correlation in lactate and perceived exertion compared to the Wingate test.
T120S heart rate correlation with W60 is insufficient for validation; leaves open its utility as anaerobic endurance test in football players.
The aim of this study was to design a simple field test to measure the anaerobic endurance fitness of rugby league players, which is an important fitness quality in the game of rugby league. Twelve amateur football players with a mean (+/-SD) age of 21.5 years (+/-2.2) volunteered to participate in the study. The subjects completed 1 trial of the Wingate 60-second (W60) cycle test and 2 trials of the new Triple-120 meter shuttle (T120S) test. All trials were completed 4 days apart. The validity of the T120S was determined by comparing physiological responses (heart rate and blood lactate) and rating of perceived exertion to the all-out W60 cycle test. The results indicate there is a significant relationship between maximum heart rate (r = 0.63 and 0.71) for the 2 trials of the T120S and the W60 cycle test. There was no significant relationship between the 2 trials and the W60 cycle test for post 3 minute lactate (r = 0.112 and 0.101) and rating of perceived exertion (r = 0.94 and 0.161). However, the T120S test elicited greater mean values for these measures than the W60 cycle test. The results indicate that the T120S is a valid test of anaerobic endurance and represents a sports specific test of this quality that may provide useful information for players and coaches involved in the sport of rugby league.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Holloway et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: