Publication:
Mechanically Braked Elliptical Wingate Test: Modification Considerations, Load Optimization, and Reliability

dc.authorscopusid28767936600
dc.authorscopusid10340647500
dc.authorscopusid55307876100
dc.authorscopusid36626799300
dc.contributor.authorOzkaya, O.
dc.contributor.authorÇolakoǧlu, M.
dc.contributor.authorKuzucu, E.O.
dc.contributor.authorYıldıztepe, E.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T14:27:48Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T14:27:48Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.departmentOndokuz Mayıs Üniversitesien_US
dc.department-temp[Ozkaya] Ozgur, Department of Coaching Education, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey; [Çolakoǧlu] Muzaffer, Department of Coaching Education, Ege Üniversitesi, Izmir, Turkey; [Kuzucu] Erinc O., Department of Coaching Education, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey; [Yıldıztepe] Engin, Department of Statistics, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Izmir, Turkeyen_US
dc.description.abstractThe 30-second, all-out Wingate test evaluates anaerobic performance using an upper or lower body cycle ergometer (cycle Wingate test). A recent study showed that using a modified electromagnetically braked elliptical trainer for Wingate testing (EWT) leads to greater power outcomes because of larger muscle group recruitment. The main purpose of this study was to modify an elliptical trainer using an easily understandable mechanical brake system instead of an electromagnetically braked modification. Our secondary aim was to determine a proper test load for the EWT to reveal the most efficient anaerobic test outcomes such as peak power (PP), average power (AP), minimum power (MP), power drop (PD), and fatigue index ratio (FI%) and to evaluate the retest reliability of the selected test load. Delta lactate responses (DLa) were also analyzed to confirm all the anaerobic performance of the athletes. Thirty healthy and well-trained male university athletes were selected to participate in the study. By analysis of variance, an 18% body mass workload yielded significantly greater test outcomes (PP = 19.5 ± 2.4 W•kg -1, AP = 13.7 ± 1.7 W•kg -1, PD = 27.9 ± 5W•s -1, FI% = 58.4 ± 3.3%, and δLa = 15.4 ± 1.7 mM) than the other (12-24% body mass) tested loads (p < 0.05). Test and retest results for relative PP, AP, MP, PD, FI%, and δLa were highly correlated (r = 0.97, 0.98, 0.94, 0.91, 0.81, and 0.95, respectively). In conclusion, it was found that the mechanically braked modification of an elliptical trainer successfully estimated anaerobic power and capacity. A workload of 18% body mass was optimal for measuring maximal and reliable anaerobic power outcomes. Anaerobic testing using an EWT may be more useful to athletes and coaches than traditional cycle ergometers because a greater proportion of muscle groups are worked during exercise on an elliptical trainer. © 2012 National Strength and Conditioning Association.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1519/JSC.0b013e31822e81ab
dc.identifier.endpage1323en_US
dc.identifier.issn1064-8011
dc.identifier.issn1533-4287
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.pmid21904246
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84857339134
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage1313en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e31822e81ab
dc.identifier.volume26en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000303151300020
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkinsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Strength and Conditioning Researchen_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Strength and Conditioning Researchen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectCycle Ergometeren_US
dc.subjectElliptical Traineren_US
dc.subjectWork Loaden_US
dc.titleMechanically Braked Elliptical Wingate Test: Modification Considerations, Load Optimization, and Reliabilityen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files