Efficacy of Selected Workloads in Identifying Anaerobic Power Using the Wingate Anaerobic Test

Abstract

0797 The Wingate anaerobic test was first developed in 1977 as a laboratory test to assess musculoskeletal anaerobic power. The test was performed on a modified bicycle ergometer at a workload equivalent to 7.5% (0.075 Kp/kg) of the performer's body weight and required one all-out 30-s exercise session. Since then, studies have recommended optimum loads for obtaining peak power as 9.5% of the performer's body weight for untrained adult males and 9.0% of the performer's body weight for untrained adult females. It has been suggested that the test is insensitive to small adjustments in resistance load and has large individual variability around the resistance producing maximal power values. PURPOSE: To examine peak anaerobic power (Pp) and mean anaerobic power (Pm) at the original and the new recommended workloads, as well as one workload above and one below these resistances. METHODS: Twenty-four sedentary college men (n = 12) and women (n = 12), 19 to 29 years of age (for males, 22.3 ± 1.3 yrs; for females, 22.0 ± 2.5 yrs) were assessed on a Monark Ergomedic 894E cycle ergometer using the Wingate protocol at workloads equivalent to 6.5%, 7.5%, 9.5%, and 11.5% of the performers' body weights. RESULTS: For Pp, a main effect for gender was found (P< .05); thus, males and females were analyzed separately. In males, repeated measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction identified Pp at 9.5% to be significantly greater than Pp at 6.5% (P< .001), 7.5% (P< .01), and 11.5% (P< .05). For females, Pp was again produced at 9.5% and found to be significantly (P< .01) greater than Pp at 6.5% or 7.5%, but not from Pp measured at 11.5% (P = .166). A main effect for gender was not found for Pm (P = .068); therefore, male and female data were combined. Pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment identified Pm at 9.5% to be significantly greater than Pm at 6.5% (p< .001), 7.5% (P< .01), and 11.5% (P< .01). No other groups were significantly different from each other. CONCLUSIONS: Resistance loads that vary by 2% of the performer's body weight from optimum loads during the Wingate anaerobic test elicit peak and mean anaerobic power values significantly lower than power values obtained at the currently recommended loads for this population.