Reliability of Time-to-Exhaustion versus Time-Trial Running Tests in Runners

Abstract

Both time-to-exhaustion (TTE) and time-trial (TT) exercise tests are commonly used to assess exercise performance, but no study has directly examined the reliability of comparable tests in the same subjects. To evaluate the reliability of comparable TTE and TT treadmill running tests of high and moderately high exercise intensity in endurance-trained male distance runners, and to validate Hinckson and Hopkins TT prediction methods using log-log modeling from TTE results. After familiarization tests, eight endurance-trained male distance runners performed, in a randomized, counterbalanced order, eight trials consisting of two 5-km TT and two 1500-m TT, and four TTE tests run at a speed equivalent to the average speed attained during both the 5-km and 1500-m TT distances. Typical error of the estimate (TEE) expressed as a coefficient of variation for the 5-km TT, 5-km TTE, 1500-m TT, and 1500-m TTE were 2.0, 15.1, 3.3, and 13.2%, respectively. The standard error of the estimate for predicted TT running speed using log-log modeling from TTE results was 0.67%, and the predicted versus criterion reliability of this method revealed TEE values of 1.6% and 2.5% for the prediction of 5-km and 1500-m TT, respectively. The variability of 5-km and 1500-m TT tests was significantly less than for similar TTE treadmill protocols. Despite the greater variability of the TTE tests, log-log modeling using the TTE test results reliably predicted actual TT performance.