1

Incremental Testing Design on Slide Board for Speed Skaters: Comparison Between Two Different
Protocols.
Piucco, D., Oʼconnell, D., Stefanyshyn, D., & De Lucas, D.
Post-print, not the final published version.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of stage duration (Long-stage–LS: 3-min, Short-stage–
SS: 1-min) on maximal and submaximal aerobic physiological variables during a simulated skating test
performed on a slide board. Ten well-trained male speed skaters performed two maximal incremental tests
on slide board until voluntary exhaustion. The second ventilatory threshold (VT2) was determined by the
ventilatory equivalent method. All participants reached the criteria for maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max)
attainment in both protocols. Maximal cadence (CADmax), VO2 at VT2 and cadence at VT2 (CADVT2) were
significantly higher during SS protocol, but maximal heart rate was significantly lower for the SS protocol.
VO2max was significantly correlated with CADmax for the SS (r= 0.62) and LS protocol (r= 0.61). Strong
correlation were found between CADmax and CADVT2 during the SS (r=0.83) and LS protocol (r=0.76).
The results of the present study suggest that either SS or LS slide board incremental protocols can be used
to evaluate skaters, since they elicited maximal physiological responses. Additionally, slide board
incremental skating tests may be considered as a more specific and practical alternative than laboratorybased tests, especially when a large number of athletes need to be assessed.
Key words: exercise performance; incremental test; speed skating; maximal oxygen uptake; aerobic
evaluation; fitness test design.

1

2

INTRODUCTION
Endurance performance in speed skating is related to physiological aspects, such as maximal
oxygen uptake (VO2max), lactate and ventilatory thresholds (VT) (9). Aerobic functional testing is largely
used to assess and prescribe training intensities for endurance athletes. It is believed that the results of these
tests repeated throughout a season provide useful information about the training status and fitness level of
athletes (11). However, the design and mode of an incremental exercise test can confound the measurement
of the submaximal and maximal physiological variables (3). This is especially important to consider in speed
skaters, who are rarely tested in a sport-specific manner.
Some studies have reported that VO2max is not statistically different between 1-min and 3-min
stage protocols during cycling and running exercises (4,5,24 ). However, Machado et al. (20), Kuipers et al.
(17) and Bishop et al. (5) found that significantly higher maximal work rate is typically attained during an
incremental test comprising of shorter stages of 1-min duration, yet higher values for maximal heart rate
(HRmax) were found when protocol with 3-min stage duration was used. It is important to note that most
of the studies provided no information about the achievement of the criteria used to define maximum effort,
i.e. a plateau in VO2, blood lactate concentration ([Lac]), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), heart rate (HR)
or rating of perceived exertion (RPE) values, commonly used to define VO2max (13).
It is extremely important to appropriately quantify submaximal physiological parameters given its
critical role in proper training prescription. However, few studies have compared physiological variables
corresponding to the second VT (VT2) between protocols with different durations, and most of them have
provided conflicting results. Bentley and McNaughton (4) have shown that the work rate corresponding to
the VT2 is quantified differently when using incremental exercise tests comprising either 1-min or 3-min

2

3

stages, while Amann et al.(1) and Weston et al.(27) reported no difference in the VT2 when obtained from
two tests comprising 1-min or 3-min stages.
While the specificity of performance evaluation is a key factor for training prescription, the
validations of specific fitness tests with speed skating are scarce, particularly because skating activities are
challenging to simulate in the laboratory (11). On track skating tests are more complicated to perform as
testing conditions are more difficult to control. Thus, acquisition of physiological data becomes problematic.
Similarly, the use of skate specific treadmills is most of time inaccessible and expensive to monitor training
and performance during the competitive season. As an alternative to perform a more specific and feasible
laboratory test, Piucco et al. (22) proposed a maximal incremental test on a slide board, using a short-stage
protocol (i.e. 1 min-stage) as an easy and low cost sport-specific evaluation for speed skaters. The authors
found a high reliability (ICC > 0.9 and typical error of measure < 3.5%) of maximal and submaximal
physiological variables obtained. However, there are no results in the literature comparing two different
incremental protocols of varying stage length to evaluate physiological parameters of speed skaters
performing their unique movement pattern. As previously mentioned, the duration of protocols can result in
different values, especially for maximum workload and HRmax achieved (5, 20) and also for workload at
VT2 (4).
Therefore, the main aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of stage duration (Longstage–LS: 3-min, Short-stage–SS: 1-min) on maximal and submaximal aerobic physiological variables
during a simulated skating test performed on a slide board. In addition, the relationships between mechanical
and physiological variables were accessed to describe the influence of stage duration on exercise
prescription parameters.

METHODS
3

4

Experimental Approach to the Problem
To determine whether physiological responses are influenced by incremental test design
(independent variable) performed on a slide board, a sample of speed skaters performed two different
maximal incremental tests differing by stage durations. Maximal and submaximal aerobic indices were
compared between protocols, as dependent variables. We therefore hypothesized that differences in stage
duration would lead to changes in maximal and submaximal physiological values, which are directly related
to performance evaluation and training prescription indices, such as HR, VO2 and intensity. However, the
specificity of the skating gesture could reflect on different responses when compared to that reported for
cycling and running.

Subjects
Ten well-trained male endurance speed skaters specializing in the 1000, 1500 and 3000 meters event
volunteered to participate in this study. The athlete’s mean age, body mass, percentage of body fat and
height were 18.9±5.3 years (age ranging from 16 to 33 years), 72.1±7.8 kg, 12.8±1.5 %, and 1.78±4.6 m
respectively. Informed consent was obtained from the subjects or from parental when under the age of 18
years. All testing fulfilled the institutional Ethics Committee regulations regarding the use of human
subjects. Subjects were tested at the end of the off-season, while participating in a structured training
program. All participants had experience with the slide board skating movement and with maximal
incremental effort tests.
Participants were instructed to refrain from heavy training, maintain a regular diet 24h prior to
testing, and to abstain from the ingestion of any stimulant (caffeine, nicotine) or alcohol during the preceding
4

5

testing day. Each subject performed two incremental skating tests to fatigue using an instrumented slide
board. The tests were performed three to six days apart in a temperature-controlled environment.
The slide board protocols were performed on a polyethylene surface (2.10 x 0.6 x 0.2 m) fixed to
the ground with double sided tape. Subject wore a pair of nylon socks over their shoes while skating on the
slide board. The dynamic friction coefficient (µ c) between both materials was 0.13 ± 0.05, determined by
different loads accelerations, tracked by a high speed kinematic system (240 fps, Eagle System; Motion
Analysis Corp.). Optical sensors were placed at either extremity of the slide board to determine the athlete’s
foot contact time at the lateral stoppers and determine the athletes’ instantaneous skating cadence (Figure
1). A software program was developed to help the athlete to keep the pace by providing visual and auditory
feedback. The participants performed a five-minute warm-up at a cadence of 30 push-offs per minute (ppm)
on the slide board. After a three-minute rest, the protocols started with a cadence of 30 ppm and were
increased by three push-offs every minute (short-stage protocol - SS) or every three minutes (long-stage
protocol - LS). Therefore, the only difference between the protocols was stage duration time. The distance
between the lateral stoppers was kept the same for all subjects (2.10 m). This decision was based on an
unpublished pilot study, where 20 subjects performed the SS test on the slide board, and were classified by
height, leg length and body mass. The result of a stepwise linear regression showed that only the final
cadence was responsible for significant changes in VO2max during the SS protocol on slide board.
Therefore, it is likely that the power output (Po) during the test, which is calculated based on the skating
cadence, stride length (stoppers distance), body mass, and on the dynamic coefficient of friction, is the main
variable that can influence the physiological responses during the test. The participants were asked to
maintain a constant hunched skating posture and were free to move their arms during the test.
FIGURE 1 HERE

5

6

The maximal cadence (CADmax) was defined as the maximal number of push-offs.min-1 reached
during the slide board tests. If the final stage was not completed, the CADmax was calculated according to
the following equation adapted from Kuipers et al. (18).
(1)

𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 + 𝑡𝑡/𝑠𝑠 ∗ 3

with CADf the cadence of the final stage completed, t the uncompleted stage time, s the stage duration and
3 the cadence increment per stage.
The mechanical power output (Po) produced by the speed skaters on the slide board was modeled
by the one-dimensional power balance model proposed by van Ingen Schenau (26). The model was driven
by skater’s body mass (m), gravitational acceleration (g), dynamic friction coefficient (µc) and speed (v)
measurements in the sideward direction (equation 2).
(2)

𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = 𝜇𝜇𝑐𝑐 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚

Participants were verbally encouraged to exert a maximal effort during all tests. The tests were
completed when the selected cadence could no longer be maintained or at volitional exhaustion. The
attainment of VO2max was defined using the follow criteria proposed by Howley et al. (13): (1) a plateau
in VO2 regardless of increase in cadence; (2) age-predicted maximal HR attained (3) RER ≥1.10; and (4)
[Lac] ≥8 mmol.l-1. Pulmonary ventilation (VE), RER, carbon dioxide production (VCO2) and VO2 were
measured breath-by-breath during all tests using a gas analyzer (K4b2 Cosmed®, Rome, Italy), calibrated
according to manufacturer’s instructions prior to each test. VO2max was considered to be the highest value
averaged over a 15-second period. Fingertip blood samples were collected during the final 20 s of every 3
minute-stage, to assess changes in [Lac] during the LS protocol, and at minute one, three, and five following
the LS and SS tests conclusion, to assess maximal values of [Lac]. Blood lactate samples were not measured

6

7

during the SS protocol. A Lactate Pro® (Arkay Inc., New South Wales, Australia) analyser, calibrated
according to the manufacturer’s recommendations before each analysis, was used to measure [Lac].
The VT2 during SS and LS tests was detected using the ventilatory equivalent method (23). In this
way, two independent observers blindly detected intensity associated with the VT2 by examining inflection
points in the plots of ventilatory equivalents of oxygen (VE/VO2) and carbon dioxide (VE/VCO2). The interobservers reliability coefficient was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC=0.91 for SS and
0.77 for LS). Values of Po, CAD, VO2, VO2 as a percentage of VO2max (%VO2max), VE, HR and RER
corresponding to VT2 for each protocol were determined.
Procedures
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (s). Normality was assessed using the ShapiroWilk test. Student’s t test for paired sample was used to compare variables between LS and SS tests. The
correlation coefficient of variables between LS and SS protocols and the correlation among VO2max,
CADmax and Pmax during LS and SS protocols were assessed using a Pearson product-moment correlation.
The relationship between maximum workload and VO2max was plotted. Statistical analysis was conducted
using GraphPad Prism (v. 5.0 GraphPad Prism Software Inc, San Diego, CA) and Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS Inc. v.17.0, Chicago, USA). The confidence level was set at 5%.

RESULTS
All participants reached at least three of criteria for VO2max attainment, according to Howley et al.
(13), during the LS test (8/10 showed a VO2 plateau, 7/10 reached maximum HR predicted, 10/10 RER ≥
1.1, 6/10 [Lac]max ≥ 8 mmol.l-1) and SS test (5/10 showed a VO2 plateau, 5/10 reached maximum HR
predicted, 10/10 RER ≥ 1.1, 8/10 [Lac]max ≥ 8 mmol.l-1).
7

8

The main comparisons for maximal and submaximal variables, obtained from LS and SS protocols,
are shown on Table 1. The total time duration was 27±2.1 minutes for LS and 10±1.8 minutes for SS
protocol. CADmax, Pomax, VO2LV2 and CADLV2 were significantly higher during SS protocol, but HRmax
was significantly lower for the SS protocol. Significant correlations were obtained for most of the maximal
variables, with the exception of RERmax and [Lac]max. Submaximal VO2, HR and Po values were
correlated between LS and SS protocols.

TABLE 1 HERE

VO2max (l.min-1) was significantly correlated with CADmax for the SS (r= 0.62) and LS protocol (r=
0.61). Strong correlation were found between CADmax and CADVT2 during the SS (r=0.83) and LS protocol
(r=0.76).
The relationship between maximum aerobic power (VO2max) and maximal mechanical workload
(Pomax) for the two protocols is presented in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2 HERE

Discussion

8

9

The main findings of this study was that incremental slide board skating tests with both short- and
long-stage protocols provided similar values of VO2max, RERmax, VEmax and [Lac]max, while the other
maximal variables (HRmax, CADmax, Pomax) presented significant differences. In the same way, certain
submaximal values related to VT2 (i.e, HR, RER, VE and Po) were not different between both protocols,
while VO2, CAD and %VO2max associated to VT2 were found to be significantly different. Another
important finding was that the design of the incremental tests analyzed in the present study was adequate to
elucidate maximal physiological responses.
No studies were found in the literature comparing different incremental protocols during skating
movement pattern. To better discuss the results, the specificity of skating movement should be taking into
account, since a large difference on HR and VO2 responses can be found between skating and cycling or
running exercises (15, 16). The difficulty to assess speed skaters using incremental laboratory testing is
evident, due to need for a specific ergometer such as wide size treadmills. Slide boards have been frequently
used as an off-ice training modality by speed skaters, since it seems to mimic the skating gesture and evokes
much more specific physiological and biomechanical responses than cycling (14). In this way, the slide
board seems to be an attractive way to evaluate physiological indices with a low cost equipment. Moreover,
during inline skating incremental protocol on a track, a low friction coefficient and rolling resistance may
reduce the physiological demand at any given speed, and high increase in velocity is necessary to attain
maximal effort. However, at maximal levels of exertion it may become biomechanically or technically
difficult to skate fast enough at 0% grade to maximally challenge the cardiovascular system (12). The
aforementioned problems were not observed during either SL or SS slide board protocols, since most criteria
to determine VO2max were reached. However, some skaters expressed having difficulties maintaining high
stroke frequencies during the last stages of the SS incremental protocol. In this sense, it seems that the both
incremental test design and characteristics of the board (friction coefficient and size) were adequate to obtain
maximal variables without the influence of individual factors as level and specificity of training.
9

10

Although there are some suggestions in the literature that longer tests could impair the VO2max
attainment (21), the VO2max values obtained during the LS and SS slide board protocols were not
significantly different (Table 1). This finding is consistent with previous reports using incremental cycling
tests (3, 4, 24), suggesting that VO2max is largely the same during incremental skating exercise on slide
board, regardless of the rate of work increments. Despite no differences between VO2max, the CADmax
during the SS protocol was higher than during the LS protocol. The disparity between linear trend lines
(Figure 2) indicates that the CADmax may alone have influenced the relationship between maximum
workload and VO2max during both protocols.
The higher CADmax values observed during the short skating protocol compared with longer is in
agreement with previous studies which analyzed other modalities (3, 4, 24). In those studies, the higher
maximum workload was explained by the fast workload increment. According to Bishop et al. (6), a high
cycling peak power might be related to the capacity to delay the accumulation of metabolic products.
Therefore, the higher CADmax recorded during the SS test, may be related to decreased accumulation of
blood lactate at the same absolute power outputs, allowing the athlete to attain a higher power output before
fatigue. This can be evidenced by the strong correlation between peak power and the VT2 in the present
study (r=0.83 and r=0.76 for SS and LS protocols). Nonetheless, the relative contribution of anaerobic
pathways may contribute to that, regarding the significant difference in [Lac]max between the two protocols.
Despite the difference in CADmax attained during the SS and LS incremental skating protocols, the
significant correlations observed between VO2max and CADmax suggest that the maximum cadence
reached during both protocols might be a good a predictor of aerobic fitness, as previous demonstrated in
different exercise modes (2, 5).
The HRmax achieved during the LS skating protocol was higher when compared to SS. This finding
is consistent with previous studies reported by Bishop et al. (5) and Roffey et al. (24) when comparing 1min stage versus 3-min stages protocols. Many factors could have contributed to the significant elevation in
10

11

HR during the LS test, such as an increased thermoregulatory load, increased blood flow, different substrate
use, and the lack of time for HR to adapt to the intensity requirement when increasing workload every
minute (7, 5, 24). It also is likely that the higher HR observed in the LS protocol compared with the SS
protocol can be attributed to cardiovascular drift in HR responses, that is evident in exercise testing that
exceeds 10 – 15 min in duration (8). In addition, the high intramuscular forces and long period of isometric
contraction on quadriceps, that are typical during skating (10, 25), during could also explain the high HR
values found, since it might lead to a disproportionate increase in HR relative to VO2.
At the intensity corresponding to VT2, significant differences occurred in CAD, VO2 and
%VO2max between the two protocols, despite significant correlations between submaximal VO2 parameters
was also found (Table 1). Contradictory results have been reported in the literature when comparing
submaximal physiological parameters derived from incremental tests with different design (4, 1, 27).
However, it is possible that the long test resulted in a steady state of exercise being achieved and, therefore,
induces more valid blood lactate and respiratory responses (3, 4). Nonetheless, the body posture adopted by
the skaters during the test could play a role on the physiological response (10). Despite the subjects were
asked to keep a skating posture close to real situation, the body posture (knee and trunk angles) was not
controlled in this study.
The skating gesture performed on the slide board can be used not only for testing, but for training
purposes as well. When prescribing training intensity based on peak exercise testing results, an incremental
test comprising shorter stages, could inflate submaximal work rates expressed as a percentage of peak values
(4). Therefore, the prescribed work rate may be too severe and result in suboptimal acute training responses.
In the other hand, test comprising of longer stages may challenge the athlete to an extended effort and
therefore be relate better to field performance (19) and more valid to prescribe endurance training intensities.
We believed that these statements could also be valid for prescribing training on slide board, based on SS
and SL protocols. Additionally, the relationship found between work intensity and VO2 during skating on
11

12

the slide board indicates the importance of including high power skating movement or sprint training for
elite speed skaters. Highly fit individuals may require a higher training stimulus to achieve a significant
training effect. Since peak values are difficult to reach when training, a slide board skating could be used to
perform high intensity interval-training sessions. Intensity can be easily manipulated by changes in cadence
or by increasing the friction coefficient on the board surface. Nonetheless, a good physiological and
neuromuscular adaptation can be obtained from training loads on the slide board, since the gesture is
specifically related to skating activity itself.
In conclusion, the results of the present study suggest that either SS or LS slide board protocols can
be used to determine VO2max in skaters. Additionally, the incremental maximal skating protocol on a slide
board elucidated maximal physiological responses and seems adequate to evaluate aerobic indices of
performance on skaters. Therefore, the incremental test on slide board may be considered as a more specific
and practical alternative to laboratory-based tests, especially when a large number of athletes need to be
monitored, given the correlation between CADmax and VO2max. However, intervention-based studies are
necessary in order to better understand the likely benefits applied to slide board training and to compare
technical aspects with the real skating movement.

Practical Implications

Based on our results, either short-stage or long-stage skating protocols on slide board can be used to
determine VO2max in skaters. The relationship between CADmax and VO2max obtained during the both
protocols seems to be a good predictor of aerobic fitness. In this sense, the incremental skating tests on the
slide board seem to be a more precise, attractive and a practical way to evaluate skaters and to prescribe
high intensity interval-training sessions.
REFERENCES
12

13

1. Amann, M, Subudhi, A, and Foster, C. Influence of testing protocol on ventilatory thresholds and
cycling performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36: 613-622, 2004.
2. Bassett, DR Jr, and Howley, ET. Limiting factors for maximum oxygen uptake and determinants
of endurance performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32: 70–84, 2000.
3. Bentley, DJ, Newell, J, and Bishop D. Incremental Exercise Test Design and Analysis. Sports
Med 37: 575-586, 2007.
4. Bentley, DJ, and McNaughton, LR. Comparison of Wpeak, VO2peak and the ventilation
threshold from two different incremental exercise tests: relationship to endurance performance. J
Sci Med Sport 6:422–435, 2003.
5. Bishop, D, Jenkins, DG, and Mackinnon, LT. The effect of stage duration on the calculation of
peak VO2 during cycle ergometry. J Sci Med Sport 1:171–178, 1998.
6. Bishop, D, Jenkins, DG, and Mackinnon, LT. The relationship between plasma lactate parameters,
Wpeak and 1-h cycling performance in women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30:1270-5, 1998.
7. Buchfuhrer, MJ, Hansen, JE, Robinson, TE, Sue, DY, Wasserman, K, and Whipp, BJ. Optimising
the exercise protocol for cardiopulmonary assessment. J Appl Physiol 55: 1558-64, 1983.
8. Coyle, E. Cardiovascular drift during prolonged exercise and the effects of dehydration. Int J
Sports Med 19:S121–124, 1998.
9. De Koning, JJ, and van Ingen Schenau, GJ. Performance-determining factors in speed skating. In:
Biomechanics in Sport: Performance Improvement and Injury Prevention. V.M. Zatsiorski ed.
Malden: Blackwell Science, 2000. pp. 232-245.
10. Foster, C, Rundell, KW, Snyder, AC, Stray-Gundersen, J, Kemkers, G, Thometz, N, Broker, J, and
Knapp, E. Evidence for restricted muscle blood flow during speed skating. Med Sci Sports Exerc
31: 1433-40, 1999.
11. Foster, C, Thompson, NN, Synder, AC. Ergometric studies with speed skaters: evolution of
laboratory methods. J Strength Cond Res 7, 193-200, 1993.
13

14

12. Hoffman, MD, Jones, GM, Bota, B, Mandli, M, and Clifford, PS. Inline skating: physiological
responses and comparison with roller skiing. Int J Sports Med 13: 137-144, 1992.
13. Howley, ET, Bassett, DR Jr, and Welch, HG. Criteria for maximal oxygen uptake: review and
commentary. Med Sci Sports Exerc 27: 1292–1301, 1995.
14. Kandou, TWA, Houtman, ILD, Bol, EVD, de Boer, RW, de Groot, G, and van Ingen Schenau,
GJ. Comparison of physiology and biomechanics of speed skating with cycling and with
skateboard exercise. Can J Appl Physiol 12:31-6, 1987.
15. Koepp, KK, and Janot, JM. A comparison of VO2max and metabolic variables between treadmill
running and treadmill skating. J Strength Cond Res 22: 497-502, 1996.
16. Krieg, A, Meyer, T, Clas, S., and Kindermann, W. Characteristics of inline speedskating Incremental tests and effect of drafting. Int J Sports Med 27: 818-823, 1996.
17. Kuipers, H, Rietjens, G, Verstappen, F, Schoenmakers, H, and Hofman, G. Effects of stage duration
in incremental running tests on physiological variables. In. J Sports Med 24:486–491, 2003.
18. Kuipers, H, Verstappen, FTJ, Geurten, P, Geurten, P, and van Kranenburg, G. Variability of
aerobic performance in laboratory and its physiologic correlates. Int J Sports Med 6: 197-201,
1985.
19. Lucía, A, Hoyos, J, Pérez, M, and Chicharro, JL. Heart rate and performance parameters in elite
cyclists: a longitudinal study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32: 1777-1782, 2000.
20. Machado, FA, Kravchychyn, AC, Peserico, CS, da Silva, DF, and Mezzaroba, PV. Effect of stage
duration on maximal heart rate and post-exercise blood lactate concentration during incremental
treadmill tests. J Sci Med Sport 16: 276–280, 2013.
21. McLellan, TM. Ventilatory and plasma lactate response with different exercise protocols: a
comparison of methods. Int J Sports Med 6: 30-5, 1985.

14

15

22. Piucco, T, dos Santos, SG, de Lucas, RD, and Dias, JA. A novel incremental slide board test for
speed skaters: Reliability analysis and comparison with a cycling test. Apunts Med Esport 50: 5763, 2015.
23. Reinhard, U, Muller, PH, and Schmulling, RM. Determination of anaerobic threshold by the
ventilation equivalent in normal indivíduals. Respiration 38: 36-43, 1979.
24. Roffey, DM, Byrne, NM, and Hills, AP. Effect of stage duration on physiological variables
commonly used to determine maximum aerobic performance during cycle ergometry. J Sports Sci
25:1325–1335, 2007.
25. Rundell, KW. Compromised oxygen uptake in speed skaters during treadmill inline skating. Med
Sci Sports Exerc 28:120-127, 1996.
26. Van Igen Schenau, GJ. A power balance applied to speed skating. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit,
Amsterdam, 1981.
27. Weston, SB, Gray, AB, Schneider, DA, and Gass, GC. Effect of ramp on ventilation thresholds
and VO2peak in male cyclists. Int J Sports Med 23: 22-27, 2002.

15

16

Acknowledgments
We thank the speed skating coach Brock and the athletes to participate in this study and for the CAPES
Brazil agency for the funding support. No conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, are declared by the
authors.

16

17

Table 1. Comparison and correlation for maximal and submaximal variables (mean±s) derived from longstage (LS) and short-stage (SS) incremental tests performed on the slide board.
LS

SS

r

VO2max (ml.kg-1.min-1)

46.3 ± 4.1

46.4 ± 3.6

0.78†

HRmax (bpm)

195 ± 6

190 ± 9*

0.86†

RERmax

1.2 ± 0.07

1.2 ± 0.1

0.50

VEmax (l.min-1)

141.0 ± 19.9

146.8 ± 23.5

0.70†

CADmax (ppm)

54.8 ± 2.1

59.5 ± 5.1*

0.78†

Pomax (W)

176.4 ± 23.0

201.2 ± 33.7*

0.94†

8.9 ± 1.8

10.03 ± 1.9

0.05

VO2VT2 (ml.kg-1.min-1)

40.8 ± 3.1

42.8 ± 2.6*

0.80†

HRVT2 (bpm)

182 ± 7

178 ± 10

0.64†

RERVT2

1.01 ± 0.05

1.04 ± 0.04

-0.27

VEVT2 (l.min-1)

94.8 ± 12.7

96.9 ± 14.5

0.63

CADVT2 (ppm)

46.2 ± 2.5

49.2 ± 3.7*

0.46

PoVT2 (W)

148.2 ± 21.3

158.7 ± 25.2

0.88†

%VO2max

88.4±4.00

92.5 ±2.9*

0,65†

Maximal

[Lac]max (mmol.l-1)
Submaximal

*

Significant difference; †Significant correlation (p<0.5). VO2max = maximal oxygen uptake; HRmax =

maximal heart hate; RERmax = maximal respiratory exchange ratio; VEmax = maximal ventilation;
CADmax = maximal cadence; Pomax = maximal power output; [Lac]max = maximal lactate concentration;
VO2VT2 = oxygen uptake at VT2; HRVT2 = heart hate at VT2; CADVT2 = cadence at VT2; PVT2 = power output
at VT2; %VO2max = % of VO2max.
17

18

Figure 1- Scheme slide-board instrumentation. 1- Photoemitter; 2- Photoreceptor.

Figure 2- Relationship between VO2max and Pomax responses during the two protocols. ● LS ■ SS
(R2=0.69 and 0.82, respectively).

18

19

19

20

20