Anaerobic Capacityestimated in A Single Supramaximal Test in Cycling: Validity and Reliability Analysis

The aim was to verify the validity (i.e., study A) and reliability (i.e., study B) of the alternative maximal accumulated oxygen deficit determined using onlya supramaximal effort (MAOD(ALT))to estimate anaerobic capacity [i.e., estimated by the gold standard maximal accumulated oxygen deficit method (MAOD)] during cycling. In study A, the effects of supramaximal intensities on MAOD(ALT) and the comparison with the MAOD were investigated in fourteen active subjects (26 ± 6 years). In study B, the test-retest reliability was investigated, where fourteen male amateur cyclists (29 ± 5 years) performed the MAOD(ALT) twice at 115% of the intensity associated to maximal oxygen uptake ([Image: see text]). MAOD(ALT) determined at 130 and 150% of [Image: see text] was lower than MAOD (p ≤ 0.048), but no differences between MAOD(ALT) determined at 100, 105, 110, 115, 120 and 140% of [Image: see text] (3.58 ± 0.53L; 3.58 ± 0.59L; 3.53 ± 0.52L; 3.48 ± 0.72L; 3.52 ± 0.61L and 3.46 ± 0.69L, respectively) with MAOD (3.99 ± 0.64L). The MAOD(ALT) determined from the intensities between 110 and 120% of [Image: see text] presented the better agreement and concordance with MAOD. In the test-retest, the MAOD(ALT) was not different (p > 0.05), showed high reproducibility when expressed in absolute values (ICC = 0.96, p < 0.01), and a good level of agreement in the Bland-Altman plot analysis (mean differences ± CI95%:−0.16 ± 0.53L). Thus, the MAOD(ALT) seems to be valid and reliable to assess anaerobic capacity in cycling.