Cargando…

Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit(®) Performance

CrossFit(®) began as another exercise program to improve physical fitness and has rapidly grown into the “sport of fitness”. However, little is understood as to the physiological indicators that determine CrossFit(®) sport performance. The purpose of this study was to determine which physiological p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dexheimer, Joshua D., Schroeder, E. Todd, Sawyer, Brandon J., Pettitt, Robert W., Aguinaldo, Arnel L., Torrence, William A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31013585
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports7040093
Descripción
Sumario:CrossFit(®) began as another exercise program to improve physical fitness and has rapidly grown into the “sport of fitness”. However, little is understood as to the physiological indicators that determine CrossFit(®) sport performance. The purpose of this study was to determine which physiological performance measure was the greatest indicator of CrossFit(®) workout performance. Male (n = 12) and female (n = 5) participants successfully completed a treadmill graded exercise test to measure maximal oxygen uptake (VO(2max)), a 3-minute all-out running test (3MT) to determine critical speed (CS) and the finite capacity for running speeds above CS (D′), a Wingate anaerobic test (WAnT) to assess anaerobic peak and mean power, the CrossFit(®) total to measure total body strength, as well as the CrossFit(®) benchmark workouts: Fran, Grace, and Nancy. It was hypothesized that CS and total body strength would be the greatest indicators of CrossFit(®) performance. Pearson’s r correlations were used to determine the relationship of benchmark performance data and the physiological performance measures. For each benchmark-dependent variable, a stepwise linear regression was created using significant correlative data. For the workout Fran, back squat strength explained 42% of the variance. VO(2max) explained 68% of the variance for the workout Nancy. Lastly, anaerobic peak power explained 57% of the variance for performance on the CrossFit(®) total. In conclusion, results demonstrated select physiological performance variables may be used to predict CrossFit(®) workout performance.