Cargando…

Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge

We examined physiological predictors of performance on the CrossFit Murph challenge (1-mile run, 100 pullups, 200 pushups, 300 air squats, 1-mile run). Male CrossFit athletes (n = 11, 27 ± 3 years) performed a battery of physical assessments including: (1) body composition, (2) upper and lower body...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carreker, Ja’Deon D., Grosicki, Gregory J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7404702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32605265
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports8070092
_version_ 1783567169944027136
author Carreker, Ja’Deon D.
Grosicki, Gregory J.
author_facet Carreker, Ja’Deon D.
Grosicki, Gregory J.
author_sort Carreker, Ja’Deon D.
collection PubMed
description We examined physiological predictors of performance on the CrossFit Murph challenge (1-mile run, 100 pullups, 200 pushups, 300 air squats, 1-mile run). Male CrossFit athletes (n = 11, 27 ± 3 years) performed a battery of physical assessments including: (1) body composition, (2) upper and lower body strength, (3) upper body endurance, (4) anaerobic power, and (5) maximal oxygen consumption. No less than 72 h later, participants completed the Murph challenge, heart rate was monitored throughout, and blood lactate was obtained pre-post. Correlations between physiological parameters and total Murph time, and Murph subcomponents, were assessed using Pearson’s correlations. Murph completion time was 43.43 ± 4.63 min, and maximum and average heart rate values were 185.63 ± 7.64 bpm and 168.81 ± 6.41 bpm, respectively, and post-Murph blood lactate was 10.01 ± 3.04 mmol/L. Body fat percentage was the only physiological parameter significantly related to total Murph time (r = 0.718; p = 0.013). Total lift time (25.49 ± 3.65 min) was more strongly related (r = 0.88) to Murph time than total run time (17.60 ± 1.97 min; r = 0.65). Greater relative anaerobic power (r = −0.634) and less anaerobic fatigue (r = 0.649) were related to total run time (p < 0.05). Individuals wanting to enhance overall Murph performance are advised to focus on minimizing body fat percentage and improving lift performance. Meanwhile, performance on the run subcomponent may be optimized through improvements in anaerobic power.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7404702
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74047022020-08-11 Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge Carreker, Ja’Deon D. Grosicki, Gregory J. Sports (Basel) Article We examined physiological predictors of performance on the CrossFit Murph challenge (1-mile run, 100 pullups, 200 pushups, 300 air squats, 1-mile run). Male CrossFit athletes (n = 11, 27 ± 3 years) performed a battery of physical assessments including: (1) body composition, (2) upper and lower body strength, (3) upper body endurance, (4) anaerobic power, and (5) maximal oxygen consumption. No less than 72 h later, participants completed the Murph challenge, heart rate was monitored throughout, and blood lactate was obtained pre-post. Correlations between physiological parameters and total Murph time, and Murph subcomponents, were assessed using Pearson’s correlations. Murph completion time was 43.43 ± 4.63 min, and maximum and average heart rate values were 185.63 ± 7.64 bpm and 168.81 ± 6.41 bpm, respectively, and post-Murph blood lactate was 10.01 ± 3.04 mmol/L. Body fat percentage was the only physiological parameter significantly related to total Murph time (r = 0.718; p = 0.013). Total lift time (25.49 ± 3.65 min) was more strongly related (r = 0.88) to Murph time than total run time (17.60 ± 1.97 min; r = 0.65). Greater relative anaerobic power (r = −0.634) and less anaerobic fatigue (r = 0.649) were related to total run time (p < 0.05). Individuals wanting to enhance overall Murph performance are advised to focus on minimizing body fat percentage and improving lift performance. Meanwhile, performance on the run subcomponent may be optimized through improvements in anaerobic power. MDPI 2020-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7404702/ /pubmed/32605265 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports8070092 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Carreker, Ja’Deon D.
Grosicki, Gregory J.
Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge
title Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge
title_full Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge
title_fullStr Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge
title_full_unstemmed Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge
title_short Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit “Murph” Challenge
title_sort physiological predictors of performance on the crossfit “murph” challenge
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7404702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32605265
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports8070092
work_keys_str_mv AT carrekerjadeond physiologicalpredictorsofperformanceonthecrossfitmurphchallenge
AT grosickigregoryj physiologicalpredictorsofperformanceonthecrossfitmurphchallenge