Specificity of V̇O2MAX and the ventilatory threshold in free swimming and cycle ergometry: Comparison between triathletes and swimmers

63Citations
Citations of this article
181Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare maximal heart rate (HRMAX), maximal oxygen consumption (VO2MAX), and the ventilatory threshold (VT; %V̇O2MAX) during cycle ergometry and free swimming between swimmers and triathletes. Methods: Nine swimmers and ten triathletes completed an incremental swimming and cycling test to exhaustion. Whole body metabolic responses were determined in each test. Results: The swimmers exhibited a significantly higher V̇O2MAX in swimming than in cycling (58.4 (5.6) v 51.3 (5.1) ml/kg/min), whereas the opposite was found in the triathletes (53.0 (6.7) v 68.2 (6.8) ml/kg/ min). HRMAX was significantly different in the maximal cycling and swimming tests for the triathletes (188.6 (7.5) v 174.8 (9.0) beats/min). In the maximal swimming test, HRMAX was significantly higher in the swimmers than in the triathletes (174.8 (9.0) v 184.6 (9.7) beats/min). No significant differences were found for VT measured in swimming and cycling in the triathletes and swimmers. Conclusion: This study confirms that the exercise testing mode affects the V̇O2MAX value, and that swimmers have very specific training adaptations even compared with triathletes. This may be a function of acute physiological responses combined with the specialist training status of the different athletes influencing maximal cardiac output or oxygen extraction. In contrast, the different training regimens do not seem to influence the VT, as this variable did not differ between the two testing modes in either group.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Roels, B., Schmitt, L., Libicz, S., Bentley, D., Richalet, J. P., & Millet, G. (2005). Specificity of V̇O2MAX and the ventilatory threshold in free swimming and cycle ergometry: Comparison between triathletes and swimmers. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 39(12), 965–968. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2005.020404

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free