International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 9 · Number 5 · 2014 1057

A Decline in Anaerobic Distance Capacity

of Champion Athletes Over the Years?
R Hugh Morton
School of Sport and Exercise, Massey University,
Private Bag 11-222, Palmerston North, New Zealand 4442
E-mail: H.Morton@massey.ac.nz

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to investigate trends over time in critical speed,
anaerobic distance capacity and maximal ‘instantaneous’ speed of male
and female running record holders. At ten year intervals, a model of human
bioenergetics is fitted to the then existing records at nine distances from
100m to the marathon, to provide estimates of these performance
attributes. An indicator variable accounts for gender differences. Critical
speed for men over the last 100 years and for women over the last 50
years has risen; men by 30% and women by 73% (though still below that
of men). Maximal instantaneous speed has risen similarly. Conversely,
anaerobic distance capacity has been declining. For men the decline has
been slow but significant, but in women it has been dramatic. Application of
this model to the progression of running records confirms training and
cross-sectional studies suggesting that changes in performance
parameters of elite runners are not independent of each other. Evolutionary
or training induced performance improvements do not necessarily imply
improvements in all parameters of the bioenergetic system.

Key words: Anaerobic Capacity, Bioenergetics, Critical Power, Gender

Differences, Running, World Records

INTRODUCTION
World athletic records are collected and ratified under controlled and stringent conditions,
and therefore represent a reliable and rich source of performance data for humans. There has
been interest in their analysis for over 100 years. Early analyses include those by Kennelly
[1], Francis [2], Lietzke [3], Henry [4] and Craig [5]. The International Amateur Athletic
Federation (IAAF) now provides data on ratified world athletic records on the web at
http://www.iaaf.org/statistics/records/inout=O/index.html. The record time progressions in
running distances from 100m to the marathon for both men and women can be deduced, but
are collated at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_athletics. Some of
these predate the IAAF ratified records. It is all these data (as at February 2013) that are

Reviewers: Andrew Jones (University of Exeter, UK)

Ray Stefani (California State University, Long Beach, USA)
1058 A Decline in Anaerobic Distance Capacity of Champion Athletes Over the Years?

analysed in this paper.

I regard it as axiomatic that a lower intensity effort can be sustained for a longer period
than a higher intensity effort, and vice versa. Data of the type described above can be utilised
in more detailed studies of energy regulation during exercise through this inverse
relationship. A number of other training studies and cross-sectional analyses which measure
critical speed and anaerobic distance capacity in the same individuals at one or two time
points (epochs) attempt to model the relationship between time and distance by fitting, for
example, simple scaling or fractal laws [1, 6, 7, 8]. What is interesting in three of these is
that they appear to incorporate a “break point” or “elbow” at roughly the 1000m (or 2
minute) mark; suggested in all cases to indicate a demarcation point between more intense
exercise which is fuelled predominantly by anaerobic metabolism, and less intense
predominantly aerobic exercise. A two component (aerobic and anaerobic) bioenergetic
system is the simplest and commonest approach that exercise physiologists take when
describing energy regulation during exercise, each component having its own characteristics.
However, those scaling laws do not provide physiological information regarding the
attributes of the athletes from whom the data is obtained. Other cross sectional analyses
which do provide this information, have applied models of human bioenergetics
incorporating structured energy systems and the energy cost of running, for example by
Keller [9] and by Péronnet and Thibault [10]. These two models are fairly complex, so to
model the relationship between distance ran and time taken; I have adopted a simpler 3-
parameter, 2-component (aerobic and anaerobic) hyperbolic model, described briefly in the
next section. This model is applied to world records at ten year intervals to avoid repetitive
fitting every time a new world record is set at any distance. I have therefore constructed a
data matrix of record times in ten year time bins from 1901 (when available and denoted as
year 1) to 2011 over nine distances from 100m to the marathon for both men and women.
The three parameters of this bioenergetic model can be meaningfully interpreted as the
highest sustainable aerobic intensity (expressed in terms of running speed), an anaerobic
energy capacity (expressed in terms of a distance), and a limiting ‘instantaneous’ maximal
power output (expressed as a top running speed). The purpose of this analysis is to determine
the trends over time in these three parameters, which intuitively would be expected to be
increasing, with male values higher than female values.

THE 3-PARAMETER CRITICAL POWER MODEL

The Critical Power (CP) concept [11, 12] proposes a two component (aerobic and anaerobic)
energy supply system to model energy regulation during exercise. In its original form [13]
an empirical linear relationship between the total amount of work done and the time taken to
do it was described and illustrated. That equation can be shown to be algebraically equivalent
to a hyperbolic relationship between endurance time and power output. It fitted data
acceptably for endurance times in the range 3 to 20 minutes, but non-linearity was evident
over a wider time range. The 3-parameter CP model does not suffer these shortcomings to
the same degree.
In detail, the 3-parameter formulation of the CP model [14] specifies the following
assumptions (using units of measurement adapted for running):

• The aerobic energy supply component is unlimited in capacity, but is rate limited by a
parameter known as the “critical speed”, denoted CS metres/sec. It is an intensity
parameter indicative of the maximal sustainable aerobic running ability of the
individual.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 9 · Number 5 · 2014 1059

• The anaerobic energy supply component is limited in capacity by a parameter known

as the “anaerobic distance capacity”, denoted D` metres. It represents the distance
equivalent of the body’s usable non-sustainable anaerobic energy stores.
• The anaerobic supply rate (above zero) is limited absolutely by a parameter denoted by
Smax metres/sec. This rate limit at any instant is determined by a feedback loop in
which the prevailing anaerobic capacity as it drops below D` during exercise at
intensities above CS, proportionally compromises the maximum voluntary power
above CS, to below Smax. Smax can be interpreted as a ‘maximal instantaneous running
speed’.
• Exhaustion (and cessation of continuous exercise at any constant speed above CS)
occurs at the instant when the maximum applicable rate of energy supply falls just
below the demand (or equivalently when the remaining anaerobic capacity, if any, is no
longer able to support the demand).

These assumptions are to some extent subject to changes and differing interpretations
since originally proposed. For example, CS is now regarded as defining the lower boundary
to all those intensities which lead to attainment of V·O2max [15]. The first two assumptions and
the fourth are the same as those of the classical 2-parameter critical power model of Monod
and Scherrer [13]. The third assumption is a feedback loop which restricts maximum
voluntary power at any instant according to how energy depleted the athlete is at that time.
While theoretically appealing, there is recent empirical evidence for this phenomenon [16],
reflecting for example, the observation that an athlete engaged in (say) a 1500m race is
generally unable to sprint the final 100m as fast as he/she would be able to if they were fully
rested. Not only that, but it can also be shown that at exhaustion some positive anaerobic
reserve of energy is involuntarily retained. That is, there appears to be some amount of the
anaerobic capacity that may not be accessible, which could be interpreted as a preservation
strategy against some unexpected or emergency energy requirement. For example, Chidnok
et al. [17] show that following initial exhaustion, exercise can be continued for a short time
if the power requirement is reduced, even if that reduced level is above CS.
From these assumptions a generalised rectangular hyperbolic model can be deduced [14],
where the relationships between the race distance D, average speed s, and elapsed race time
taken t, are given by solutions to the equations:

(t – k)(s – CS) = D` and s = D/t (1)

where k = D`/(CS – Smax) measured in seconds, is the location of the horizontal asymptote
of the rectangular hyperbola. Note that k < 0, and that Smax is the location where the
hyperbola intersects the horizontal axis at t = 0 (14). This system admits six algebraically
equivalent equations for pairwise relationships between the three variables. This model is
becoming more widely used [15], extending representation of the relationship between
intensity of effort and endurance time [18].

METHOD
Both the 100m and 200m are sprint races in which an all-out effort for the duration of the
race is assumed, pacing plays little or no part, the race may end before exhaustion sets in,
and in which acceleration from a stationary start is a significant component. That is, a
significant amount of the energy expended does not directly contribute to locomotion, and
the concept of a constant speed (at least approximately) throughout the race is not applicable.
1060 A Decline in Anaerobic Distance Capacity of Champion Athletes Over the Years?

Neither of these attributes align well with the assumptions of the 3-parameter hyperbolic
model described above. These distances will be excluded in the substantive analysis as
explained below.
Intuitively, since D is normally the independent variable, it would be natural to fit an
equation relating the time taken, t, as a function of race distance, D. However, there are
statistical issues associated with this approach. The spread of the t data is very wide; times
taken range from about ten seconds to in excess of two hours, a more than 720-fold increase.
Serious heteroscedasticity is evident; variability at the shortest distances is very much less
than at the marathon. Nevertheless, fitting this equation results in good fits (R2 in the range
0.84 – 0.92), but the residuals are very large in percentage terms for the shorter distances.
This is particularly so if the sprints are included, to the extent that the fitted values are totally
unrealistic (such as 13.3 seconds for 100m where the current world record is 9.58 and 26.8
seconds for 200m where the current record is 19.19). Furthermore, parameter estimates
differ somewhat depending on whether the equation contains k or Smax.
For all these reasons therefore I have chosen to fit the equation for s as a function of t,
which is of the following form:

s = D`/(t – k) + CS (2)

substituting k = D`/(CS – Smax) to get estimates for parameters CS, D` and Smax. A binary
indicator variable G (G = 1 for women and 0 for men) is included multiplicatively to evaluate
the significance of sex differences in the three parameters:

s = (D`+ D1`G)/(t – k – k1G) + CS + CS1G (3)

Fits of equation 3 were performed in 10 year time bins. Available data for men
commences in 1911, but for women only in 1961. SigmaPlot (Jandel Scientific, San Rafael,
CA) was used for all curve fitting and statistical significance was set for p < 0.05.

RESULTS
Fits of equation 1 are good, with adjusted R2 in the range 0.8838 to 0.9776. Estimated
parameter values for D`, CS and Smax for both men and women, together with their relative
values are presented in Table 1. D` is observed to decline over the years. For men the decline
in D` is quite slow, but does have a significant negative linear slope (-2.76 metres/year, p =
0.001). For women the change is more dramatic; though the 1961 figure is above the normal
physiological range and is regarded as an outlier, being omitted from further consideration.
For the last 20 years the women’s values have been lower than the men’s, with their relativity
averaging 81%. On the other hand CS is rising, though again women more rapidly than men.
Over time, Smax is also observed to rise for both men and women. For example, for men a
linear rise fits well (R2 = 0.954) but an exponential rise towards an asymptote at 6.84
metres/sec has higher R2 (0.971). While a linear rise is the simplest, an asymptotic trend to
an upper limit is intuitively more reasonable.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 9 · Number 5 · 2014 1061

Table 1. Physiological attributes of world record holders over time; men and
women and the gender ratio

Parameter D` CS Smax
Year Men Women Ratio Men Women Ratio Men Women Ratio
1911 710.6 * * 4.53 * * 9.42 * *
1921 528.4 * * 4.92 * * 9.87 * *
1931 537.9 * * 5.02 * * 9.83 * *
1941 560.5 * * 5.09 * * 10.04 * *
1951 588.5 * * 5.16 * * 9.89 * *
1961 469.4 2542.0 5.42 5.45 3.12 0.57 10.35 7.60 0.73
1971 368.6 927.1 2.52 5.70 3.83 0.67 11.27 8.81 0.78
1981 423.4 548.8 1.30 5.70 4.89 0.86 10.80 9.47 0.88
1991 397.5 380.4 0.96 5.79 5.19 0.90 11.13 10.39 0.93
2001 412.0 251.9 0.61 5.89 5.59 0.95 11.41 10.88 0.95
2011 380.5 323.9 0.85 5.95 5.40 0.91 11.05 10.58 0.96

DISCUSSION
Knowing that performances are improving over all distances, consideration of Table 1 yields
both expected and unexpected observations. Firstly as one might therefore expect, aerobic
ability expressed through CS, for men over the last 100 years and for women over the last 50
years, has been steadily and significantly rising; men by over 30% and women by a dramatic
73% (though still below that of men). This is clearly evident in Figure 1. Relativity between
men and women in the last 30 years is fairly stable at around 90%. These observations are
entirely consistent with the records of both men’s and women’s performances.

6.5

6.0
Critical speed, CS: metres/sec

5.5

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
Year
Figure 1. The trend over time of critical speed in world running record
holders. Men, solid circles; women, open circles.
1062 A Decline in Anaerobic Distance Capacity of Champion Athletes Over the Years?

Secondly, although as expected, maximal anaerobic power expressed through Smax has
been rising, the nature of that rise is not steady. Figure 2 displays the trend for Smax. The
steep rise for men between 1951 and 1971 may be coincident with rising use of performance
enhancing drugs. Whether this is also true of the even steeper rise in women’s explosive
power is unclear because data prior to 1961 is unavailable. Alternatively, it may be that
female participation rates in long distance events, which had been very low, have skewed the
data. The last 20-30 years have been a relatively steady period for both men and women, with
relativities again around 90%.

12
Maximal speed, Smax: metres/sec

11

10

7
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
Year
Figure 2. The trend over time of maximal instantaneous speed in world
running record holders. Men, solid circles; women, open circles.

Thirdly, a surprise may lie in the estimates of D`, which are clearly and perhaps
unexpectedly declining over the years in both men and women, as can be seen in Figure 3.
There appears to be no immediately obvious explanation for this decline in anaerobic
distance capacity, and its inverse relationship to the other parameters. It is the case though
that athletes generally specialise in certain distances and target that ability with specificity of
their training; so if they are distance runners their training tends to be predominantly aerobic
and consequently their CS will be high and their D` low, and vice versa. So if CS increases,
D` might possibly decrease concomitantly. In other words, these two parameters may not be
strictly independent of each other.
Perhaps more importantly, there are several research studies that have provided evidence
of this inverse association between the parameters CP and W’, at least in males. In a paper
by Jenkins and Quigley [19], the mean critical power of a sample of 12 male subjects
increased significantly from 196W to 255W (paired t = 5.50, p < 0.001) in response to an 8-
week cycling endurance training programme. Over the same period, their mean anaerobic
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 9 · Number 5 · 2014 1063

1000

Anaerobic distance capacity, D': metres

800

600

400

200

0
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
Year
Figure 3. The trend over time of anaerobic distance capacity in world
running record holders. Men, solid circles; women, open circles.

work capacity decreased significantly from 19.9kJ to 15.3kJ (paired t = -3.67, p = 0.002).
MacLaren and Coulson [20] also report a similar inverse relationship between CP and W’
in 11 males in response to swim training. More recently Vanhatalo et al. [21] report the very
same outcome in a group of 9 subjects (8 male and 1 female) after a 4-week interval cycling
training period; mean CP increased significantly from 230W to 255W (p < 0.001) while
mean W’ decreased non-significantly from 17.2kJ to 15.5kJ (p = 0.08). Even more recently
Vanhatalo et al. [22] report and interpret evidence that in a study of 7 male subjects doing
knee extension exercise, mean CP was significantly higher (18.0W versus 16.1W, p < 0.05)
and W’ significantly lower (1.48kJ versus 1.92kJ, p < 0.05) in hyperoxia compared to
normoxia. Again therefore, the notion that these two parameters may not be strictly
independent of each other is suggested in all these studies.
I thank one reviewer for offering the following interpretation: “Over time, the prototypical
athlete in non-sprint events burns off anaerobic capacity faster, resulting in a shorter
anaerobic distance capacity so that the high aerobic intensity (may be) applied over more of
the race, making for higher average velocity.” Alternatively (Jones, A.M., personal
communication), indicates it may be that “maximal muscle power and V·O2max are relatively
fixed in humans, and the development of superior training techniques has gradually pushed
CS closer to V·O2max (i.e., so CS now occurs closer to V·O2max in the best athletes), with this
being responsible for the apparently lower D’.” While the inverse relationship may be an
artefact of the model design, these interpretations taken together with the above independent
empirical evidence, suggests a complex dependence to be the more likely explanation.
1064 A Decline in Anaerobic Distance Capacity of Champion Athletes Over the Years?

CONCLUSION
In men and in women, both maximal aerobic and anaerobic intensities expressed through CS
and Smax respectively have been increasing over the years, but D’ has been declining. This,
taken together with results from a number of other studies, suggests that these performance
parameters may not be independent of each other. This does not necessarily imply that of
itself an increase in aerobic fitness will decrease anaerobic capacity. In both performances
over all distances and in the values of bioenergetic model parameters, rates of change for
women are more rapid than for men and women’s ability currently averages around 90%
relative to men.

REFERENCES
1. Kennelly, A.E., An Approximate Law of Fatigue in the Speeds of Racing Animals, Proceedings of the
American Academy of Arts and Science, 1906, 42, 273-331.
2. Francis, A.W., Running Records, Science, 1943, 98, 315-316.
3. Lietzke, M.H., An Analytical Study of World and Olympic Racing Records, Science, 1954, 119, 333-336.
4. Henry, F.M., Prediction of World Records in Running Sixty Yards to Twenty-six Miles, Research Quarterly,
1955, 26, 147-158.
5. Craig, A.B., Evolution and Predictions of World Running and Swimming Records, Journal of Sports
Medicine and Physical Fitness, 1963, 3, 14-21.
6. Carbone, V. and Savaglio, S., Scaling Laws and Forecasting in Athletic World Records, Journal of Sports
Sciences, 2001, 19, 477-484.
7. Katz, L. & Katz, J.S., Fractal (Power Law) Analysis of Athletic Performance, Sports Medicine, Training and
Rehabilitation, 1994, 5, 95-105.
8. Alvarez-Ramirez, J., Meraz, M. and Gallegos, G., Zipf-Mandelbrot Scaling Law for World Track Records,
Physica A, 2003, 328, 545-560.
9. Keller, J.B., A Theory of Competitive Running, Physics Today, 1973, 26(9), 43-47.
10. Péronnet, F. and Thibault, G., Mathematical Analysis of Running Performance and World Running Records,
Journal of Applied Physiology, 1989, 67, 453-465.
11. Hill, D.W., The Critical Power Concept, Sports Medicine, 1993, 16, 237-254.
12. Morton, R.H., The Critical Power and Related Whole-body Bioenergetic Models, European Journal of
Applied Physiology, 2006, 96, 339-354.
13. Monod, H. and Scherrer, J., The Work Capacity of a Synergic Muscular Group, Ergonomics, 1965, 8, 329-
338.
14. Morton, R.H., A 3-Parameter Critical Power Model, Ergonomics, 1996, 39, 611-619.
15. Jones, A.M., Vanhatalo, A., Burnley, M., Morton, R.H. and Poole, D.C., Critical Power: Implications for
Determination of V·O2max and Exercise Tolerance, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2010, 42,
1876-1890.
16. Simpson, L.P., Jones, A.M., Vanhatalo, A. and Wilkerson, D.P., Influence of Initial Metabolic Rate on the
Power-duration Relationship for All-out Exercise, European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2012, 112,
2467-2473.
17. Chidnok, W., DiMenna, F.J., Fulford, J., Bailey, S.J., Skiba, P.F., Vanhatalo, A and Jones, A.M., Muscle
Metabolic Responses During High-intensity Intermittent Exercise Measured by 31P-MRS: Relationship to
the Critical Power Concept, American Journal of Physiology: Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative
Physiology, 2013, 305, R1085-R1092.
18. Hill, D.W., The Relationship Between Power and Time to Fatigue in Cycle Ergometer Exercise, International
Journal of Sports Medicine, 2004, 25, 357-361.
19. Jenkins, D.G. and Quigley, B.M., Endurance Training Enhances Critical Power. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 1992, 24, 1283-1289.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 9 · Number 5 · 2014 1065

21. MacLaren, D.P.M. and Coulson, M., Critical Swim Speed Can be Used to Determine Changes in Training
Status, in: Keskinen, K.L., Komi, P.V. and Hollander, A.P., eds., Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming
VIII, Grummerus Printing, Jyväskylä, Finland, 1999, 227-232.
21. Vanhatalo, A., Doust, J.H. and Burnley, M., A 3-min All-out Cycling Test is Sensitive to a Change in Critical
Power, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2008, 40, 1693-1699.
22. Vanhatalo, A., Fulford ,J., DiMenna, F.J. and Jones, A.M., Influence of Hyperoxia on Muscle Metabolic
Responses and the Power-Duration Relationship During Severe-intensity Exercise in Humans: A 31P
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Study, Experimental Physiology, 2010, 95, 528-540.