+Model

SCISPO-3495; No. of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS

Science & Sports (2020) xxx, xxx—xxx

Disponible en ligne sur

ScienceDirect
www.sciencedirect.com

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Comparison of different exercise testing

modalities to determine maximal aerobic
speed in amateur soccer players
Comparaison de différentes modalités de test d’effort pour
détérminer et prédire la vitesse maximale aérobie chez des
joueurs amateurs de football

A. Darendeli a,f,∗, D. Vitiello b,c, V.L. Billat d, G. Diker a, M. Cuğ e

a
Department of physical education & sport, Faculty of sports science, Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas,
Turkey
b
Institut des Sciences du Sport-Santé de Paris (I3SP), Université de Paris, URP3625, 75015 Paris, France
c
Institut de Biologie Paris-Seine (IBPS), CNRS UMR 8256, Inserm ERL U1164, Biological Adaptation and
Ageing, Sorbonne Université, 75005 Paris, France
d
Unité de Biologie Intégrative des Adaptations à l’Exercice (EA7362), Université Evry-Val d’Essonne, Evry,
Turkey
e
Faculty of sports science, Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey
f
Institute of health science, Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey

Received 19 February 2020; accepted 22 September 2020

KEYWORDS Summary
Maximal aerobic Objectives. — In this study, we aimed to examine the maximal aerobic speed (sVO2max ) prediction
velocity; capability of different modalities in amateur soccer players.
Time trial; Equipment and methods. — Eighteen male soccer players with at least 3 years of training
Aerobic power; experience were recruited. Players randomly attended the following 4 testing sessions: Yoyo
Training intensity; intermittent recovery test-1 (IRT1), multistage 20 m shuttle test (20-MST), 5 minutes Time Trial
Field test (5 min TT) and Université de Montréal Track test (UMTT). Differences and relationships between
values of UMTT sVO2max and final speed (FS) recorded with the Yoyo IRT1 and 20-MST, mean speed
of 5 min TT and sVO2max equations suggested in literature were tested.

∗ Corresponding author at: Department of physical education & sport, Faculty of sports science, Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Turkey.
E-mail address: abdxsup@gmail.com (A. Darendeli).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
0765-1597/© 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Darendeli A, et al. Comparison of different exercise testing modalities to determine
maximal aerobic speed in amateur soccer players. Sci sports (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
+Model
SCISPO-3495; No. of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2 A. Darendeli et al.

Results. — sVO2max obtained with UMTT was significantly different to that obtained with Yoyo
IRT1, 20-MST and 5 min TT (−1.7 ± 0.8, 2.1 ± 0.7, −0.6 ± 1.1 km.h−1 respectively, p < 0.05). The
highest correlations were found between UMTT sVO2max and 20-MST FS (r = 0.70) and Yoyo FS
(r = 0.69). The Bland—Altman plots showed high bias when comparing sVO2max UMTT with Yoyo
IRT1 and 20-MST FS, indicating that these two methods systematically generate different results.
The 5 min TT had the smallest bias and the largest limits of agreement with UMTT sVO2max ,
whereas the FS Yoyo IRT1 and 20-MST methods had relatively narrow limits of agreement.
Additionally, the regression equation model used for predicting sVO2max was more robust using
Yoyo IRT1 results (R2 = 0.70 vs. R2 = 0.63 for 20-MST). These findings suggest that after sVO2max
prediction using the provided equations, coaches may establish precise aerobic training loads
in such population.
© 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

MOTS CLÉS
Vitesse maximale
aérobie ;
Contre la montre ;
Puissance aérobie ;
Intensité
d’entraînement ;
Test de terrain.
Résumé
Objectifs. — Dans cette étude, nous avons examiné la ou les modalités de test d’effort perme-
ttant de déterminer la vitesse maximale aérobie (sVO2max ) et de prédire cette vitesse auprès
de footballeurs amateurs.
Matériels et méthodes. — Dix-huit joueurs de football masculins avec au moins 3 ans
d’expérience d’entraînement ont été recrutés. Les joueurs ont assisté au hasard aux 4 séances
de test suivantes : Yoyo intermittent recovery test-1 (IRT1), multi-stage 20 m shuttle test
(20-MST), 5 minutes Time Trial (5 min TT) et Université de Montréal Track test (UMTT). Les
différences et les relations entre les valeurs de sVO2max obtenues par l’UMTT, la vitesse finale
(FS) obtenues avec le Yoyo IRT1 et 20-MST, la vitesse moyenne de 5 min TT et les équations de
sVO2max suggérées dans la littérature ont été analysées.
Résultats. — La sVO2max obtenue avec l’UMTT était significativement différente de celles
obtenues avec les tests Yoyo IRT1, 20-MST et 5 min TT (−1.7 ± 0.8; 2.1 ± 0.7; −0.6 ± 1.1 km.h−1
respectivement, p < 0,05). Les corrélations les plus élevées ont été trouvées entre sVO2max UMTT
et 20-MST FS (r = 0.70) et Yoyo FS (r = 0.69). Les graphiques de Bland—Altman ont montré un biais
élevé lors de la comparaison de sVO2max UMTT avec Yoyo IRT1 FS et 20-MST, indiquant que ces
2 méthodes génèrent systématiquement des résultats différents. Le TT de 5 min avait le plus
petit biais et les plus grandes limites d’accord avec sVO2max UMTT, tandis que les méthodes
FS Yoyo IRT1 et 20-MST avaient des limites d’accord relativement étroites. De plus, le mod-
èle d’équation de régression utilisé pour prédire sVO2max était plus robuste en utilisant les
résultats de Yoyo IRT1 (R2 = 0.70 vs R2 = 0.63 pour 20-MST). Ces résultats suggèrent que sur la
base de la prédiction de sVO2max obtenue via les équations fournies, les entraîneurs peuvent
établir des charges d’entraînement en endurance plus précises et personnalisées auprès de
cette population de footballeurs amateurs.
© 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.

1. Introduction consuming and required expensive equipment and trained

Maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max ) has been widely used
as an indicator of aerobic capacity [1] and has a signifi-
cant relation with the distance covered during soccer match
play [2]. However, athletes with similar VO2max may not be
able to perform equally [3], and therefore the performance
indeed cannot be restricted to VO2max [4]. Thus, VO2max was
not a useful index for setting running pace and duration
[5]. Interestingly, the minimum speed at which VO2max is
reached (sVO2max ) was a practical tool allowing coaches to
see and explain individual performance differences [6]. It
was also reported that training at certain percentages of
sVO2max enhanced the aerobic fitness of middle and long dis-
tance runners [7] and the physical fitness of soccer players
during a competitive season [8].
Generally, incremental running test protocols on a tread-
mill have been used to determine sVO2max by monitoring
the expired gas. These laboratory protocols were time-
personnel under controlled conditions [9]. Also, treadmill
protocols in the literature had different characteristics
in terms of evaluation space, duration of stage, ways of
increasing the velocity, the technology used, and the proto-
col methodology that extracts the final sVO2max value [10].
In addition, they did not reflect the nature of specific sports
[11]. Due to the complexity of laboratory testing, field-based
tests have been developed to reflect the nature of a sport
relatively closer to reality. The Université de Montréal Track
Test (UMTT) by Léger and Boucher [12] appears to be a more
specific protocol devoted to determine sVO2max and VO2max
[11—15], and has a strong correlation with treadmill tests in
terms of sVO2max (r = 0.95, p < 0.001) [4]. In fact, studies have
shown that the UMTT is a valid method for determination of
sVO2max [11—16].
Other incremental maximal tests involving shuttle run
were developed like the Yoyo intermittent recovery test 1
(IRT1) by Bangsbo et al. [17], and the multistage 20-meter

Please cite this article in press as: Darendeli A, et al. Comparison of different exercise testing modalities to determine
maximal aerobic speed in amateur soccer players. Sci sports (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
+Model
SCISPO-3495; No. of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Determination of maximal aerobic speed
shuttle run test (20-MST) by Léger et al. [18]. These spe-
cific tests intended to determine performance in team-sport
athletes. Although the 20-MST did not have recovery inter-
vals, the Yoyo IRT aimed to examine recovery potential from
intensive repeated exercise. Both tests have been widely
used for maximal aerobic power evaluation in team sports
[17—19]. The main limiting factor of the Yoyo IRT and 20-
MST is the precise determination of the speed for training
intensity prescription. For the Yoyo IRT, it was because the
shuttles remained at same speed during each stage of the
test. For that reason, Kuipers et al. [20] suggested using
the following equation to eliminate the sensitivity lack,
[Vyoyo = V + 0.5 × (n/8)] where V was the speed of last com-
pleted stage and n was the last shuttle completed. For the
20-MST, it is the varying number of shuttles in each stage of
the test that limits the determination of the speed. These
elements point out the importance of finding the suitable
exercise protocol to better predict sVO2max in a specific sport
like soccer.
Field sports, such as soccer, hockey, and rugby union,
are characterised by a stop—start nature, with varying run-
ning speeds and multiple changes of direction. Due to the
nature of these sports, besides anaerobic energy contribu-
tions, high aerobic power and conditioning can be critical
for success. Research on aerobic training using sVO2max value
showed that training at or above 100% sVO2max is a critical
factor for improving aerobic power [8].
Several studies worked on different modalities [i.e. Yoyo
IRT1, 5 min time trial (5 min TT), 1200—3000 m track trials]
to predict sVO2max in college students [14,15], heteroge-
neous groups [4,10], well-trained swimmers [21,22], male
and female runners with different levels [6,13,23] and Aus-
tralian Rules football players [16,24]. However, there were
no studies devoted to the prediction of sVO2max using field
tests in amateur soccer players. By identifying this value,
training load can be individualised and the athletes can per-
form at certain loads specific to their level. Consequently,
better performance improvements may be observed in team
sport athletes. Hence, in this study, we aimed to first exam-
ine sVO2max prediction capability of different modalities (i.e.
Yoyo IRT1, 20-MST, 5 min TT) when the UMTT was considered
as the reference value of sVO2max . The second objective of
this study was to produce equation models to provide robust
sVO2max values for amateur soccer players.
2. Methods
2.1. Participants
Eighteen regional-level male amateur soccer players with
at least 3 years of training experience constituted the sam-
ple [age: 18.3 ± 0.5 years, height: 177.7 ± 6.4 cm, weight:
70.4 ± 8.5 kg and body mass index (BMI): 22.3 ± 1.9]. Parti-
cipants signed written informed consent prior to attendance
and were informed about the purpose, potential risks, and
benefits of the present study. The study was approved by the
Cumhuriyet University Clinical Research Ethics Board and
operated according to the ethical standards stated in the
Declaration of Helsinki.
Please cite this article in press as: Darendeli A, et al. Comparison of different exercise testing modalities to determine
maximal aerobic speed in amateur soccer players. Sci sports (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
3
2.2. Tests used to predict sVO2max
2.2.1. The Université de Montréal Track Test (UMTT)
The sVO2max of the participants was determined using UMTT.
The initial speed was set at 10 km.hr−1 and increased by
1 km.hr−1 every 2 min, as previously suggested [12]. The
400 m official track was marked with cones set every 25 m.
The pre-recorded tape was used to indicate the speed
of the stage by sound signals showing when the partici-
pants required to coincide within the 2 m of the next cone.
The test finished when the participant reached volitional
exhaustion or missed three consecutive cones. The following
formula was used to extract sVO2max .
sVO2max = V + [(t/120) × i]
where V was the last completed speed (km.h−1 ), t was
the time spent in the incomplete stage (s) and i was the
speed increment of each stage (km.h−1 ).
2.2.2. The Yoyo intermittent recovery test 1 (IRT1) and
the multistage 20-meter shuttle run test (20-MST)
The initial speed of the Yoyo IRT1 was 10 km.h−1 and the
speed was increased according to the procedure stated by
Bangsbo et al. [17] where the increment was 0.5 km.h−1
after 13 km.h−1 . The 20-MST was performed according to the
procedure depicted by Léger et al. [18], in which the initial
speed of 8.5 km.hr−1 was increased by 0.5 km.hr−1 per min.
The test was finished when the participant failed to reach
the cone in 2 consecutive times or volitionally exhausted.
The final speed (FS) of the participant was calculated using
the following formulas.
Vyoyo IRT1 = V + 0.5 × (n/8) where V was the speed of last
completed stage and n was the last shuttle completed.
V20-MST= V + 0.45 × (k/d) where V was the speed of last
completed stage, k was the last shuttle completed (km.h−1 )
and d was the number of total shuttles in given stage of the
test.
Furthermore, the equation model suggested by Berthoin
et al. [5] to extract sVO2max from 20-MST was used
(sVO2max = (V [km.h−1 ]) × 1.81—7.86 where V was the speed
of the last stage completed). The equation provided by
Heaney et al. [25] to determine sVO2max using distance cov-
ered during Yoyo IRT1 and height of the participant was also
utilised (sVO2max = 0.701 (distance covered [km.h−1 ]) + 0.030
(the height of the participant [cm])—2.201). These equa-
tions were used to test their reproducibility when applied
to our sample.
2.2.3. The five minutes time trial (5 min TT)
Participants were asked to keep the running speed at a
steady level. During the test, verbal feedbacks were given
to keep a constant pace according to the interval of time
between two marks on the 400 m track and to remind the
remaining time. Resting during the run was not allowed. The
mean speed of the 5 min TT was compared to sVO2max value
obtained with the UMTT.
+Model
SCISPO-3495; No. of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS
4 A. Darendeli et al.

Table 1 Comparison between sVO2max and indexes extracted from 5 other exercise testing modalities and equations.

sVO2max FS Yoyo IRT1 FS 20-MST Mean-speed Yoyo IRT1 20-MST

UMTT 5 min TT equation equation [5]
[25]

Speed (km.h−1 ) 15.3 ± 1 16.9 ± 1* 13.2 ± 0.9* 15.8 ± 1.2* 16.3 ± 1.7* 16.1 ± 1.6*
Pearson’s r — 0.69 0.70 0.52 0.63 0.70
Raw difference (km.h−1 ) — 1.7 ± 0.8 2.1 ± 0.7 0.6 ± 1.1 1.1 0.8 (0.2 —
(1.3 — 2.1) (1.7—2.4) (0—1.1) (0.4—1.7) 1.3)
CV% (CI %95) — 7.4 10.2 4.6 6.1 5.3
(5.6—9.2) (8.4—11.9) (3.1—6.2) (4.1—8.1) (3.8—6.7)
HRmax 198.1 ± 7.4 194.7 ± 6.3 198.2 ± 9.6 — — —
VO2max 54.5 ± 3.1 53.2 ± 5.2 51.9 ± 5.2 51.3 ± 3.9 — —
[12] [17] [18] [4]
sVO2max = maximal aerobic speed; FS = final speed; CV = coefficient of variation; CI = confidence interval; HRmax = maximal heart rate;
Yoyo IRT1 = Yoyo intermittent recovery test level 1; 20-MST = 20 meter shuttle run test; 5 min TT = 5 minute time trial and
VO2max = maximal oxygen consumption.
* Significant difference when compared to the sVO
2max .

2.3. General procedures 3. Results

Testing sessions took place in four consecutive periods (Yoyo
IRT1, 20-MST, 5 min TT, UMTT) and performed in a ran-
domised order, with at least 72 h intervals between testing
sessions, spanning 17 days overall. During the first period,
anthropometric measurements (weight, height, BMI) were
completed. All testing periods were carried out at the
same time of the day, under similar weather conditions
(i.e. temperature 14.5—16 ◦ C, humidity 35—50%). Partici-
pants performed the Yoyo IRT1 and 20-MST on the grass field,
and 5 min TT and UMTT on an official 400 m track. During the
sessions, participants were asked to avoid food, caffeine,
and alcohol 3 h before the testing and to attend each period
well hydrated. Throughout the tests, heart rate (HR) of the
participants was tracked using the Polar Team Pro monitor
(Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland).
2.4. Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was carried out using the IBM SPSS
Statistics software (Version 24.0, SPSS, Armonk, NY: IBM
Corp). Distribution of the variables was checked using
Shapiro—Wilk’s test and descriptive statistical information
was provided as mean ± standard deviation (SD). While com-
paring two and more variables (UMTT sVO2max and FS of Yoyo
IRT1 and 20-MST, mean speed of 5 min TT), Paired Samples t
Test and Repeated Measures ANOVA with Bonferroni correc-
tion were used respectively. The coefficient of variation was
calculated at 95% confidence interval to check relative vari-
ability. The correlation between sVO2max and FS and equation
results was tested using Pearson’s r test. The Bland—Altman
plot demonstrated the ± 95% limits of agreement between
the 2 investigated methods. Multiple regression analysis was
used to extract equation models by using the test results to
estimate sVO2max . The relationship between the model and
the dependent variable was tested using R-squared measure.
The significance level was set at 0.05.
sVO2max determined by the UMTT, the mean speed of 5 min
TT, equation results and the FS of Yoyo IRT1 and 20-MST are
shown in Table 1.
3.1. Test performances
The mean speed of 5 min TT, 20-MST equation [5], Yoyo IRT1
equation [25] and FS of Yoyo IRT1 overestimated sVO2max
(p = 0.043; 0.008; 0.004; 0.001, respectively). The FS of 20-
MST underestimated sVO2max (p = 0.001). In addition, as seen
in Fig. 1, the Bland—Altman plots showed high bias when
comparing sVO2max UMTT with FS Yoyo IRT1 and 20-MST,
indicating that these 2 methods systematically generate dif-
ferent results. The average speed elicited during the 5 min
TT had the smallest bias and the largest limits of agree-
ment, suggesting a poor agreement with UMTT sVO2max ,
while the FS Yoyo IRT1 and 20-MST methods had relatively
narrow limits of agreement. sVO2max values were signifi-
cantly correlated with all the other modalities (i.e. Yoyo
IRT1 r = 0.69, p = 0.002; 20-MST r = 0.70, p = 0.001; 5 min TT
r = 0.52, p = 0.03; Yoyo IRT1 equation [25] r = 0.63, p = 0.005;
20-MST equation [5] r = 0.70, p = 0.001).
The HRmax values were similar in UMTT and 20-MST
(198.1 ± 7.4, 198.2 ± 9.6; respectively) and were significan-
tly higher than the values of HRmax obtained with the Yoyo
IRT1 test (i.e. 194.7 ± 6.3, p < 0.05).
3.2. Regression analysis
The multiple regression equation using the Yoyo IRT1
variables (such as the distance covered during the test)
significantly predicted sVO2max [F(3,14) = 9.435, p < 0.001,
R = .818, R2 = .669]:
Y = 17.673 — (BMI × 0.253) — ([x/t] × 6.568) + (FS × 0.972)
where Y was sVO2max , the BMI was expressed as kg/m2 , x
was the distance covered in meter, t was the test duration
in seconds, and FS was the final speed reached during Yoyo
IRT1 in km.hr−1 .

Please cite this article in press as: Darendeli A, et al. Comparison of different exercise testing modalities to determine
maximal aerobic speed in amateur soccer players. Sci sports (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
+Model
SCISPO-3495; No. of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Determination of maximal aerobic speed
Figure 1 The Bland-Altman plots display the agreement between sVO2max UMTT and the FS of Yoyo IRT1 (A), 20-MST (B) and the
mean speed of 5 min TT (C).
The 20-MST FS and the BMI significantly predicted
sVO2max . [F(2,15) = 12.639, p < 0.001, R = .792, R2 = .628]:
Y = 10.415—(BMI × 0.205) + (FS × 0.713)
where Y was sVO2max , the BMI was expressed as kg/m2 ,
and FS was the final speed reached during 20-MST in km.hr−1 .
4. Discussion
The present study showed that FS values of the Yoyo IRT1,
20-MST and the previous equation models [5,25] significantly
correlated with sVO2max derived from UMTT. The regression
model established an equation using FS reached during the
Yoyo IRT1, BMI, test duration and distance covered in the
test. This equation model was the most suitable to robustly
predict sVO2max value in our population of amateur soccer
players, even if the 20-MST FS and the BMI alone also signi-
ficantly predicted sVO2max value.
The FS obtained from the Yoyo IRT1 using Kuipers
[20] equation overestimated sVO2max . Thus, the raw value
extracted from Yoyo IRT1 should not be used alternatively
with sVO2max in our population. Furthermore, the FS of
Yoyo IRT1 consistently produced different results than UMTT
sVO2max ; even so, the limits of agreement were relatively
narrow. Similarly, in a study conducted in female netballers,
Heaney et al. [25] compared sVO2max values derived from a
treadmill VO2max test to sVO2max values extracted from the
Yoyo IRT1 results using Kuipers [20] equation. These authors
Please cite this article in press as: Darendeli A, et al. Comparison of different exercise testing modalities to determine
maximal aerobic speed in amateur soccer players. Sci sports (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
5
also demonstrated that the Yoyo IRT1 FS (16.1 km.hr−1 )
overestimated sVO2max (15.3 km.hr−1 ). In addition, Hill and
Rowell [26] stressed the fact that data collecting protocols
and the definitions of sVO2max varied among studies. Thus,
they compared five different modalities to obtain sVO2max .
As a result, these authors reported that sVO2max values
derived from the five modalities were significantly differ-
ent. Consequently, the treadmill protocol used by Heaney
et al. [25] may not be reproducible.
In another study, Berthoin et al. [14] compared sVO2max
values derived from a maximal treadmill test (using a proto-
col where the speed increase was 2 km.hr−1 every 4 minutes
and gradient set at 3%) to those obtained by the 20-MST and
reported that the FS of 20-MST (13.1 ± 1.2 km.hr−1 ) was sig-
nificantly lower than treadmill sVO2max (15.9 ± 2.6 km.hr−1 ).
Unlike the treadmill procedures used in literature [10,23],
the protocol used by these authors was not sensitive enough
to detect the speed where VO2max occurred. In line with the
present study, UMTT sVO2max overestimated the FS of the 20-
MST. Nonetheless, Berthoin et al. [15] also used the same
treadmill protocol when comparing treadmill test to UMTT
and found no significant difference between both tests (i.e.
treadmill 16.6 ± 1.9 km.hr−1 vs. UMTT 16.2 ± 1.2 km.hr−1 ,
NS) in terms of sVO2max . The lower speed reached during
the 20-MST compared to the UMTT could be associated with
the number and the characteristics of the sample, besides
using a different modality to obtain the reference sVO2max
value.
+Model
SCISPO-3495; No. of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS
6 A. Darendeli et al.
Soccer is known to be a practice in which stop—start
actions at varying intensities take place [27]. It is accepted
that improving the ability to perform repeated bouts of
high intensity activities as well as enhancing both aerobic
and anaerobic capacities is crucial in soccer. Research [28]
showed that low to moderate intensity activities (i.e. walk-
ing, jogging; 0.7—14.4 km.hr−1 ) represent ∼85% of the total
time in soccer match. The Yoyo IRT1 also has a nature similar
to soccer (having intervals, escalating intensity, and shut-
tles), enabling soccer players to be familiarised with the
test both physiologically and cognitively. On the other hand,
the nature of the 5 min TT is also characterised with soc-
cer because it requires maximal efforts demanding a high
contribution of aerobic power. In addition, this TT is also
characterised with team sports because sVO2max has been
shown to be predicted from the average speed during a
TT for any distance between 1200 and 2200 m in Australian
football players [16]. In our study, soccer players approx-
imately ran 1.3 km.h−1 during the 5 min TT. However, the
high deviation in final scores derived from the 5 min TT and
the relatively lower correlation between the mean speed of
5 min TT and sVO2max values could potentially explain that
the regression model was not suitable to precisely predict
sVO2max . Moreover, there was not a good agreement based
on large limits of agreement between the mean speed of
5 min TT and UMTT sVO2max .
Considering it was demonstrated by world-record run-
ning data that 5 min maximal test was the optimal duration
to determine sVO2max [29], Berthon et al. [4] hypothesised
that 5 min TT could be used to estimate sVO2max and com-
pared the 5 min TT to a maximal treadmill test protocol.
As found in our study, they reported that the mean speed
of the 5 min TT overestimated sVO2max (0.3 km.hr−1 , +1.8%).
Besides, a strong correlation between sVO2max and the mean
speed of 5 min TT was shown (r = 0.92). The correlation coef-
ficients between the FS values of the 5 min TT and UMTT
were lower than other paired modalities (i.e. Yoyo IRT1 and
UMTT) in the present study. This result could be explained
by two factors. Firstly, the 5 min TT was a self-paced test
where no sound signals were used to indicate the participant
where he needed to be during the test for optimal output. In
this case, some participants could be more motivated than
others. Consequently, a great inter-individual change in per-
formance could be seen particularly in a sample, such as
amateur soccer players. Secondly, lacking a familiarisation
session, an optimal result for 5 min TT may not be expected.
In both cases, remaining significantly different than sVO2max ,
the 5 min TT may overestimate sVO2max derived from UMTT.
Finally, both the regression equation by Heaney et al. [25]
and the equation by Berthoin et al. [5] overestimated the
value of sVO2max . The gender difference, number of samples,
test protocols and independent variables used to predict the
target value of sVO2max may be possible factors for this out-
come. The results of the present study showed that FS values
obtained in the field tests (i.e. Yoyo IRT1, 20-MST) did not
coincide with the target value of sVO2max derived from UMTT
and led us to utilise the regression equation (using Yoyo
IRT1 or 20-MST variables) to predict sVO2max in male ama-
teur soccer players. These equation models may be used
to track changes in physical fitness and prescribe training
intensities and loads time-efficiently without using addi-
tional resources. Considering these equations may not be
Please cite this article in press as: Darendeli A, et al. Comparison of different exercise testing modalities to determine
maximal aerobic speed in amateur soccer players. Sci sports (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
reproducible in a variety of samples, the study results sug-
gest using the equation in similar samples with the present
study.
The main limitation of the present study was the use of
a single reference test (UMTT) to obtain sVO2max reference
value. sVO2max was determined using UMTT with a speed
increase of 1 km.hr−1 every 2 min until volitional exhaus-
tion, as previously suggested [12]. Working on Australian
Rules football players, Bellenger et al. [16] also used sVO2max
derived from UMTT as a single reference. However, some
researchers have drawn on other incremental protocols on
treadmill and determined sVO2max by monitoring the expired
gas [10,23]. In addition, Billat et al. [30] showed that dif-
ferent protocols resulted in similar outputs, and in a review
study, Billat and Koralsztein [6] acknowledged that nearly
10% variance in sVO2max may be expected among incremental
protocols. Nonetheless, the literature suggests that UMTT is
a valid test to assess the velocity associated with VO2max
[11,13,16].
5. Conclusions
The final score attained in Yoyo IRT1, 20-MST and 5 min TT
alone did not coincide with sVO2max . However, the FS reached
during the Yoyo IRT1 and 20-MST correlated well with sVO2max
values derived from the UMTT in our population of regional-
level amateur soccer players. Indicating a good fit, Yoyo
IRT1 and 20-MST equation models could be used to predict
sVO2max value. This may help coaches and athletes to bet-
ter set individual training intensities. Practitioners should be
aware of the interchangeability of the sVO2max value among
individuals and populations. sVO2max equations suggested in
the literature and the ones provided in the current study
should only be used in similar populations with the original
investigation.
Disclosure of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
References
[1] Howley ET, Bassett Jr DR, Welch HG. Criteria
for maximal oxygen uptake: review and com-
mentary. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1995;27:1292—301,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1249/00005768-199509000-00009.
[2] Bangsbo J, Nørregaard L, Thorsøe F. Activity profile of compe-
tition soccer. Can J Sport Sci 1991;16:110—6.
[3] Bergh U, Ekblom B, Astrand PO. Maximal oxygen uptake ‘clas-
sical’ versus ‘contemporary’ viewpoints. Med Sci Sports Exerc
2000;32:85—8.
[4] Berthon P, Fellmann N, Bedu M, Beaune B, Dabonneville M,
Coudert J, et al. A 5-min running field-test as a measurement
of maximal aerobic velocity. Eur J Appl Physiol 1997;75:233—8.
[5] Berthoin S, Gerbeaux M, Geurruin F, Lensel-Corbeil G, Van-
dendorpe F. Estimation of maximal aerobic speed. Sci Sport
1992;7(2):85—91.
[6] Billat LV, Koralsztein JP. Significance of the velocity at
VO2max and time to exhaustion at this velocity. Sports Med
1996;22:90—108.
+Model
SCISPO-3495; No. of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Determination of maximal aerobic speed
[7] Billat LV. Interval training for performance: a scien-
tific and empirical practice. Sports Med 2001;31:13—31,
http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200131010-00002.
[8] Dupont G, Blondel N, Lensel G, Berthoin S. Critical velocity
and time spent at a high level of VO2 for short intermit-
tent runs at supramaximal velocities. Can J Appl Physiol
2002;27(2):103—15.
[9] Pyne DB, Spencer M, Mujika I. Improving
the value of fitness testing for football. Int
J Sports Physiol Perform 2014;9(3):511—4,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2013-0453.
[10] Cappa DF, García GC, Secchı JD, Maddıgan ME. The relationship
between an athlete’s maximal aerobic speed determined in
a laboratory and their final speed reached during a field test
(UNCa Test). J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2014;54:1—2.
[11] Souza KM, Lucas RD, Grossl T, Costa VP, Guglielmo Luiz A,
Denadai BS. Performance prediction of endurance runners
through laboratory and track tests. Rev Bras Cineantropom
Desempenho Hum 2014;16(4):466—74.
[12] Léger L, Boucher R. An indirect continuous running multistage
field test, Université de Montreal Track Test. Can J Appl Sport
Sci 1980;5:77—84.
[13] Lacour JR, Padilla-Magunacelaya S, Chatard JC, Arsac L,
Barthélémy JC. Assessment of running velocity at maximal oxy-
gen uptake. Eur J Appl Physiol 1991;62:77—82.
[14] Berthoin S, Gerbeaux M, Turpin E, Guerrin F, Lensel-Corbeil
G, Vandendorpe F. Comparison of two field tests to estimate
maximum aerobic speed. J Sport Sci 1994;12:355—62.
[15] Berthoin S, Pelayo P, Lensel-Corbel G, Robin H, Gerbeaux M.
Comparison of maximal aerobic speed as assessed with labora-
tory and field measurements in moderately trained subjects.
Int J Sports Med 1996;17(7):525—9.
[16] Bellenger CR, Fuller JT, Nelson MJ, Hartland M, Buckley JD,
Debenedictis TA. Predicting maximal aerobic speed through set
distance time-trials. Eur J Appl Physiol 2015;115(12):2593—8.
[17] Bangsbo J, Iaia FM, Krustrup P. The Yo-yo intermittent recovery
test: a useful tool for evaluation of physical performance in
intermittent sports. Sports Med 2008;38(1):37—51.
[18] Léger L, Mercier D, Gadoury C, Lambert J. The multistage
20-meter shuttle run test for aerobic fitness. J Sports Sci
1988;6:93—101.
[19] Brito J, Fernandes L, Rebelo A, Krustrup P, Silva G, Oliveira
J. Heart rate kinetics response of pre-pubertal children during
Please cite this article in press as: Darendeli A, et al. Comparison of different exercise testing modalities to determine
maximal aerobic speed in amateur soccer players. Sci sports (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2020.09.006
7
the Yo-Yo intermittent endurance test-level 1. Sports (Basel)
2019;7(3):65, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports7030065.
[20] Kuipers H, Verstappen FTJ, Keize HA, Guerten P, Van Kranen-
burg G. Variability of aerobic performance in laboratory and its
physiologic correlates. In J Sport Med 1985;6:197—201.
[21] Renoux JC. Evaluating the time limit at maximum aerobic
speed in elite swimmers. Training implications. Arch Physiol
Biochem 2001;109(5):424—9.
[22] Sousa AC, Vilas-Boas JP, Fernandes RJ. VO2 kinetics and
metabolic contributions whilst swimming at 95, 100, and
105% of the velocity at VO2max . BioMed Res Int 2014,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/675363 [Article ID 675363, 9
pages].
[23] Olher RR, Sales MM, Sousa CV, Sotero RC, Madrid
B, Cunha RR, et al. Heart rate cost of running
in track estimates velocity associated with maxi-
mal oxygen uptake. Physiol Behav 2019;205:33—8,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2019.02.029.
[24] Lorenzen C, Williams MD, Turk PS, Meehan DL, Kolsky DJ. Rela-
tionship between velocity reached at VO2max and time-trial
performances in elite Australian rules footballers. Int J Sports
Physiol Perform 2009;4:408—11.
[25] Heaney N, Williams M, Lorenzen C, Kemp J.Comparison of a
YOYO IR1 test and a VO2max test as a determination of training
speeds and evaluation of aerobic power. 2009 [Poster Presen-
tation 7, 18(S1)].
[26] Hill DW, Rowell A. Determination of running velocity at VO2max .
Med Sci Sports Exerc 1996;28:114—9.
[27] Gorostiaga E, Llodio I, Ibáñez J, Granados C, Navarro I,
Ruesta M, et al. Differences in physical fitness among indoor
and outdoor elite male soccer players. Eur J Appl Physiol
2009;106(4):483—91.
[28] Scott BR, Lockie RG, Davies SJ, Clark AC, Lynch DM, Janse de
Jonge XAK. The physical demands of professional soccer players
during in-season field-based training and match play. J Austr
Strength Cond 2014;22(4):7—15.
[29] Chamoux A, Berthon P, Laubignat JF. Determination of max-
imum aerobic velocity by a 5-minute test with reference to
world running records. A theoretical approach. Arch Int Physiol
Biochem 1996;104:207—11.
[30] Billat V, Hill D, Pinoteau J, Petit B, Koralsztein JP. Effect of
protocol on determination of velocity at VO2max and on its time
to exhaustion. Arch Int Physiol Biochim 1996;3:313—21.