The 29% reduction in SIR variability when prescribed by ASR vs MAS exceeds error in TTE efforts (~9–15%) and can therefore be considered practically meaningful. Reducing SIR variability ensures similar physiological demand across individuals. #ESSTC21 6/6

Trivial differences in TTE variability during SIR were present when prescribed by 30-15IFT vs MAS (ES=-0.05; -3%; p=0.86; Image 1). This may be explained by SIR trials not requiring a change in direction, which 30-15IFT also quantifies. #ESSTC21 5/6

TTE during SIR was not different between prescription methods (p=0.58; Image 1). TTE variability during SIR was reduced when prescribed by ASR vs MAS (ES=-0.47; -29%), however some uncertainty existed (ES 95% confidence interval = -1.03 to 0.09; p=0.09; Image 2). #ESSTC21 4/6

17 male Australian Rules footballers performed SIR trials to exhaustion at 120% MAS, 20% ASR and 95% 30-15IFT (Image 1). Time to exhaustion (TTE) variability for each prescription method was root mean square of difference between individual and mean values (Image 2). #ESSTC21 3/6

However, SIR prescribed by %MAS produces inconsistent responses in physiological demand and exercise tolerance (Image 1). Prescription of SIR by %ASR or %30-15IFT, which account for anaerobic ability, may be superior to %MAS (Image 2). #ESSTC21 2/6

Supramaximal interval running (SIR) is an effective training modality when prescribed accurately (Image 1). Prescription of intervals at or below MAS (an indirect measure of aerobic power) are adequately prescribed by %MAS. #ESSTC21 1/6

@frogdolling @hiitscience @tommyd_90 @jay_collison Hello Mark. If said average bloke is still keeping himself in shape, it means you should have the Streaky Bay footy club high performance manager prescribe your conditioning efforts by ASR! 😉

RT @Gareth_Sandford: 🚨New🚨 To prescribe supramaximal training (beyond VO2max) Which test is best? • Maximal aerobic speed (MAS) • 30-…

@michaelroeger @Tokyo2020 Go well mate; all the best!

RT @sleep_to_elite: 🚨NEW RESEARCH🚨 Excited for this one to be out via @MDPIOpenAccess - thank you to our great team. A Validation Study…

In female AF, a 1.4-1.5km TT best predicts UMTT-derived MAS for quantifying fitness and prescribing training intensities. Prediction of UMTT-derived MAS from TT performance reduces time and resource burden associated with MAS quantification via graded exercise test. #ESSTC20 6/6

Association between bias and TT distance also indicated UMTT-derived MAS may be predicted from any distance between 1.2 and 2.2km using the equation… MAS=(TTd/TTt)–( –1.423[TTd]+2.114) where TTd = time trial distance (km) and TTt = time to complete time trial (h). #ESSTC20 5/6

Mean speed for all TT distances were different to UMTT-derived MAS except for 1.4km TT. LOA was narrowest for 1.4km TT (Image 1). Association between bias and TT distance indicated TT speed would be equal to UMTT-derived MAS when completing a 1.4-1.5km TT (Image 2). #ESSTC20 4/6

31 female AF completed tests of MAS (via UMTT; Image 1) and TT performance (1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0, 2.2km) separated by ≥48 hours (Image 2). Bias, limits of agreement (LOA) and linear regression evaluated TT-derived running speed vs UMTT-derived MAS agreement. #ESSTC20 3/6

In male Australian Rules footballers (AF), MAS may be predicted from 2km TT running speed (Image 1). Given between-sex differences in physiological variables precursory to endurance performance (Image 2), 2km TT speed is unlikely to best predict MAS in female AF. #ESSTC20 2/6

Maximal aerobic speed (MAS) may be used to quantify physical fitness and prescribe future training intensities. Prediction of MAS from time trial (TT) performance reduces time and resource burden associated with MAS quantification via graded exercise test (Image 1). #ESSTC20 1/6

@RodSiegel @Gareth_Sandford @josephcoyne 😊

@RodSiegel @Gareth_Sandford @josephcoyne Noted in the paper @RodSiegel. 1500 m TT speed should only be compared to UMTT-derived MAS in this context (1 km/h increments every 2 min).

Given the popularity of the AFLW, we have recently repeated this study in female athletes (SANFLW players). Tlim for running at MAS was similar between males and females (~7 min), but this resulted in a 1500m TT best approximating MAS.