Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> Performance
CrossFit<sup>®</sup> began as another exercise program to improve physical fitness and has rapidly grown into the “sport of fitness„. However, little is understood as to the physiological indicators that determine CrossFit<sup>®</sup> spo...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2019-04-01
|
| Series: | Sports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/7/4/93 |
| _version_ | 1811303291636678656 |
|---|---|
| author | Joshua D. Dexheimer E. Todd Schroeder Brandon J. Sawyer Robert W. Pettitt Arnel L. Aguinaldo William A. Torrence |
| author_facet | Joshua D. Dexheimer E. Todd Schroeder Brandon J. Sawyer Robert W. Pettitt Arnel L. Aguinaldo William A. Torrence |
| author_sort | Joshua D. Dexheimer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | CrossFit<sup>®</sup> began as another exercise program to improve physical fitness and has rapidly grown into the “sport of fitness„. However, little is understood as to the physiological indicators that determine CrossFit<sup>®</sup> sport performance. The purpose of this study was to determine which physiological performance measure was the greatest indicator of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> workout performance. Male (<i>n</i> = 12) and female (<i>n</i> = 5) participants successfully completed a treadmill graded exercise test to measure maximal oxygen uptake (VO<sub>2max</sub>), a 3-minute all-out running test (3MT) to determine critical speed (CS) and the finite capacity for running speeds above CS (D′), a Wingate anaerobic test (WAnT) to assess anaerobic peak and mean power, the CrossFit<sup>®</sup> total to measure total body strength, as well as the CrossFit<sup>®</sup> benchmark workouts: Fran, Grace, and Nancy. It was hypothesized that CS and total body strength would be the greatest indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> performance. Pearson’s r correlations were used to determine the relationship of benchmark performance data and the physiological performance measures. For each benchmark-dependent variable, a stepwise linear regression was created using significant correlative data. For the workout Fran, back squat strength explained 42% of the variance. VO<sub>2max</sub> explained 68% of the variance for the workout Nancy. Lastly, anaerobic peak power explained 57% of the variance for performance on the CrossFit<sup>®</sup> total. In conclusion, results demonstrated select physiological performance variables may be used to predict CrossFit<sup>®</sup> workout performance. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T07:44:16Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0342dc46b2354e8db5b947c5b8dec308 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2075-4663 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T07:44:16Z |
| publishDate | 2019-04-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sports |
| spelling | doaj.art-0342dc46b2354e8db5b947c5b8dec3082022-12-22T02:55:43ZengMDPI AGSports2075-46632019-04-01749310.3390/sports7040093sports7040093Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> PerformanceJoshua D. Dexheimer0E. Todd Schroeder1Brandon J. Sawyer2Robert W. Pettitt3Arnel L. Aguinaldo4William A. Torrence5Department of Exercise Science, Concordia University Chicago, Riverforest, IL 60305, USADivision of Biokinesiology & Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USADepartment of Kinesiology, Point Loma Nazarene University, San Diego, CA 92106, USAOffice of Research and Sponsored Projects, Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions, Provo, UT 84606, USADepartment of Kinesiology, Point Loma Nazarene University, San Diego, CA 92106, USADepartment of Exercise Science, Concordia University Chicago, Riverforest, IL 60305, USACrossFit<sup>®</sup> began as another exercise program to improve physical fitness and has rapidly grown into the “sport of fitness„. However, little is understood as to the physiological indicators that determine CrossFit<sup>®</sup> sport performance. The purpose of this study was to determine which physiological performance measure was the greatest indicator of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> workout performance. Male (<i>n</i> = 12) and female (<i>n</i> = 5) participants successfully completed a treadmill graded exercise test to measure maximal oxygen uptake (VO<sub>2max</sub>), a 3-minute all-out running test (3MT) to determine critical speed (CS) and the finite capacity for running speeds above CS (D′), a Wingate anaerobic test (WAnT) to assess anaerobic peak and mean power, the CrossFit<sup>®</sup> total to measure total body strength, as well as the CrossFit<sup>®</sup> benchmark workouts: Fran, Grace, and Nancy. It was hypothesized that CS and total body strength would be the greatest indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> performance. Pearson’s r correlations were used to determine the relationship of benchmark performance data and the physiological performance measures. For each benchmark-dependent variable, a stepwise linear regression was created using significant correlative data. For the workout Fran, back squat strength explained 42% of the variance. VO<sub>2max</sub> explained 68% of the variance for the workout Nancy. Lastly, anaerobic peak power explained 57% of the variance for performance on the CrossFit<sup>®</sup> total. In conclusion, results demonstrated select physiological performance variables may be used to predict CrossFit<sup>®</sup> workout performance.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/7/4/93CrossFit<sup>®</sup> sport performancephysiological indicatorsbenchmark performanceVO<sub>2max</sub>critical speedD′strength |
| spellingShingle | Joshua D. Dexheimer E. Todd Schroeder Brandon J. Sawyer Robert W. Pettitt Arnel L. Aguinaldo William A. Torrence Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> Performance Sports CrossFit<sup>®</sup> sport performance physiological indicators benchmark performance VO<sub>2max</sub> critical speed D′ strength |
| title | Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> Performance |
| title_full | Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> Performance |
| title_fullStr | Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> Performance |
| title_full_unstemmed | Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> Performance |
| title_short | Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit<sup>®</sup> Performance |
| title_sort | physiological performance measures as indicators of crossfit sup r sup performance |
| topic | CrossFit<sup>®</sup> sport performance physiological indicators benchmark performance VO<sub>2max</sub> critical speed D′ strength |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/7/4/93 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT joshuaddexheimer physiologicalperformancemeasuresasindicatorsofcrossfitsupsupperformance AT etoddschroeder physiologicalperformancemeasuresasindicatorsofcrossfitsupsupperformance AT brandonjsawyer physiologicalperformancemeasuresasindicatorsofcrossfitsupsupperformance AT robertwpettitt physiologicalperformancemeasuresasindicatorsofcrossfitsupsupperformance AT arnellaguinaldo physiologicalperformancemeasuresasindicatorsofcrossfitsupsupperformance AT williamatorrence physiologicalperformancemeasuresasindicatorsofcrossfitsupsupperformance |