Yo-Yo IR1 vs. incremental continuous running test for prediction of 3000-m performance

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare physiological responses during the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery level 1 (Yo-Yo IR1) Test and an incremental continuous running field Test (ICRT) and to analyze their predictive value on 3000-m running performance. METHODS: Forty moderately trained individuals (18 females) performed the ICRT and Yo-Yo IRI Test to exhaustion. The ICRT was performed as graded running test with an increase of 2.0 km.h(-1) after each 3 min interval for lactate diagnostic. In both tests, blood lactate levels were determined after the test and at 2 and 5 min of recovery. Heart rate (HR) was recorded to monitor differences in HR slopes and HR recovery. RESULTS: Comparison revealed a correlation between ICRT and Yo-Yo IR1 Test performance (R-2=0.83, P<0.001), while significant differences in HRmax existed (Yo-Yo IR1, 189 +/- 10 bpm; ICRT, 195 +/- 16 bpm; P<0.005; ES=0.5). Maximum lactate levels were also different between test (Yo-Yo IR1, 10.1 +/- 2.1 mmol.L-1; ICRT, 11.7 +/- 2.4 mmol.L-1; P<0.01; ES=7). Significant inverse correlations were found between the Yo-Yo IR1 Test performance and 3000 m running time (R-2=0.77, P<0.0001) as well as the ICRT and 3000 m time (R-2=0.90, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that ICRT and Yo-Yo IR1 test arc useful field test methods for the prediction of competitive running performances such as 3000-m runs but maximum HR and blood lactate values differ significantly. The ICRT may have higher predictive power for middle- to long- distance running performance such as 3000-m runs offering a reliable test for coaches in the recruitment of athletes or supervision of training concepts.