Abstract

The purpose of this research study was to determine the difference in improvement rates between anaerobic and aerobic training. Over two, four week periods VO2max test and Wingate test were administered on 11 untrained students from a Northwest College. The hypothesis was anaerobic training would facilitate greater improvement rates in both VO2max accessed through use of metabolic cart and anaerobic performance assessed through use of a Wingate test.

Depending on what systems an individual wants to improve in performance they should specifically stress the desired system. Overall participants who trained aerobically had a 13.01% average improvement (p=0.275) in the VO2max test compared to 8.18% average improvement (p=0.579) in the Wingate test. Participants who trained anaerobically had a 3.77% average improvement in VO2max (p=0.744) and also a 6.39% improvement (p=0.667) anaerobic performance.

In conclusion, the statistical hypothesis was rejected because anaerobic training did not produce the most beneficial results due to training. The anaerobic training only had improvement in the Wingate test while the aerobic training had the biggest effect on the VO2max test. Results from this study indicate that individuals can improve at a faster rate in both aerobic and anaerobic capacity with aerobic training.

Share

COinS
 

Improvement Rates in Aerobic and Anaerobic Training

The purpose of this research study was to determine the difference in improvement rates between anaerobic and aerobic training. Over two, four week periods VO2max test and Wingate test were administered on 11 untrained students from a Northwest College. The hypothesis was anaerobic training would facilitate greater improvement rates in both VO2max accessed through use of metabolic cart and anaerobic performance assessed through use of a Wingate test.

Depending on what systems an individual wants to improve in performance they should specifically stress the desired system. Overall participants who trained aerobically had a 13.01% average improvement (p=0.275) in the VO2max test compared to 8.18% average improvement (p=0.579) in the Wingate test. Participants who trained anaerobically had a 3.77% average improvement in VO2max (p=0.744) and also a 6.39% improvement (p=0.667) anaerobic performance.

In conclusion, the statistical hypothesis was rejected because anaerobic training did not produce the most beneficial results due to training. The anaerobic training only had improvement in the Wingate test while the aerobic training had the biggest effect on the VO2max test. Results from this study indicate that individuals can improve at a faster rate in both aerobic and anaerobic capacity with aerobic training.