metabolic testing for endurance athletes · • treadmill (1-2% grade) • two methods: 1....

Bob Seebohar, MS, RD, CSSD, CSCS

USA Triathlon Level III Elite Coach

Sport Dietitian/Exercise Physiologist

Metabolic Testing for Endurance Athletes

Objectives

1) Describe principles of advanced metabolic testing and physiological monitoring.

2) Discuss how to improve performance with specific metabolic and physiological assessment and monitoring tools.

3) Customize performance nutrition plans for athletes based on individual physiological parameters.

Metabolic Calorie Efficiency Assessment

(MCEA)

How efficient is the body in utilizing CHO and FAT at different intensities and during

certain training cycles and how can these answers be utilized in practical

sports nutrition recommendations for athletes?

% VO2 max (intensity)

Car

bohy

drat

e (%

)

Fat (

%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

0

10

20

30

4

050

60

30

40

50

60

7

0

80

9

0

100

Crossover Concept


Car

bohy

drat

e (%

)

Fat (

%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

0

10

20

30

4

050

60

30

40

50

60

7

0

80

9

0

100

Improvement in Fitness =


Car

bohy

drat

e (%

)

Fat (

%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

0

10

20

30

4

050

60

30

40

50

60

7

0

80

9

0

100

Nutrition Periodization and Improved Fitness

MCEA Protocol• Measurement of gas exchange (O2 , CO2 )

• Metabolic cart with freedom of data manipulations

• %CHO, %FAT

• RER/RQ

• REE (Kcal/day)

• Sub-maximal exercise bout, 45-60 minutes

• Warm-up of 15-20 minutes on the cart

• No calories or stimulants for 2-4 hours prior

MCEA Protocol

• Bike with power measuring capabilities

• Treadmill (1-2% grade)

• Two methods:

1. Incremental (crossover point)

• Five minute stages

• Increase 15-25 (50 elite) watts or 0.2-0.4mph

2. Steady-state (competition nutrition planning)

• Continuous at predetermined power output, pace and/or HR

MCEA Overview• Markers

• RQ/RER start and increase

• Crossover point (0.85)

• Calorie use efficiency (%CHO, %FAT)

• RQ/RER >0.93, no need to continue in most cases in an incremental test

• RQ/RER may have to be maintained at >0.93 for steady state test

Data Sheet

MCEA Examples and Applications:

Incremental Workload

Run: Incremental

81%77% 75% 78% 78%

72%68%

61%

49%

20% 23% 26% 23% 23%28%

32%

52%

75%

26%

39%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Min/mile:14:16

13:20 12:30 11:46 11:07 10:31 10:00 9:32 9:05 8:42

Amateur Male Ironman Athlete

Conclusions

• Lower carbohydrate diet

• Good aerobic/cardiovascular system

• Very efficient in burning fat at higher intensities

Energy Expenditure Table

Pace Heart RateKcal

hour/min CHO (gr/cal) Fat (gr/cal)14:16 103 355/6 18/72 32/28813:20 128 495/8 28/114 42/37812:30 137 510/9 33/132 43/38711:46 143 528/9 30/120 46/41411:07 145 536/9 31/124 46/41410:31 153 578/10 38/152 48/43210:00 160 580/10 41/164 46/414

9:32 165 621/10 50/200 47/4239:05 171 650/11 63/252 44/3968:42 173 695/12 90/360 38/342

Nutrition Rx for Ironman Athlete

• Ironman EI is ~25-35% TEE

• Race intensity 65-75% max

• Emphasis on fat expenditure

and at what intensities this

is maximized to reduce

exogenous CHO feedings

• If bike nutrition was

adequate, safe to consume

~173-217 kcal/hr on the run

Pace HRKcal

hr/minCHO

(gr/cal)Fat

(gr/cal)14:16 103 355/6 18/72 32/28813:20 128 495/8 28/114 42/378

12:30 137 510/9 33/132 43/387

11:46 143 528/9 30/120 46/414

11:07 145 536/9 31/124 46/41410:31 153 578/10 38/152 48/432

10:00 160 580/10 41/164 46/414

9:32 165 621/10 50/200 47/4239:05 171 650/11 63/252 44/396

8:42 173 695/12 90/360 38/342

Bike: Incremental

45% 42% 40% 42% 45%41%

37% 37%

14%

55%59% 60% 59%

55%60% 63%

86%

44%

64%57%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Watts:100

125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325

Elite Female Short Course Triathlete

Conclusions

• Did not achieve a true crossover point

• Higher carbohydrate diet

• More efficient at burning fat at higher vs. lower

intensities


Power Heart RateCalorie

hour/minCHO

(gr/cal) Fat (gr/cal)100 75 354/6 49/196 18/162125 83 465/8 69/276 22/198150 91 524/9 79/316 23/207175 101 602/10 89/356 28/252200 114 693/12 95/380 35/315225 122 821/14 117/468 40/360250 136 914/15 137/548 41/369275 155 1033/17 163/652 42/378300 169 1130/19 181/724 46/414325 183 1313/22 282/1128 20/180


Power Heart RateCalorie

hour/min CHO (gr/cal) Fat (gr/cal)100 75 354/6 49/196 18/162125 83 465/8 69/276 22/198150 91 524/9 79/316 23/207175 101 602/10 89/356 28/252200 114 693/12 95/380 35/315225 122 821/14 117/468 40/360250 136 914/15 137/548 41/369275 155 1033/17 163/652 42/378300 169 1130/19 181/724 46/414325 183 1313/22 282/1128 20/180

Nutrition Rx Female SC Triathlete

Power HRCalorie hr/min

CHO (gr/cal)

Fat (gr/cal)

100 75 354/6 49/196 18/162

125 83 465/8 69/276 22/198

150 91 524/9 79/316 23/207

175 101 602/10 89/356 28/252

200 114 693/12 95/380 35/315

225 122 821/14 117/468 40/360

250 136 914/15 137/548 41/369

275 155 1033/17 163/652 42/378

300 169 1130/19 181/724 46/414

325 183 1313/22 282/118 20/180

• Race intensity >85% max

• Race EI is ~15-25% of

race TEE

• Emphasis on CHO expenditure

and exogenous CHO feedings

• Fat expenditure less important

• Consume minimum only:

~137-170 kcal/hr on the bike

MCEA Examples and Applications:

Constant Workload

Constant Workload: Month 1

Bike: Competitive Amateur Cyclist

33%24%

34% 31% 30% 33% 40% 36% 36%

74%64% 67% 69% 65% 58% 63%65%

63%

0%

4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5

250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250

1117 1126 1127 1132 1128 1130 1120 1091 1103

149 152 153 154 154 157 155 156 156

CH

O (b

lack

) and

Fat

(red

)

RPE

Watts

Total Kcals

Heart Rate

33%

24%

34%31% 30%

33%40%

36% 36%

65%

74%

64% 67% 69%65%

58%63% 63%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250

Power (Watts)

Perc

ent C

ontr

ibut

ion

from

CH

O a

nd fa

ts to

TEE

Interpretation of Data

Average CHO

Expend.(cal/hr)

Average HR

(bpm)

Average power (watts)

Average CHO

oxidation (%)

Average Fat

oxidation (%)

731 154 250 65 33

Constant Workload: Month 2

44% 46% 47% 47% 53% 48% 52% 50% 53%

52% 52% 51% 46% 51% 46% 46%55%

49%

0%

4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5

250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250

1220 1187 1192 1170 1189 1187 1171 1157 1154

141 138 140 139 140 140 140 140 142

CH

O (b

lack

) and

Fat

(red

)

RPE

Watts

Total Kcals

Heart Rate

44% 46% 47% 47%53%

48%52% 50%

53%

55% 52% 52% 51%46%

51%46% 49% 46%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250

Power (Watts)

Perc

ent C

ontri

butio

n fro

m C

HO

and

fats

to T

EE

Interpretation of DataAverage

CHOexpend.(cal/hr)

Average HR

(bpm)

Average power (watts)

Average CHO

oxidation (%)

Average Fat

oxidation (%)

588(-143)

140(-14)

250 50(-15)

49(+16)

• In one month emphasizing aerobic, heart rate based training, athlete increased utilization of fats as energy.

• Athlete was able to decrease reliance of CHO per hour, thus the need for exogenous CHO was reduced.

Application

1. Athlete can appropriately determine caloric expenditure based on heart rate and/or power/pace training zones.

2. Athlete can appropriately determine total calorie and exogenous CHO needs per hour for each training zone.

MCEA Case Study

• Male endurance athlete

• Training for 100 mile run

• Goal to finish under 30 hour cut-off

• Trains with a heart rate monitor

• Knows lactate clearing efficiency (aka- lactate threshold) heart rate and pace zones

26%30%

34%26%

18%

8%

74%70%

66%74%

83%

93%

11%

90%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Min/mile:10:00

9:32 9:05 8:42 8:20 8:00 7:42

End of Transition Cycle

Dietary CHO: 7.7 g/kg (61%)

Month 1

3 months later

45%50%

42%46% 44%

30%

55% 58%54% 56%

42%50%

70%

58%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Min/mile: 10:00 9:32 9:05 8:42 8:20 8:00 7:42

End of Preparation cycle

Dietary CHO: 5.4 g/kg (53%)

MCEA Case Study Summary

Pace (min/mile)

CHO Expend.Month 1

CHO Expend.Month 3

FAT Oxidation Month 1

FAT Oxidation Month 3

10:00 74 55 26 45

9:32 70 50 30 50

9:05 66 58 34 42

8:42 74 54 26 468:20 83 56 18 44

8:00 90 58 11 42

7:42 93 70 8 30

MCEA Case Study Summary

Pace (min/mile)

CHO Expend.Month 1

CHO Expend.Month 3

FAT Expend. Month 1

FAT Expend. Month 3

10:00 74 55 26 45

9:32 70 50 30 50

9:05 66 58 34 42

8:42 74 54 26 468:20 83 56 18 44

8:00 90 58 11 42

7:42 93 70 8 30

Underdeveloped aerobic system

Higher CHO diet at less appropriate times of year

Poor utilization of body fat stores for energy

More reliance on supplemental CHO

Inability to properly feed during training/racing

Application

Want More Proof? Male Elite Cyclist

3 weeks later

0

50

100

1 2 3 4 5

Stages

Perc

enta

ge

Start

0

50

100

1 2 3 4 5

Stages

Perc

enta

ge

Future Looks Bright!

1. MCEA will allow athletes to further individualize nutritional needs for competition.

2. Calorie and carbohydrate intake can be matched for specific heart rate and power/pace training zones.

3. Crossover Concept can be utilized to gauge fitness in addition to it allowing an athlete to manipulate nutrition needs based on fitness throughout the year.

• A good coach understands the “why.”

• Over-testing is as bad as under-testing.

• Coaching is as much an art as it is a science.

• Know how to apply science but don’t get bogged down with it. Listening to your athletes and observing them gives more information and feedback.

Summary

Great Resource!!!

$15 per signed copy available at the USA

Triathlon Booth

Contact information:

[email protected]

www.fuel4mance.com

Thanks to USA Triathlon!

metabolic testing for endurance athletes · • treadmill (1-2% grade) • two methods: 1....

Documents