Critical Power (CP) - Cirtical velocity (CV)

Simple. Measure maximum velocity. No lactate testing required.

You have to measure several maxes at different durations to get a good idea of performance. Lots of good papers out there show many combinations of time trial durations and their relative accuracy for estimate CP/CV.

1, 4, and 10 minute time trials give a great estimate.

So how are you defining 'anaerobic capacity'?

If you use maximum velocity, there is no ambiguity.

There is no need to overcomplicate these things. Unless you wish to make yourself appear more knowledgeable than you really are.

Out of curiosity, i had a look at the 2017 edition of the IAAF Scoring Tables for Outdoor
Events. Your 5K female runner scores 1115 IAAF points.
At that score point, I looked at the time for 800m, 1500m, 3000m and calculated CV based on these 4 data points (including 5K). CV = 03:12 min/km.
That should give a good ballpark.

How accurate is that estimation for your runner?

technotronic trainer: I was at a track camp in 2001 and Veronique Billat explained how to get rid of the hyperbolas: Graph time vs. distance instead of speed (or power) vs. distance.

Suppose your 3000 time is 8:10 and your 5000 is 14 flat. The difference between those 2 points when graphed as time vs. distance is 2000m in 5:50. That's your CP pace. So you can do 1000m repeats in 2:55 if you like to train at that pace.

For some people, the data points line up pretty well from 1500 to marathon. For others, not so much. But it's a line fit to the points rather than a messy hyperbola.

I define it as many do… W’ or also known as AWC. you need velocity and duration pairs to model physiology. At least two pairs and more if better.

The more W’ you have, the more work over CP/CV you can do. Or in the CP world, CP/CV represents the boundary between moderate and severe work domains. And typically CP is the workload you can sustain for 30 minutes.

I do CP testing for cycling and running. Makes things super easy in my opinion

And despite your 'optimal' training almost all your runners will be injured. Great!

I was asking for a definition of Anaerobic Capacity.

Very much so as she has Pb of 1:10:40 for half. With many of our sessions on grass much has to taken into account. Next race over 10k on the road on Sunday but looks to be wet and miserable.

Are there 2 different camps, using the term 'CP' to denote different things? One camp (mostly cyclists) defining CP or CV as the max power or speed that can be maintained for any specific time, such as CP10 or CP45 or CP200? And another camp that sees a theoretical asymptote on the CP graph at about 30 minutes, that (as you wrote) represents the boundary between moderate and severe work? And they are operating on the assumption that this level of work can theoretically be continued indefinitely??? The fellow on this video below even points out that this is a controversy because we know it is not true. He says this at 11:13 in the video. Correct me if I am wrong.

You can look it up if you want. In the context of CV/CP, W', or work prime, is the anaerobic capacity. Or the work over critical power/velocity.

If you want to get into a discussion of lactate or oxygen kinetics and how anaerobic capacity is generated, that's a complete other chat.

There are two different camps, actually. Those who understand CP/CV and those who kind of don't. Joe Friel started that CPXX thing with his Power meter handbook. Currently, people use MMP20, MMP30 to define your mean maximal power at different points. There's only one CP, like the highlander.

And yes, if you go back to the 1960 Monod paper on CP...CP is the workload that can be sustained indefinitely. That's a main assumption. It's not a great assumption, but it's not bad, either. However, you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Here, try reading this. It's by Dr. Clarke and Dr. Skiba...two people who know a thing or two.

Rationale and resources for teaching the mathematical modeling of athletic training and performance

thanks for the reply, I will check it out

By the way, there are MANY formulations of the critical power model. 2 parameter, 3 parameter, extended CP, omni-durational, etc. I've been studying this topic for about 5 years now and actually bought a metabolic cart, blood lactate meter, and muscle oxygen sensors to use at home a couple of years ago.

Golden Cheetah can be used for free to analyze your running files to your heart's content.

A survey of mathematical models of human performance using power and energy

False, you fall into that trap. W' is not the anaerobic capacity (!), this information is outdated and wrong. (i asume thats why user 'say otherwise' asked you about it).

Here a better intepretation:

Yes, I'm familiar with Vanhatalo.

The term "anaerobic" is outdated, completely. That's not the discussion we're having.

To be completely honest, I don't believe CP is the delineator. When you pass your lower threshold, or LT1, VT1... is likely the beginning of when W' depletion begins.

This topic is quite interesting and hundreds of people are studying it. I'm not here to argue.

From the paper by Jones et al:

"CP represents the highest rate of energy transduction (oxidative ATP production, V? O2) that can be sustained without continuously drawing on the energy store W' (composed in part of anaerobic energy sources and expressed in kilojoules)"

Composed in part, so it's certainly not Anaerobic Capacity is it?

If you don't make clear distinctions based on actual bioenergetics, it's not very good science is it?

How is the term "Anaerobic" outdated? It means non oxidative. Or it did until you decided otherwise.

If you mean what old fashioned coaches refer to as "going anaerobic" then yes, that is incorrect.

I was referring to the latter. I like Mader, Heck, and Olbrecht's work, so I see anaerobic a lot.

Anyways, I like the Jones paper, too.