Traditionally, physiological characteristics such as oxygen uptake (SO2) have been scaled simply by dividing them by an anthropometric variable,

for instance body mass (BM). This produces a ratio standard and the particular standard SO2/BM expressed as mlkg_1min_1 is probably the most widely used value in the physiology of exercise. However, it was suggested nearly 60 years ago by Tanner (1949) and confirmed by Packard and Boardman (1987) and Winter et al. (1991) that these standards can be misleading. Tanner (1949) stated that the ratio standard should be applied only when a special circumstance has been satisfied. For an outcome measure y and a predictor variable x, the special circumstance that allows the legitimate use of a ratio standard is given by: _x /_y _ r where: _x _ coefficient of variation of x, that is (SDx/x) _ 100 _y _ coefficient of variation of y, that is (SDy/y) _ 100 r _ Pearsons productmoment correlation coefficient. Rarely is this special circumstance tested and arguably it is even rarer for it to be satisfied. As the disparity between each side of the equation increases, the ratio standard becomes increasingly unstable and distorts measures under consideration. An effect of the unchallenged use of ratio standards is an apparent favourable economy in submaximal exercise in large individuals compared with those who are diminutive, whereas for maximal responses the opposite occurs. This latter observation has bedevilled researchers in the field of growth and development who see childrens endurance performance capabilities increase during adolescence while simultaneously, their aerobic capabilities seemingly deteriorate.

ALLOMETRY
The preferred form of scaling is non-linear allometric modelling (SchmidtNielsen, 1984; Nevill et al., 1992). This modelling is based on the relationship: where: y _ a performance or physiological outcome measure x _ an anthropometric predictor variable a _ the constant multiplier b _ the exponent. The terms a and b can be identified by taking natural logarithms (ln) of both the predictor variable and outcome measure and then regressing ln