Effect of Various Warm-Up Approaches on Wingate-derived Power Output

Bridgette Stevens, Haley Perko, Melissa Michaelson

Kine 326 Exercise Physiology
Fall 2014

Abstract
Background: Although there is limited scientific evidence supporting their ultimate effectiveness,
warm-up routines prior to exercise is a well-accepted practice. Studies have been conducted
looking at how temperature-related mechanisms relate to performance, as well as different warmup protocols such as running vs strength-based. In this study we tested men and womens
maximal anaerobic power after various warm-up strategies. Aim: To determine if different warm
up strategies have an effect on the outcome of power output, and determine what is the best
warm-up strategy to optimize peak power after various warm-up strategies. Method: There were
13 individuals who participated in this four day Wingate testing; 8 women with a mean age of
22.6 years, and 5 men with a mean age of 27.4 years. Subjects of varied fitness levels
participated. On the first day of testing, the individual performed a 5 min standard warm-up on a
cycle ergometer, and then immediately performed the Wingate test. This was a baseline test so
that the subjects could get a feeling for the test. Days 2 through 4 prior to warm-up a blood
sample was taken from the subjects fingertip to assess lactate, this was also done immediately
after the warm-up, and two minutes after their supramaximal bout of exercise. Different warm-up
protocols were performed depending on the day, including a standard warm-up, a sprint bike
warm-up, or a dynamic warm-up; all with duration of 5 minutes. Before all warm-up protocols,
torque factor was applied (8.5% BW for women, 10% BW males), and resistance was applied at
40% of their body weight Then the subject was asked to continue to pedal at max effort for 30
seconds. During this performance, peak power (PP), mean power (MP), and minimum power
(Pmin) were recorded. The fatigue index was later calculated (FI). Results: There was a
significant difference in mean power and minimum power across warm-up conditions (p
=0.000). There was not a significant difference in peak power across warm-up conditions (p >
0.05). FI was seen to be greater in the male participants. Conclusion: During the Wingate test
between the 13 subjects the dynamic warm-up proved to have the greatest effect on one's
performance. Mean power output was significantly different across all warm-ups. Blood lactate
levels increased as the exercise bouts intensity increased.
Introduction
A Wingate power test is used in the measurement of peak anaerobic power and anaerobic
capacity (work in 30 sec), which represents the maximal rate of ATP generation during exercise.
It is clear however that even during short duration high power exercise, some ATP regeneration
occurs through oxidative phosphorylation (Smith, Hill et al, 1997). Variables determined via the
Wingate test include peak power (PP), mean power (MP), minimum power (Pmin), and fatigue
index (FI) have been used to estimate an individual's anaerobic capacity. Wingate tests have been
used to assess success in sports; however we were interested in seeing how different warm-up
protocols would affect ones Wingate performance, and how beneficial one protocol may be over
another. Different warm-up protocols and their effects have been tested throughout the years.
Susan Gray and Myra Nimmo, conducted a study on the effects of active, passive, or no warm-up
on metabolism and performance during high-intensity exercise. If exercise is preceded by a lowintensity active warm-up (30-60% of maximal oxygen uptake, VO2max), maximal peak power

and exercise time to exhaustion have seemed to enhance, whereas after higher-intensity warm-up
(70-100%, VO2max), there is a decreased in ones performance (Gray, Nimmo et al, 2001).
Other warm-up mechanisms, besides different intensities have been studied as well. It has been
suggested the majority of the effects of warm-up have been attributed to temperature-related
mechanisms (Bishop et al, 2003). It has been proposed that an increase in temperature could
improve performance of an athlete via a decrease in viscous resistance of muscles, a speeding of
rate-limiting oxidative reactions, and/or an increase in oxygen delivery to muscles; at the same
time increase thermoregulatory strain has the potential to adversely affect certain types of
performance (Bishop et al, 2003). With this said although warm up is a widely accepted practice
before almost every athletic event, there is surprisingly little scientific evidence supporting its
effectiveness, and how different types may affect one's performance.
Lactic acid is mainly produced in muscle cells and red blood cells. Lactate forms when
the body breaks down carbohydrates to use for energy during times of low oxygen levels; times
when ones oxygen levels may drop are during intense exercise and when one may have an
infection or disease. Therefore lactate levels at different stages of the Wingate test will be taken
to help assess athletic performance. Ones lactate Threshold is the maximum steady state effort
that can be maintained without lactate continually increasing, however in this study we expect
lactate to increase because the subjects will be performing at supramaximal intensities. In
previous studies pronounced depletion of ATP, CP, and glycogen was observed while lactate
concentrations were increased more than six times the resting values (Jacobs et al, 1982).
Therefore lactate and metabolite levels have been seen to have a significant difference between
resting and post exercise; pointing out the importance of recording the lactate levels throughout
our study both pre warm-up, post warm-up, and after a bout of exercise.
The aim of this study is to determine if different warm-up strategies, including a standard,
sprint, or dynamic warm-up, have an effect on the outcome of active men and womens peak,
mean, or minimum power output. It was hypothesized that a 5 minute standard warm-up on the
cycle ergometer will produce the highest WAnt power output at all levels (Peak, Mean, Min) ,
than that of the dynamic and sprint warm-up. The less stress put on the body before a bout of
exercise the better one will perform because they are less apt to fatigue because metabolites will
be more readily available after a less intense warm-up than after a higher intensity warm-up.
Methods
Participants
Eight females and five males volunteered in a four day Wingate testing. All participants
were non-smoker, part of the CSUSM community, not obese, work out a minimum of 5 hours a
week, and available to come in 4 separate days for 20 minutes each day. Participants were asked
to come in on the first day and fill out a health history and consent form. Following the forms
age, height, and weight were recorded as the following (mean, SD); 25.0 2.4 years, 66.2 4.2
inches, 67.0 11.8 kg. All subjects were asked to not exercise the lower extremity 24 hours prior
to the test day. As well as not eat 2 hours before and to walk to the lab.
Procedures

On day one all forms were completed on the first day each subject came in. Both the
health history and consent forms were reviewed with each participant. After forms were
completed and any questions the participant may have had were answered, height (in inches) and
weight (in kg) were measured in the laboratory. The first day was a baseline test to familiarize
the procedures. The participant was asked to get on the cycle ergometer. Seat and handlebars
were adjusted to each subject's comfort. The computer screen was turned away from the subject
so they could not see how much time they have or their results at the end of each Wingate test.
The participant then began the warm-up, which consisted of a 5 minute warm-up on the cycle
ergometer with an 8.5% torque resistance for females, 10% torque resistance for males. At the
end of the 5 minutes they were told to speed up their cadence to their max speed with a 5 second
count down to the beginning of the 30 second Wingate. The 30 second Wingate test had a load of
40% body weight added onto the cycle ergometer by the computer immediately following the
warm up. Upon completion of the test, subjects continued to bike for a minimum of 2 minutes or
until they recovered enough to get off the cycle ergometer. Subjects were asked to stay in the lab
until they no longer felt dizzy or nausea and were ok to walk around. Subjects were asked to
come in 3 more day with at least 48 hours between Wingate test days. They were reminded to not
eat 2 hours before coming in and to refrain from lower extremity exercise for at least 24 hours
prior to test day. Each of the last 3 days has a different warm-up that consisted of a standard
warm up on the cycle ergometer, 5 second sprint on the cycle ergometer, and dynamic stretches.
Standard Warm-up
One day subjects performed a standard warm-up. Upon arrival, subjects were asked to
come in a sit down for a few minutes to relax. Subjects were then told which warm-up they were
doing. For this warm-up, it was explained to them that would be exactly like the baseline test.
Participants got on the cycle ergometer and began the 5 minute warm up. After 5 minutes they
were told increase their cadence with a 5 second count down to the start of the Wingate test.
Participants were told to continue biking for a minimum of 2 minutes as a cool down before
getting off the bike. They were asked to stay on the lab until they have recovered and no longer
felt dizzy or nausea.
Sprint Bike
Subjects also performed a sprint bike warm up. Participants were once again asked to
come in and sit down to relax before getting on the cycle ergometer. Once on the bike each
participant were verbally walked through the warm up. The warm up was 5 minutes long.
Participants were told to bike at a steady cadence for 50 seconds. At 45 seconds they were give a
5 second countdown, and then told to sprint for 5 seconds. At the end of the minute there were
told to slow back down to their steady cadence. This was repeated 4 more times. At the end of
the 5 minutes, they were told to speed up their cadence. They were given a 5 second countdown
to start the Wingate test. Upon completion of the test, participants continued to pedal for a 2
minute cool-down at comfortable pace. After dismounting the cycle ergometer, they were asked
to take a seat in a chair or lay down on the floor and put their feet up for recovery.
Dynamic Stretches

The last type of warm up consisted of dynamic stretches. This warm up consisted of 4
different dynamic stretches that were performed for a minute and 15 seconds each with no rest
between exercises. Upon arrival the subject was asked to sit down in a chair to relax for a few
minutes. He or she then went outside to begin the warm up. The warm-up consisted of walking
lunges, high knees, butt kicker, and body weight squats. Demonstrations and verbal directions
were given for each exercise. Walking lunges, high knees and butt kickers were performed in the
hallway outside the lab. During the last 15 seconds of the butt kicker the participant worked their
way back into the lab. Body weight squats were performed inside the lab right next to the bike.
While the participant was warming up, the bike pedals were spun to keep the torque load from
preventing the subject to perform efficiently during the test. This was done so that the Wingate
test can be started immediately after the dynamic stretches were completed.
Blood Lactate
Blood lactates were drawn 3 times on days 2-4. The first lactate was drawn a few minutes
after arriving. The subject was asked to sit down and put 2 figures in a warm cup of water for a
few minutes. Blood lactate was then drawn before the warm-up begins. The second lactate was
drawn around 4 minutes into the warm up. The participant was asked to continue their warm-up
while blood was drawn. The last lactate was drawn 2 minutes after the Wingate was performed,
while the subject was still on the cycle ergometer during the cool-down. No lactate was drawn
during the baseline test. Blood lactate was drawn by pricking the tip of the finger. An automated
blood lactate analyzer was used to read the lactate.
Analysis
Data was analyzed on SPSS version 20.0 using two-way ANOVA test for all
measurements and analyzed the data using the 95% Confidence Interval. Two-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA) is an extension to the one-way analysis of variance; there are two
independent variables (Power output vs. Warm-up protocol).
Results
Comparison of Wingate-derived data from different warm up protocols
Peak power output revealed to have no significant difference across the warm-up
conditions with a (p>0.05). However there was a significant difference in mean power output
across warm-up condition (p = 0.000). There was also a significant difference in min power
output across warm-up condition (p = 0.000). Data is revealed in Table 1 in differences among
power output across the warm-up conditions, dynamic, sprint, and standard.
Blood Lactate
After the warm-up in all warm-up protocols, blood lactate was significant at (p = 0.000). This
suggests that blood lactate concentration after supramaximal exercise showed a positive
correlation with PP, suggesting an increase in blood concentration produced during exercise.

Table 1: Differences (mean SD) in power output, and blood lactate levels.

Parameter

Baseline

Dynamic

Sprint

Standard

P-Value

PP (W/kg)

9.99 1.68

10.07 1.83

10.25 1.62

10.65 1.34

0.201

MP (W/kg)

6.45 0.67

5.78 0.79*

6.36 0.87

6.42 0.75

0.000

Pmin (W/kg)

4.19 0.487

3.52 0.93

4.10 0.84

4.15 0.58

0.000

Prelac (mmol/L)

---

1.27 0.53

1.16 0.41

1.35 0.57

0.000+

Warmuplac
(mmol/L)

---

8.40 2.14

5.50 2.06

2.42 0.98

---

Postlac
(mmol/L)

---

14.27 1.89

12.75 2.07

11.68 1.79

---

+ = All lactate values were significant at (p=0.000); * = Pairwise comparisons demonstrate that MPdyn
was lower (p<0.05) than all the other warm-up conditions
PP= peak power; MP= mean power; Pmin= minimum power

Figure 1: Line graph comparison for 30 sec Wingate derived PP across all three warm-up
protocols. To our surprise there is no significant difference between warm-up conditions and
peak power output with a significance of (p = 0.30) .

Figure 2: Line Graph comparison for 30 sec Wingate-derived MP across all three warm-up
protocols. Pairwise comparisons demonstrate that MPdyn was lower (p < 0.05) than all the other
warm-up conditions.

Figure 3: Line graph comparison for 30 sec Wingate-derived Pmin across all three warm-up
protocols. The dynamic warm-up shows a significantly lower power output across most subjects
with a mean of 3.52 W/kg.
Table 2: Mean values of Min power output of the female, male, and overall mean between the
two, all expressed in W/kg. Males appear to have a higher minimum power output across all
warm-up styles besides the dynamic. There is a significant difference in min power between
males and females across warm-up conditions (p=0.012).
Female

Male

Mean

Pminpre (W/kg)

4.25

4.1

4.19

Pmindyn (W/kg)

3.63

3.34

3.52

Pminsprint (W/kg)

4.06

4.17

4.1

Pminstand (W/Kg)

4.11

4.22

4.15

Fatigue Index
Male subjects demonstrated a higher FI than women. Females had a mean FI (52.61 7.85 %),
while males had a mean FI (63.26 5.69%). Overall the mean FI in all subjects was (57.93
8.71%).
Discussion
The goal of this study was to determine if different warm-up strategies affect power
output of WAnT and which would be the best warm-up to optimize peak power output in active
men and women. Overall, our findings support the idea that different warm-up protocols may
affect performance and decrease power output. Significant differences were seen between the
MP across all warm-up protocols. Pairwise comparisons demonstrated that MPdyn was
significantly lower (p < 0.05) than all the other warm-up conditions. There was a significant
difference between males and females in their Pmin across all the warm-up conditions; generally
the males had a greater Pmin. It been suggested that females have lower function activities of
enzymes such as phosphorylase and phosphofructokinase as compared to males which results in
the breakdown of glycogen (Jacobs et al, 1982). There was also a trend in the data that shows as
exercise intensity increase, blood lactate levels increase. Actively warming up is a common
practice preceding almost any athletic event. This is believed to be essential for injury prevention
and performance enhancement. Potential beneficial mechanisms include; an increase in muscle
temperature or in nerve conduction rate, a speeding in oxygen kinetics due to the greater muscle
perfusion, oxygen transport, delivery and a decrease in viscous resistance and stiffness (Candau,

Carbonnel, Girard, Millet et al. 2009). Although these are all great things initiated by warming
up little attention has been paid to the potential adverse effects of an improperly designed warmup protocol. Prior activity has the potential to result in fatigue. As a result, dynamic stretching
warm up showed the greatest fatigue and lactate levels amongst all other warm ups. Our findings
showed the difference between warm-up protocols and how they can both positively and
adversely affect one's performance and demonstrate which may be more beneficial than another.
After any exercise, muscle contractile response can be decreased by fatigue or enhanced
by post activation potentiation (PAP) (MacIntosh, Tomaras et al. 2011). It is common knowledge
that a warm-up routine is common practice for preparation for physical exercise. A conventional
warm-up generally consists of submaximal aerobic exercise, upper- and lower- extremity static
stretching, followed by a rehearsal of the skill about to be performed. It has been reported that
static stretching has produced higher levels of perceived pain than dynamic stretching (Degens,
Morse, Needham et al, 2009). In a study conducted by Degens, Morse, and Needham, et al
2009, they looked at the acute effect of different warm-up protocols on anaerobic performance
in elite youth soccer players; in this study the results suggested that a dynamic warm-up with the
inclusion of resistance enhances jumping ability more than dynamic exercise alone. In addition,
dynamic warm-up produces a superior sprint and jump performance compared to a warm-up
consisting of static stretching (Degens, Morse, Needham et al, 2009). Overall this data supports
the idea that a slightly more intense warm-up protocol resulted in better performance in the
soccer player's skills. This Degens, Morse, and Needhams study slightly refutes the findings of
this current study. Their study discovered a positive effect on a dynamic warm-up on a soccer
players performance, whereas the current study has found a negative effect on performance. The
dynamic warm-up in the WAnT study proved to be the least beneficial for our active men and
women in the study and maintaining anaerobic power. This may be due to the reduction of ATP
(supply vs. demand), rapid depletion of PCr, and decrease of pH in the body.
Another study conducted by Souissi, et al 2010, looked at the effects of active warm-up
duration on the diurnal fluctuations in anaerobic performances. This study consisted of medical
stress tests and four Wingate tests that measured PP, MP, and fatigue index during an all-out 30
sec cycling exercise. Results showed that PP indicated that the time-of-day effect was significant
(p < 0.001) with the post-hoc test revealing that PP was significantly higher in the morning (p <
0.05). However, in contrast, warm-up effects were not significant ( p > 0.05) (Souissi et al,
2010). MP showed similar results to that of PP. In comparison to this current WAnT study, it was
discovered that the warm-up had no significant effect on PP (p > 0.05). However, it did have a
significant difference on MP, especially that of the dynamic warm-up, where the pairwise
comparisons demonstrated that MPdyn was significantly lower (p<0.05) than all other warm-up
conditions. This leads the conclusion that adverse pre-exercise protocols can have varying effects
and this is why it is still so widely tested.
During high-intensity exercise, the major pathways for ATP resynthesis are the
breakdown of creatine phosphate (CP) and the degradation of muscle glycogen to lactic acid
(Hargreaves et al, 1997). With repeated bouts of high- intense exercise, contribution of these
processes to ATP turnover decreases; although there may be an increase in the aerobic

contribution to exercise, reduced power output and total work production are the result
(Hargreaves et al, 1997). Plasma (H+) and lactate increase progressively throughout exercise
bouts with increased intensity, however after continuously repeated bouts there was not much
difference in peak power and total work from the first (Hargreaves et al, 1997). Results state that
the decline in exercise performance with repeated bouts does not appear to be related to a
reduction in muscle glycogen, rather it may be caused in by the reduction of CP availability,
increased (H+), or other fatigable inducing agents ((Hargreaves et al, 1997). Ultimately, this
supports the idea that with an increase in blood lactate concentration, even though increasing
substantially, did not significantly limit one's PP performance on a WAnT.
Limitations
The results collected can only be applied to the population we used in this present study,
active men and women. In addition, the number of active men and women recruited for this
study was 13 active subjects, 8 women and 5 men, this is not an extremely large sample size,
therefore, it is unknown if recruiting active individuals to perform four 30sec WAnT would have
significantly altered the data. Subjects were not consistent with the time of day which potentially
could alter the results. Subjects were recommended not to perform any leg workouts the day
prior to performing the test. If this recommendation was ignored there may have been significant
effect on subjects power output for that day.
Heart Rate (HR) was not measured in this study which could have been a helpful
physiological indication to assess how hard the heart was performing. Blood lactate
concentrations were used in lieu of HR to help determine sources of fatigue during intense
exercise such as the WAnT. Finally, towards the end of the study, participants may have formed a
learned response toward WAnT potentially having an increased performance on the test, which
may have skewed data collection (MacIntosh, Tomaras et al, 2011).
In conclusion, this study demonstrated that different warm-up protocols (dynamic, sprint,
standard) can affect ones supramaximal performance on WAnT, in one way or another. Men and
women who completed the 4 days of WAnT demonstrated similar PP, MP, and Pmin results,
where MP was significantly affected by the various warm-up protocols. Blood lactate levels
increased substantially over an increase in exercise intensity, indicating low blood flow and
oxygen throughout the body. Although there was a significant difference in mean power output
based on warm-up protocol, there could be other factors that may have influenced WAnT
performance; time of day and how it may impact the PP, MP and Pmin outcome. Further research
needs to be conducted to find the optimal time of day to perform a WAnT and look into other
populations such as untrained individuals and the effects of warm-up on their performance of
WAnT, various athletic events, or a VO2max test. Future investigations could be conducted to
assess muscle power and the associated metabolic changes in the muscle while performing
WAnT with different warm-up protocols, to understand how this contributes to maximal
performance on the test (McCartney et al, 1986). A muscle biopsy can be performed to determine
if muscle fiber types can alter the performance between different warm up protocols.
Investigating various warm-up protocols may be beneficial for certain performance aspects and
their outcomes.

References
Astorino, T., & Cottrell, T. (2011, September 12). Reliability and Validity of the Velotron
Racermate Cycle Ergometer to Measure Anaerobic Power. CSUSM, 1-6.

Bishop, D. (2003). Potential Mechanisms and the Effects of Passive Warm Up on Exercise
Performance. School of Human Movement and Exercise Science, University of
Western Australia, 440-454.

Girard, O., Carbonnel, Y., Candau, R., & Millet, G. (2009, April 9). Running versus
strength-based warm-up: acute effects on isometric knee extension function. , 1.

Gray, Susan, and Myra Nimmo. "Effects of active, passive or no warm-up on metabolism and
performance during high-intensity exercise." Applied Physiology Group (2001): 694-700.
Print.

Hargreaves, Mark. "Muscle metabolites and performance during high-intensity, intermittent

exercise." Department of Physiology, The Univeristy of Melbourne (1997): 1687-91.
Print.

Jacobs, I. (1982, July). Changes in muscle metabolites in females with 30-s exhaustive exercise.
Research and Sports Medicine, 457-460.

McCartney, Neil. "Muscle power and metabolism in maximal intermittent exercise."

Department of Medicine, McMaster University : 1164-69. Print.

Needham, Robert, Christopher Morse, and Hans Degens. "The Acute Effect of Different
Warm-Up Protocols on Anaerobic Performance in Elite Youth Soccer Players." Exercise
and Sport Science Department (2009): 2614-20. Print.

Souissi, Nizar. "Diurnal variation in Wingate Test Performances: Influence of Active Warm-Up."
Chronobiology International (2009): 640-52. Print.

Tomaras, E., & MacIntosh, B. (2011, May). Less is more: standard warm-up causes fatigue and
less warm-up permits greater cucling power output. Human Performance Lab,
University of Calgary, 228-235.