Comparative validity of the Wingate and new power bike tests for the assessment of peak anaerobic power

Abstract

Abstract

Purpose

This study evaluated the construct validity of the inertial-load protocol, the New Power Bike Test (NPBT), by comparing it with the Wingate Anaerobic Test (WAnT) and examining its correlation with criterion measures, including Vertical Jump (VJ) and Isokinetic Leg Strength (ILS).

Methods

Thirty-seven healthy adults performed the standard 30-s WAnT and the NPBT (four 4-s maximal accelerations against inertial resistance) in a randomized and counterbalanced crossover design. Data were analyzed using paired t-tests with Cohen's d effect sizes, Pearson and Spearman rank correlations with 95% confidence intervals, Bland–Altman analysis, and Williams’ test for comparing dependent overlapping correlation coefficients.

Results

The NPBT produced significantly higher mean peak power (976.18 W; 11.47 W·kg⁻¹) than the WAnT (705.67 W; 8.34 W·kg⁻¹). Also, the NPBT demonstrated significant correlations with both VJ (r = 0.666 to 0.766, p < 0.001) and ILS (r = 0.638 to 0.861, p < 0.001). In contrast, the WAnT showed weak associations with VJ and inconsistent relationships with ILS (r = 0.240 to 0.663). Bland–Altman analysis confirmed that the protocols are not interchangeable at the individual level (bias = 270.52 W; 95% LoA: −193.02 to 734.05 W). Williams’ test showed that NRPP correlated significantly more strongly than WRPP with all five criterion variables (all p ≤ 0.031).

Conclusion

The NPBT and WAnT are not interchangeable assessment tools. The NPBT provides greater concurrent validity for evaluating instantaneous peak neuromuscular power, likely due to its ability to facilitate force-velocity auto-optimization and specifically target the phosphagen energy system. The WAnT remains appropriate for assessing anaerobic capacity and fatigue tolerance.