A clearer understanding of, and tighter boundaries between, terms are important for researchers designing studies as well as for other sport stakeholders creating evidence-informed policies. This article considers the terms 'athlete', 'talent', and 'player' from psychological and sociocultural perspectives and in different sporting communities to highlight the importance of terminological clarity in sport research. We present considerations to clarify the use of these terms within different contexts and how the use of specific terms may affect knowledge mobilization in diverse sporting populations. A conceptual discussion is provided to help operationalize development-related terminology and its associated stages, to better reflect contemporary academic thought, and enhance practical interpretations. Importantly, we also call for greater transparency from researchers when presenting findings and encourage practitioners to clearly define key terms when working in sport. Our intention in this paper is to energize readers to consider how we use language in athlete identification and development contexts, to stimulate deeper thought and discourse around the possible implications these terms may have at any point of an individual's development in sport. Greater deliberation, identification, and acknowledgment of the drawbacks accompanying these terms will be needed before more confident assertions can be made on how researchers and practitioners could (or even should) implement certain terminology across youth sport contexts moving forward. This paper adds to a growing literature on the importance of clarity in terminology and acts as an impetus for those working in specific sports to co-design key terms used by researchers, practitioners, and policy makers.

This paper describes the functional development of the ClimApp tool (available for free on iOS and Android devices), which combines current and 24 h weather forecasting with individual information to offer personalised guidance related to thermal exposure. Heat and cold stress assessments are based on ISO standards and thermal models where environmental settings and personal factors are integrated into the ClimApp index ranging from −4 (extremely cold) to +4 (extremely hot), while a range of −1 and +1 signifies low thermal stress. Advice for individuals or for groups is available, and the user can customise the model input according to their personal situation, including activity level, clothing, body characteristics, heat acclimatisation, indoor or outdoor situation, and geographical location. ClimApp output consists of a weather summary, a brief assessment of the thermal situation, and a thermal stress warning. Advice is provided via infographics and text depending on the user profile. ClimApp is available in 10 languages: English, Danish, Dutch, Swedish, Norwegian, Hellenic (Greek), Italian, German, Spanish and French. The tool also includes a research functionality providing a platform for worker and citizen science projects to collect individual data on physical thermal strain and the experienced thermal strain. The application may therefore improve the translation of heat and cold risk assessments and guidance for subpopulations. ClimApp provides the framework for personalising and downscaling weather reports, alerts and advice at the personal level, based on GPS location and adjustable input of individual factors.

Background: Several indirect calorimetry (IC) instruments are commercially available, but comparative validity and reliability data are lacking. Existing data are limited by inconsistencies in protocols, subject characteristics, or single‐instrument validation comparisons. The aim of this study was to compare accuracy and reliability of metabolic carts using methanol combustion as the cross‐laboratory criterion.

Methods: Eight 20‐minute methanol burn trials were completed on 12 metabolic carts. Respiratory exchange ratio (RER) and percent O 2 and CO 2 recovery were calculated.

Results: For accuracy , 1 Omnical, Cosmed Quark CPET (Cosmed), and both Parvos (Parvo Medics trueOne 2400) measured all 3 variables within 2% of the true value; both DeltaTracs and the Vmax Encore System (Vmax) showed similar accuracy in measuring 1 or 2, but not all, variables. For reliability , 8 instruments were shown to be reliable, with the 2 Omnicals ranking best (coefficient of variation [CV] < 1.26%). Both Cosmeds, Parvos, DeltaTracs, 1 Jaeger Oxycon Pro (Oxycon), Max‐II Metabolic Systems (Max‐II), and Vmax were reliable for at least 1 variable (CV ≤ 3%). For multiple regression , humidity and amount of combusted methanol were significant predictors of RER ( R 2 = 0.33, P < .001). Temperature and amount of burned methanol were significant predictors of O 2 recovery ( R 2 = 0.18, P < .001); only humidity was a predictor for CO 2 recovery ( R 2 = 0.15, P < .001).

Conclusions: Omnical, Parvo, Cosmed, and DeltaTrac had greater accuracy and reliability. The small number of instruments tested and expected differences in gas calibration variability limits the generalizability of conclusions. Finally, humidity and temperature could be modified in the laboratory to optimize IC conditions.

ObjectiveThere are several indirect calorimetry (IC) instruments commercially available but validity and reliability data is lacking. Site-to-site inconsistencies in protocols and subject characteristics, and comparisons to a “gold standard” instrument or method which may no longer be accurate enough, have put restraints on drawing conclusions about instruments' performance.PurposeTo compare the accuracy and reliability of different metabolic carts using the methanol combustion technique as the criterion measure.MethodsA total of eight, 20-minute methanol burn trials were completed on 12 metabolic carts (2 Cosmed Quark CPET, 2 DeltaTrac II, 2 Parvo Medics TrueOne 2400, 2 Iaeger Oxycon Pros, 2 Omnicals, a Vmax Encore, and a Max-II Metabolic System) at 11 international study sites. Methanol tests were performed at 0700, 1000, 1300, and 1600 hours on 2 consecutive days. Respiratory Exchange Ratio (RER) and percent (%) recovery of O2 and CO2 were calculated after each test.ResultsAccuracy – 1 Omnical, Cosmed, and Parvo were accurate in measuring RER and % recovery O2, while 1 DeltaTrac was also accurate for % recovery O2. The same Cosmed and Parvo, and the other DeltaTrac were accurate in measuring % recovery CO2. Reliability – 8 instruments were shown to be reliable with the two Omnicals ranking best based on the smallest coefficient of variation (CV) (all CV(s) 1.26%). Both Cosmeds, Parvos, DeltaTracs and 1 Vmax were the reliable instruments for at least one variable (CV(s) 3%). Multiple Regression– Humidity, amount of methanol combusted, and temperature were tested as predictors of IC outcomes. Humidity and amount of combusted methanol were significant predictors of RER (F (2, 60) =10.91, p<0.001, R2=0.33). Temperature and amount of burned methanol were significant predictors of % recovery O2 (F (2, 60) =8.32, p<0.001, R2=0.18) while only humidity was a predictor for % recovery CO2 (F (1, 61) =21.10, p<0.001, R2=0.15).ConclusionOmnical, Cosmed, and Parvo showed superior accuracy and reliability; however, accuracy was only found at one of two study sites. Exogenous factors such as humidity and temperature may be influencing instrument performance and could be modified in the lab to optimize IC conditions.

Aims: To assess the agreement between the Ross treadmill method and the Åstrand ergometer cycle method, and the repeatability of each method.

Methodology: Twenty healthy people aged 22.5 ± 2.2 years were tested on two different days, each day with both methods with a pause of 30 min between the tests. The tests were executed in the reverse order the following test day.

Major findings: There was no statistical difference between the methods. The correlation (R) between the methods was 0.85. The mean difference (95% CI) of the methods was 0.050 (0.046–0.054) L/min and the limit of the agreement (mean difference ±2SD) was 0.81 L/min. No significant differences in test-retest were shown for either test. The mean difference for Åstrand tests was 0.12 L/min and 0.08 L/min for the Ross tests. The coefficient of repeatability was 0.88 L/min (23%) for the Åstrand test, and 0.78 L/min (20%) for the Ross test.

Conclusion: The Ross treadmill test could be used as an alternative to the Åstrand cycle ergometer test, showing good agreement and repeatability. The large variation should be considered when estimating aerobic capacity on an individual level, although either method could be used for group studies where maximal measurements are not possible.

Purpose To investigate the physiological basis of continued world-class performance of a world-class rower who won medals (three gold and two bronze) at five consecutive Olympic Games.

Methods From the age of 19 to 40 yr, maximal oxygen uptake (V˙O2max), peak HR, blood lactate, and rowing ergometer performance were assessed annually.

Results During the first years of his elite career (from age 19 to 24), V˙O2max increased from 5.5 to approximately 5.9 L·min−1 (78 mL·min−1·kg−1) and his average power during 6-min maximal rowing increased from 420 to approximately 460 W. Although his HRmax declined by approximately 20 bpm during the 20-yr period, maximal aerobic power, evaluated both as V˙O2max and 6-min test performance, was maintained until the age of 40. Furthermore, peak lactate levels remained unchanged and average power outputs during 10-s, 60-s, and 60-min ergometer tests were all maintained at approximately 800 W, approximately 700 W, and approximately 350 W, respectively, indicating that he was able to preserve both aerobic and anaerobic exercise performances. Echocardiographic analyses revealed a left ventricular mass of 198 g and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter of 5.8 cm.

Conclusions This longitudinal case indicates that until the age of 40 yr, a steady increase in the oxygen pulse may have compensated for the significant decline in the maximal heart frequency. Furthermore, the maintenance of aerobic and anaerobic exercise capacities allowed this Olympic athleteto compete at the highest level for almost two decades.

This study evaluated the impact of a high-intensity strength training session on rowing sprint performance. Ten male club rowers performed a baseline counter-movement jump (CMJ) and a 250 m rowing ergometer sprint (250 m). Twenty-four hours after baseline, participants performed a high-intensity strength training session (ST) consisting of multi-joint barbell exercises. At 24 h, 48 h and 72 h post-ST, CMJ and 250 m were repeated alongside assessment of plasma creatine kinase (CK) and perceived muscle soreness. At 24 h post-ST 250 m performance decreased significantly (90% CI: 0.3 – 0.7 s), but returned to pre-test values at 48 h. There was a significant decrease in CMJ height at 48 h post ST (90% CI: −0.7 – −4.1 cm). Perceived muscle soreness was significantly greater than baseline at all assessed time points following ST (p < 0.05). There was a significant increase in CK from baseline to 24 h (90% CI: 146 – 390 U/L). High-intensity strength training was observed to adversely affect 250 m rowing ergometer performance after 24 h and coincided with transient muscle damage.

Competitive swimmers routinely undertake a 7 X 200-m incremental step test to evaluate their fitness and readiness to compete.1 An exercise protocol more closely replicating competition swimming speeds may provide further insight into the swimmer’s physiological and technical readiness for competition. This case study reports data over a 3-year period from 11 Race Readiness Tests, which were completed, in addition to the 7 X 200-m test, as an attempt to provide the swimmer and coach with a fuller assessment. For this individual, data provided objective information from which to assess training status and race readiness following a transition from 200-m to 100-m race training. Data also raised a question as to whether a 100-m maximal effort 10 minutes before another one actually enhances performance owing to a priming effect.