REF-770 · Sandford et al., 2021 · Sports Medicine, Vol. · Paper · PubMed

Anaerobic Speed/Power Reserve and Sport Performance: Scientific Basis, Current Applications and Future Directions

B+moderate evidenceMeasured on a mixed groupWritten before October 2026, being re-checked

Many events require extended work above maximal aerobic speed or power (MAS/MAP). Without valid, reliable measures of anaerobic metabolism, the anaerobic speed/power reserve (ASR/APR), the gap between MAS/MAP and maximal sprinting speed (MSS) or peak power (MPP), helps explain tolerance of efforts in that range.

The authors propose that above MAS/MAP what likely matters most is the proportion of the reserve used, not the percentage of MAS/MAP, that athlete profiles ('speed', 'endurance', 'hybrid') may change the training response, and that high-intensity interval formats should be tailored to the locomotor profile.

Participants

No participants: narrative review. The abstract does not give the number of sources.

Protocol

Review of the scientific basis and current use of the ASR/APR concept across locomotor modes, with recommendations for coaches. No systematic method is described in the abstract.

Key Results

Definition: ASR/APR = the difference between an athlete's MAS/MAP and their maximal sprinting speed (MSS) or peak power (MPP).
Above MAS/MAP, the proportion of the ASR/APR used likely matters more than the percentage of MAS/MAP, irrespective of athlete profile or locomotor mode (the authors' position).
Differences in athlete profile (for example fiber typology) may shape the training response of 'speed', 'endurance' and 'hybrid' profiles; an individualized approach may be needed to avoid 'maladaptive' or 'non-responses'.
Recommendation: upfront locomotor profiling to guide training at the macro level (profile variability, training model selection, annual periodization) and the micro level (weekly and daily planning: short vs long intervals vs repeated sprint training, recovery time between workouts).
High-intensity interval formats should be tailored to the locomotor profile.

Practical Application

"How hard should my intervals above maximal aerobic speed or power be?" — this review from the group that developed the concept proposes setting work above maximal aerobic speed or power as a share of the athlete's anaerobic reserve (the gap between MAS/MAP and maximal sprint speed or peak power), not as a percentage of MAS/MAP, and profiling each athlete as a speed, endurance or hybrid type before choosing short intervals, long intervals or repeated sprints.
Why it matters, inference, not tested here: two athletes asked to run or ride at the same % of MAS/MAP are working at very different fractions of their reserve if one has a much larger sprint ceiling, so the same session is easier for the speed type and harder for the endurance type.
Use the profile at two scales, as the authors recommend: across the season (which training model and periodization) and within the week (interval format and the recovery time between workouts).
Not from this paper; the base's own practice: measure both ends, MAS/MAP from an incremental test and MSS/MPP from a short maximal sprint (in cycling, a ramp-test MAP and an all-out sprint peak power); the reserve is the gap. The base holds no validated table for prescribing by % of the reserve.

Limitations

Narrative/opinion review: the reserve-based prescription is proposed, not tested against %MAS/MAP prescription in the abstract.
No numbers in the abstract, so no reserve fractions, thresholds or profile cut-offs can be quoted from this entry.
The link between fiber typology and training response is described as emerging.
Written from the abstract and record metadata only (full text not read).
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level

authoritative narrative review from the leading anaerobic-reserve group; not systematic