## 1 Introduction  
### The Wingate Anaerobic Test, Origin and Relevance  
Originally based on the Cumming test [1] the Wingate Anaerobic Test (WAT) was developed at the Department of Sports Medicine and Research of the Wingate Institute for Physical Education and Sport in Israel during the mid and late 1970s [2]. Since the introduction of its prototype in 1974 [3], the WAT has been used in various laboratories, both as a test that assesses anaerobic performance and as a standardised effort to analyse responses to supra-maximal exercises. The purpose of the WAT is to evaluate the availability of ATP-Phosphocreatine reserves (quantity and speed) using the phosphogenic system (Phosphocreatine) and glycolytic metabolism by measuring the power generated in an all-out cyclo-ergometer test (exercise performed at maximum intensity without distribution of effort from start to finish) [4, 5]. It was designed to be administered in a simple manner, without the need for specifically trained personnel, at low cost, and performed with accessible equipment such as the Monark ergometer or cyclo-ergometers equipped with similar mechanisms. It was also devised to be non-invasive, aimed at quantifying muscle performance through indirect variables (physiological or biomechanical) and feasible to administer to a broad spectrum of the population (including children and the physically handicapped). Furthermore, it is based on the assumption that anaerobic performance is a local rather than systemic characteristic and that the test could be applicable to both upper and lower limbs. In retrospect, since its origins as a measure of anaerobic power and capacity in 1974, the WAT has gained wide acceptance as an important assessment test to determine anaerobic performance. Several studies were carried out on modifications to optimal load and/orload duration in a variety of populations (these will be studied in more detail below). This has led to its evolution over the years, with many variants and modifications in its application in different research study designs. It is probably the most widely used anaerobic test. It has also served as a basis for the design of newer tests of a similar nature [6] and other performance-based protocols, such as the Sprint Interval Test [7]. Furthermore, it was deemed objective, reliable, valid and sensitive to improvement or deterioration of anaerobic performance rather than to overall good health. In order to determine the validity of a test, it must be compared to a gold standard protocol that is known to produce accurate and reliable results. However, there is no gold standard protocol for measuring anaerobic capacity or power [8]. Instead, the WAT was compared to laboratory results, sports performances and sports specialities in order to verify its validity as a test protocol. These aspects will be covered in greater detail in the following sections, although we can already state that the original WAT only seems to have validity for control of Peak Power (PP), not for Mean Power (MP) or Fatigue Index (FI) [9]. In terms of the reliability obtained in the different researches conducted, the results depend on the measured variable being referred to. In the case of PP and MP, they indicate that it is a precise and valid indicator [10]. Therefore, the WAT can be used as a valid and reliable predictor of anaerobic capacity and power [11]. WAT reliability coefficients (test-retest comparisons \(p<0.05\)) are good for PP (r \(>90\)) [9; 11] and MP (between 0.91 and 0.93) [3; 12; 13; 14]. On the other hand, FI reliability is low r = 0.43-0.73 [1]. In a study carried out with eleven healthy, moderately-trained males, comparing six sprints on a bicycle ergometer on four different occasions, which were separated by a minimum of 1 day and a maximum of 7 days, maximum power was significantly higher (4.9%; r \(<0.05\)) in trial 2 compared to trial 1, whilst there was no difference observed between trials 2, 3 and 4 [15].