Fatigue and Performance Rates as Decision-Making Criteria in Pacing Control During CrossFit ®.

We investigated fatigue and performance rates as decision-making criteria in pacing control during CrossFit®. Thirteen male regional-level competitors completed conditions of all-out (maximum physical work from beginning to end) and controlled-split (controlled physical work in the first two rounds but maximum work in the third round) pacing throughout the Fight Gone Bad workout separated by one week. We assessed benchmarks, countermovement jumps and ratings of fatigue after each round. Benchmarks were lower in round 1 (99 vs. 114, p <.001) but higher in rounds 2 (98 vs. 80, p <.001) and 3 (97 vs. 80, p <.001) for controlled-split compared with all-out pacing. Reductions in countermovement jumps were higher after rounds 1 (−12.6% vs. 1.6%, p <.001) and 2 (−12.7% vs. −4.0%, p =.014) but similar after round 3 (−13.2% vs. −11.3%, p =.571) for all-out compared with controlled-split pacing. Ratings of fatigue were higher after rounds 1 (7 vs. 5 a.u., p <.001) and 2 (8 vs. 7 a.u, p =.023) but similar after round 3 (9 vs. 9 a.u., p =.737) for all-out compared with controlled-split pacing. During all-out pacing, countermovement jump reductions after round 2 correlated with benchmark drops across rounds 1 and 2 (r =.78, p =.002) and rounds 1 and 3 (r = −.77, p =.002) and with benchmark workout changes between pacing strategies (r = −.58, p =.036), suggesting that the larger the countermovement jump reductions the higher the benchmark drops across rounds and workouts. Therefore, benchmarks, countermovement jumps and ratings of fatigue may assess exercise-induced fatigue as decision-making criteria to improve pacing strategy during workouts performed for as many repetitions as possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]