Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to quantify the physiological requirements of various boxing exercises such as sparring, pad work, and punching bag. Because it was not possible to measure the oxygen uptake (VO₂) of "true" sparring with a collecting gas valve in the face, we developed and validated a method to measure VO₂ of "true" sparring based on "postexercise" measurements. Nine experienced male amateur boxers (Mean ± SD: age = 22.0 ± 3.5 years, height = 176.0 ± 8.0 cm, weight = 71.4 ± 10.9 kg, number of fights = 13.0 ± 9.5) of regional and provincial level volunteered to participate in 3 testing sessions: (a) maximal treadmill test in the LAB, (b) standardized boxing training in the GYM, and (c) standardized boxing exercises in the LAB. Measures of VO₂, heart rate (HR), blood lactate concentration [LA], rated perceived exertion level, and punching frequencies were collected. VO₂ values of 43.4 ± 5.9, 41.1 ± 5.1, 24.7 ± 6.1, 30.4 ± 5.8, and 38.3 ± 6.5 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹ were obtained, which represent 69.7 ± 8.0, 66.1 ± 8.0, 39.8 ± 10.4, 48.8 ± 8.5, and 61.7 ± 10.3%VO₂peak for sparring, pad work, and punching bag at 60, 120, and 180 b·min⁻¹, respectively. Except for lower VO₂ values for punching the bag at 60 and 120 b·min⁻¹ (p < 0.05), there was no VO₂ difference between exercises. Similar pattern was obtained for %HRmax with respective values of 85.5 ± 5.9, 83.6 ± 6.3, 67.5 ± 3.5, 74.8 ± 5.9, and 83.0 ± 6.0. Finally, sparring %HRmax and [LA] were slightly higher in the GYM (91.7 ± 4.3 and 9.4 ± 2.2 mmol·L⁻¹) vs. LAB (85.5 ± 5.9 and 6.1 ± 2.3 mmol·L⁻¹). Thus, in this study simulated LAB sparring and pad work required similar VO₂ (43-41 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹, respectively), which corresponds to ~70%VO₂peak. These results underline the importance of a minimum of aerobic fitness for boxers and draw some guidelines for the intensity of training.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".