Physiological and electromyographic responses during 40-km cycling time trial: Relationship to muscle coordination and performance

The use of elliptical chainrings (also called chainwheels or sprockets) has gained considerable interest in the amateur and professional cycling community. Nevertheless, we are unaware of any scientific studies that have examined the performance benefits of using elliptical chainrings during an actual performance trial. Therefore, this study examined the influence of elliptical chainring use on physiological and performance parameters during a 10 km cycling time trial. Nine male cyclists completed, in a counterbalanced order, three 10 km cycling time trials using either a standard chainring or an elliptical chainring at two distinct settings. An attempt was made to blind the cyclists to the type of chainring used until the completion of the study. During the 10 km time trial, power output and heart rate were recorded at a frequency of 1 Hz and RPE was measured at 3, 6, and 8.5 km. Total power output was not different (P = .40) between the circular (340 ± 30 W) or either elliptical chainring condition (342 ± 29 W and 341 ± 31 W). Similarly, no differences (P = .73) in 2 km mean power output were observed between conditions. Further, no differences in RPE were observed between conditions measured at 3, 6, and 8.5 km. Heart rate was significantly greater (P = .02) using the less aggressive elliptical setting (174 ± 10 bpm) compared with the circular setting (171 ± 9 bpm). Elliptical chainrings do not appear to provide a performance benefit over traditional circular chainrings during a mid-distance time trial.

Download Full-text

The Potential to Change Pacing and Performance During 4000-m Cycling Time Trials Using Hyperoxia and Inspired Gas-Content Deception

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance ◽

10.1123/ijspp.2018-0335 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 (7) ◽

pp. 949-957

Author(s):

Michael J. Davies ◽

Bradley Clark ◽

Laura A. Garvican-Lewis ◽

Marijke Welvaert ◽

Christopher J. Gore ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Confidence Interval ◽

Time Trial ◽

Cycling Performance ◽

Peak Oxygen Uptake ◽

Gas Content ◽

Cycling Time Trial ◽

Fraction Of Inspired Oxygen ◽

And Performance ◽

Inspired Oxygen ◽

Cycling Time

Purpose: To determine if a series of trials with fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) content deception could improve 4000-m cycling time-trial (TT) performance. Methods: A total of 15 trained male cyclists (mean [SD] body mass 74.2 [8.0] kg, peak oxygen uptake 62 [6] mL·kg−1·min−1) completed six 4000-m cycling TTs in a semirandomized order. After a familiarization TT, cyclists were informed in 2 initial trials they were inspiring normoxic air (NORM, FiO2 0.21); however, in 1 trial (deception condition), they inspired hyperoxic air (NORM-DEC, FiO2 0.36). During 2 subsequent TTs, cyclists were informed they were inspiring hyperoxic air (HYPER, FiO2 0.36), but in 1 trial, normoxic air was inspired (HYPER-DEC). In the final TT (NORM-INFORM), the deception was revealed and cyclists were asked to reproduce their best TT performance while inspiring normoxic air. Results: Greater power output and faster performances occurred when cyclists inspired hyperoxic air in both truthful (HYPER) and deceptive (NORM-DEC) trials than NORM (P < .001). However, performance only improved in NORM-INFORM (377 W; 95% confidence interval [CI] 325–429) vs NORM (352 W; 95% CI 299–404; P < .001) when participants (n = 4) completed the trials in the following order: NORM-DEC, NORM, HYPER-DEC, HYPER. Conclusions: Cycling performance improved with acute exposure to hyperoxia. Mechanisms for the improvement were likely physiological; however, improvement in a deception trial suggests an additional placebo effect. Finally, a particular sequence of oxygen deception trials may have built psychophysiological belief in cyclists such that performance improved in a subsequent normoxic trial.

Download Full-text

Prior Low- or High-Intensity Exercise Alters Pacing Strategy, Energy System Contribution and Performance during a 4-km Cycling Time Trial

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0110320 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 9 (10) ◽

pp. e110320 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Carlos Rafaell Correia-Oliveira ◽

Ralmony Alcantara Santos ◽

Marcos David Silva-Cavalcante ◽

Romulo Bertuzzi ◽

Maria Augusta Peduti Dal’Molin Kiss ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Intensity ◽

Time Trial ◽

Energy System ◽

High Intensity Exercise ◽

Cycling Time Trial ◽

Pacing Strategy ◽

And Performance ◽

Cycling Time

Download Full-text

Correction: Caffeine increases motor output entropy and performance in 4 km cycling time trial

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0246014 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

pp. e0246014

Author(s):

Bruno Ferreira Viana ◽

Gabriel S. Trajano ◽

Carlos Ugrinowitsch ◽

Flávio Oliveira Pires

Keyword(s):

Time Trial ◽

Motor Output ◽

Cycling Time Trial ◽

Output Entropy ◽

And Performance ◽

Cycling Time

Download Full-text

Pedal force asymmetries and performance during a 20-km cycling time trial

Kinesiology ◽

10.26582/k.48.2.12 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 48 (2) ◽

pp. 193-199 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Rodrigo R. Bini ◽

Tiago C. Jacques ◽

Carlos H. Sperb ◽

Fábio J. Lanferdini ◽

Marco A. Vaz

Keyword(s):

Effect Size ◽

Force Production ◽

Time Trial ◽

Cycling Time Trial ◽

Pedal Force ◽

Performance Time ◽

Competitive Cyclists ◽

And Performance ◽

The Relationship ◽

Cycling Time

It is unclear if applying larger or more symmetrical pedal forces leads to better performance in cycling. The aims of this study were to assess the relationship between pedal force production and performance in a cycling time trial and to evaluate the relationship between asymmetries in pedal force production and performance. Fifteen competitive cyclists/triathletes performed a 20 km cycling time trial on a cycle trainer while bilateral forces applied to the pedals were recorded along with total time. Total forces applied to the pedals were computed and converted into dominant and non-dominant forces using a leg preference inventory. Pedal force asymmetries ranged from 43% (in favour of the dominant limb) to 34% (in favour of the non-dominant limb). The relationship between total pedal force (averaged from both pedals) and performance time was small (r=-.32, effect size=.66) as well as the association between the asymmetry indices and performance time (r=.01, effect size=.06). In conclusion, applying large forces on the pedals and balancing pedal force application between the dominant and non-dominant limbs did not lead to better performance in this cycling time trial.

Download Full-text