PEAK POWER OUTPUT, THE LACTATE THRESHOLD AND 90-MIN TIME TRIAL PERFORMANCE IN WELL TRAINED CYCLISTS

2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. S342 ◽  
Author(s):  
D J. Bentley ◽  
L R. Mcnaughton ◽  
D Thompson ◽  
A M. Batterham
Keyword(s):  
Power Output ◽  
Lactate Threshold ◽  
Peak Power ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Peak Power Output ◽  
Time Trial Performance ◽  
Trial Performance

Peak power output, the lactate threshold, and time trial performance in cyclists

2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (12) ◽  
pp. 2077-2081 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID J. BENTLEY ◽  
LARS R. MCNAUGHTON ◽  
DYLAN THOMPSON ◽  
VERONICA E. VLECK ◽  
ALAN M. BATTERHAM
Keyword(s):  
Power Output ◽  
Lactate Threshold ◽  
Peak Power ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Peak Power Output ◽  
Time Trial Performance ◽  
Trial Performance

Is the Functional Threshold Power a Valid Surrogate of the Lactate Threshold?

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 1293-1298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro L. Valenzuela ◽  
Javier S. Morales ◽  
Carl Foster ◽  
Alejandro Lucia ◽  
Pedro de la Villa
Keyword(s):  
Effect Size ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Lactate Threshold ◽  
Peak Power ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Peak Power Output ◽  
Threshold Power ◽  
Limits Of Agreement ◽  
Mean Power ◽  
Mean Power Output

Purpose: To analyze the relationship between functional threshold power (FTP) and the lactate threshold (LT). Methods: A total of 20 male cyclists performed an incremental test in which LT was determined. At least 48 h later, they performed a 20-min time trial, and 95% of the mean power output was defined as FTP. Participants were divided into recreational (peak power output < 4.5 W·kg−1; n = 11) or trained cyclists (peak power output > 4.5 W·kg−1; n = 9) according to their fitness status. Results: The FTP (240 [35] W) was overall not significantly different (effect size = 0.20; limits of agreement = −2.4% [11.5%]) from the LT (246 [24] W), and both markers were strongly correlated (r = .95; P < .0001). Accounting for the participants’ fitness status, no significant differences were found between FTP and LT (effect size = 0.22; limits of agreement =2.1% [7.8%]) in trained cyclists, but FTP was significantly lower than the LT (P = .0004, effect size = 0.81; limits of agreement =−6.5% [8.3%]) in recreational cyclists. A significant relationship was found between relative peak power output and the bias between FTP and the LT markers (r = .77; P < .0001). Conclusions: FTP is a valid field test-based marker for the assessment of endurance fitness. However, caution should be taken when using FTP interchangeably with LT, as the bias between markers seems to depend on the athlete’s fitness status. Whereas FTP provides a good estimate of LT in trained cyclists, in recreational cyclists, it may underestimate LT.

Carbohydrate Mouth Rinsing in the Fed State: Lack of Enhancement of Time-Trial Performance

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 400-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milou Beelen ◽  
Jort Berghuis ◽  
Ben Bonaparte ◽  
Sam B. Ballak ◽  
Asker E. Jeukendrup ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Perceived Exertion ◽  
Average Power ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Rating Of Perceived Exertion ◽  
Time Trial Performance ◽  
Mouth Rinsing ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Trial Performance

It has been reported previously that mouth rinsing with a carbohydrate-containing solution can improve cycling performance. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the impact of such a carbohydrate mouth rinse on exercise performance during a simulated time trial in a more practical, postprandial setting. Fourteen male endurance-trained athletes were selected to perform 2 exercise tests in the morning after consuming a standardized breakfast. They performed an ~1-hr time trial on a cycle ergometer while rinsing their mouths with either a 6.4% maltodextrin solution (CHO) or water (PLA) after every 12.5% of the set amount of work. Borg’s rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was assessed after every 25% of the set amount of work, and power output and heart rate were recorded continuously throughout the test. Performance time did not differ between treatments and averaged 68.14 ± 1.14 and 67.52 ± 1.00 min in CHO and PLA, respectively (p = .57). In accordance, average power output (265 ± 5 vs. 266 ± 5 W, p = .58), heart rate (169 ± 2 vs. 168 ± 2 beats/min, p = .43), and RPE (16.4 ± 0.3 vs. 16.7 ± 0.3 W, p = .26) did not differ between treatments. Furthermore, after dividing the trial into 8s, no differences in power output, heart rate, or perceived exertion were observed over time between treatments. Carbohydrate mouth rinsing does not improve time-trial performance when exercise is performed in a practical, postprandial setting.

scholarly journals Influence of Environmental Temperature on 40 km Cycling Time-Trial Performance

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremiah J. Peiffer ◽  
Chris R. Abbiss
Keyword(s):  
Core Temperature ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Environmental Temperature ◽  
Core Body Temperature ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Time Trial Performance ◽  
Cycling Time Trial ◽  
Pacing Strategies ◽  
Cycling Time ◽  
Trial Performance

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of environmental temperature on variability in power output, self-selected pacing strategies, and performance during a prolonged cycling time trial. Nine trained male cyclists randomly completed four 40 km cycling time trials in an environmental chamber at 17°C, 22°C, 27°C, and 32°C (40% RH). During the time trials, heart rate, core body temperature, and power output were recorded. The variability in power output was assessed with the use of exposure variation analysis. Mean 40 km power output was significantly lower during 32°C (309 ± 35 W) compared with 17°C (329 ± 31 W), 22°C (324 ± 34 W), and 27°C (322 ± 32 W). In addition, greater variability in power production was observed at 32°C compared with 17°C, as evidenced by a lower (P = .03) standard deviation of the exposure variation matrix (2.9 ± 0.5 vs 3.5 ± 0.4 units, respectively). Core temperature was greater (P < .05) at 32°C compared with 17°C and 22°C from 30 to 40 km, and the rate of rise in core temperature throughout the 40 km time trial was greater (P < .05) at 32°C (0.06 ± 0.04°C·km–1) compared with 17°C (0.05 ± 0.05°C·km–1). This study showed that time-trial performance is reduced under hot environmental conditions, and is associated with a shift in the composition of power output. These finding provide insight into the control of pacing strategies during exercise in the heat.

A Comparison of Different Prerace Warm-Up Strategies on 1-km Cycling Time-Trial Performance

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 1109-1116
Author(s):  
Mathias T. Vangsoe ◽  
Jonas K. Nielsen ◽  
Carl D. Paton
Keyword(s):  
Blood Lactate ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Peak Power ◽  
Lactate Concentration ◽  
Blood Lactate Concentration ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Peak Power Output ◽  
Warm Up ◽  
Performance Time ◽  
Competitive Cyclists

Purpose: Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) and postactivation potentiation (PAP) are warm-up strategies proposed to improve high-intensity sporting performance. However, only few studies have investigated the benefits of these strategies compared with an appropriate control (CON) or an athlete-selected (SELF) warm-up protocol. Therefore, this study examined the effects of 4 different warm-up routines on 1-km time-trial (TT) performance with competitive cyclists. Methods: In a randomized crossover study, 12 well-trained cyclists (age 32 [10] y, mass 77.7 [4.6] kg, peak power output 1141 [61] W) performed 4 different warm-up strategies—(CON) 17 minutes CON only, (SELF) a self-determined warm-up, (IPC) IPC + CON, or (PAP) CON + PAP—prior to completing a maximal-effort 1-km TT. Performance time and power, quadriceps electromyograms, muscle oxygen saturation (SmO2), and blood lactate were measured to determine differences between trials. Results: There were no significant differences (P > .05) in 1-km performance time between CON (76.9 [5.2] s), SELF (77.3 [6.0] s), IPC (77.0 [5.5] s), or PAP (77.3 [5.9] s) protocols. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in mean or peak power output between trials. Finally, electromyogram activity, SmO2, and recovery blood lactate concentration were not different between conditions. Conclusions: Adding IPC or PAP protocols to a short CON warm-up appears to provide no additional benefit to 1-km TT performance with well-trained cyclists and is therefore not recommended. Furthermore, additional IPC and PAP protocols had no effect on electromyograms and SmO2 values during the TT or peak lactate concentration during recovery.

Training Prescription Guided by Heart-Rate Variability in Cycling

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Javaloyes ◽  
Jose Manuel Sarabia ◽  
Robert Patrick Lamberts ◽  
Manuel Moya-Ramon
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Heart Rate Variability ◽  
Oxygen Uptake ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Maximal Oxygen Uptake ◽  
Peak Power ◽  
Performance Enhancement ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Peak Power Output ◽  
Road Cycling

Purpose: Road cycling is a sport with extreme physiological demands. Therefore, there is a need to find new strategies to improve performance. Heart-rate variability (HRV) has been suggested as an effective alternative for prescribing training load against predefined training programs. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of training prescription based on HRV in road cycling performance. Methods: Seventeen well-trained cyclists participated in this study. After an initial evaluation week, cyclists performed 4 baseline weeks of standardized training to establish their resting HRV. Then, cyclists were divided into 2 groups, an HRV-guided group and a traditional periodization group, and they carried out 8 training weeks. Cyclists performed 2 evaluation weeks, after and before a training week. During the evaluation weeks, cyclists performed a graded exercise test to assess maximal oxygen uptake, peak power output, and ventilatory thresholds with their corresponding power output (VT1, VT2, WVT1, and WVT2, respectively) and a 40-min simulated time trial. Results: The HRV-guided group improved peak power output (5.1% [4.5%]; P = .024), WVT2 (13.9% [8.8%]; P = .004), and 40-min all-out time trial (7.3% [4.5%]; P = .005). Maximal oxygen uptake and WVT1 remained similar. The traditional periodization group did not improve significantly after the training week. There were no differences between groups. However, magnitude-based inference analysis showed likely beneficial and possibly beneficial effects for the HRV-guided group instead of the traditional periodization group in 40-min all-out time trial and peak power output, respectively. Conclusion: Daily training prescription based on HRV could result in a better performance enhancement than a traditional periodization in well-trained cyclists.

scholarly journals Heat acclimation improves exercise performance

2010 ◽  
Vol 109 (4) ◽  
pp. 1140-1147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santiago Lorenzo ◽  
John R. Halliwill ◽  
Michael N. Sawka ◽  
Christopher T. Minson
Keyword(s):  
Exercise Performance ◽  
Lactate Threshold ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Heat Acclimation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Time Trial Performance ◽  
Before And After ◽  
C 30 ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Trial Performance

This study examined the impact of heat acclimation on improving exercise performance in cool and hot environments. Twelve trained cyclists performed tests of maximal aerobic power (V̇o2max), time-trial performance, and lactate threshold, in both cool [13°C, 30% relative humidity (RH)] and hot (38°C, 30% RH) environments before and after a 10-day heat acclimation (∼50% V̇o2max in 40°C) program. The hot and cool condition V̇o2max and lactate threshold tests were both preceded by either warm (41°C) water or thermoneutral (34°C) water immersion to induce hyperthermia (0.8–1.0°C) or sustain normothermia, respectively. Eight matched control subjects completed the same exercise tests in the same environments before and after 10 days of identical exercise in a cool (13°C) environment. Heat acclimation increased V̇o2max by 5% in cool (66.8 ± 2.1 vs. 70.2 ± 2.3 ml·kg−1·min−1, P = 0.004) and by 8% in hot (55.1 ± 2.5 vs. 59.6 ± 2.0 ml·kg−1·min−1, P = 0.007) conditions. Heat acclimation improved time-trial performance by 6% in cool (879.8 ± 48.5 vs. 934.7 ± 50.9 kJ, P = 0.005) and by 8% in hot (718.7 ± 42.3 vs. 776.2 ± 50.9 kJ, P = 0.014) conditions. Heat acclimation increased power output at lactate threshold by 5% in cool (3.88 ± 0.82 vs. 4.09 ± 0.76 W/kg, P = 0.002) and by 5% in hot (3.45 ± 0.80 vs. 3.60 ± 0.79 W/kg, P < 0.001) conditions. Heat acclimation increased plasma volume (6.5 ± 1.5%) and maximal cardiac output in cool and hot conditions (9.1 ± 3.4% and 4.5 ± 4.6%, respectively). The control group had no changes in V̇o2max, time-trial performance, lactate threshold, or any physiological parameters. These data demonstrate that heat acclimation improves aerobic exercise performance in temperate-cool conditions and provide the scientific basis for employing heat acclimation to augment physical training programs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document