Validity of the Velocomp PowerPod compared with the Verve Cycling InfoCrank power meter

Purpose: To determine the validity of the Velocomp PowerPod power meter in comparison with the Verve Cycling InfoCrank power meter. Methods: This research involved 2 separate studies. In study 1, 12 recreational male road cyclists completed 7 maximal cycling efforts of a known duration (2 times 5 s and 15, 30, 60, 240, and 600 s). In study 2, 4 elite male road cyclists completed 13 outdoor cycling sessions. In both studies, power output of cyclists was continuously measured using both the PowerPod and InfoCrank power meters. Maximal mean power output was calculated for durations of 1, 5, 15, 30, 60, 240, and 600 seconds plus the average power output in study 2. Results: Power output determined by the PowerPod was almost perfectly correlated with the InfoCrank (r \u3e .996; P \u3c .001) in both studies. Using a rolling resistance previously reported, power output was similar between power meters in study 1 (P = .989), but not in study 2 (P = .045). Rolling resistance estimated by the PowerPod was higher than what has been previously reported; this might have occurred because of errors in the subjective device setup. This overestimation of rolling resistance increased the power output readings. Conclusion: Accuracy of rolling resistance seems to be very important in determining power output using the PowerPod. When using a rolling resistance based on previous literature, the PowerPod showed high validity when compared with the InfoCrank in a controlled field test (study 1) but less so in a dynamic environment (study 2)

Superior Inhibitory Control and Resistance to Mental Fatigue in Professional Road Cyclists

Purpose: Given the important role of the brain in regulating endurance performance, this comparative study sought to determine whether professional road cyclists have superior inhibitory control and resistance to mental fatigue compared to recreational road cyclists. Methods: After preliminary testing and familiarization, eleven professional and nine recreational road cyclists visited the lab on two occasions to complete a modified incongruent colour-word Stroop task (a cognitive task requiring inhibitory control) for 30 min (mental exertion condition), or an easy cognitive task for 10 min (control condition) in a randomized, counterbalanced cross-over order. After each cognitive task, participants completed a 20-min time trial on a cycle ergometer. During the time trial, heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were recorded. Results: The professional cyclists completed more correct responses during the Stroop task than the recreational cyclists (705±68 vs 576±74, p = 0.001). During the time trial, the recreational cyclists produced a lower mean power output in the mental exertion condition compared to the control condition (216±33 vs 226±25 W, p = 0.014). There was no difference between conditions for the professional cyclists (323±42 vs 326±35 W, p = 0.502). Heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and RPE were not significantly different between the mental exertion and control conditions in both groups. Conclusion: The professional cyclists exhibited superior performance during the Stroop task which is indicative of stronger inhibitory control than the recreational cyclists. The professional cyclists also displayed a greater resistance to the negative effects of mental fatigue as demonstrated by no significant differences in perception of effort and time trial performance between the mental exertion and control conditions. These findings suggest that inhibitory control and resistance to mental fatigue may contribute to successful road cycling performance. These psychobiological characteristics may be either genetic and/or developed through the training and lifestyle of professional road cyclists

Track cycling

he fi rst track-cycling competitions date back to the late 19th century (i.e., 1870). Track cycling has been an Olympic sport since the fi rst edition of the modern Olympic Games in 1896, with the exception of the 1912 edition, when the organizing committee decided not to build a velodrome. In recent years, the Olympic Games track-cycling program has considerably changed with the inclusion of new competitions and the loss of more traditional events. Since the London 2012 Games, the Games have had 10 events, 5 for men and 5 for women. Track cyclists could be classifi ed into two distinct categories based on their anthropometric and physiological characteristics, which suit different races. Indeed, many short competitions are designed for sprinters; longer races, sometimes involving bunch riding, are specifi cally intended for endurance cyclists. Velodromes have a characteristic oval shape consisting of two straights and two turns. Both the straights and the turns are banked, though with differing slopes. Velodromes can be categorized into the following types: indoor or outdoor; short or long based on their lengths, ranging from about 180 meters to more than 600 meters; and fast or slow based on their surfaces (i.e., wood or concrete). Shorter velodromes typically have steeper banking when compared with longer velodromes. Recent Track World Championships and Olympic Games typically have been organized on indoor, 250- meter wooden velodromes. In the last century more than 100 velodromes have been built by Schuermann Architects

Considerations on the Assessment and Use of Cycling Performance Metrics and their Integration in the Athlete's Biological Passport

Over the past few decades the possibility to capture real-time data from road cyclists has drastically improved. Given the increasing pressure for improved transparency and openness, there has been an increase in publication of cyclists' physiological and performance data. Recently, it has been suggested that the use of such performance biometrics may be used to strengthen the sensitivity and applicability of the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) and aid in the fight against doping. This is an interesting concept which has merit, although there are several important factors that need to be considered. These factors include accuracy of the data collected and validity (and reliability) of the subsequent performance modeling. In order to guarantee high quality standards, the implementation of well-structured Quality-Systems within sporting organizations should be considered, and external certifications may be required. Various modeling techniques have been developed, many of which are based on fundamental intensity/time relationships. These models have increased our understanding of performance but are currently limited in their application, for example due to the largely unaccounted effects of environmental factors such as, heat and altitude. In conclusion, in order to use power data as a performance biometric to be integrated in the biological passport, a number of actions must be taken to ensure accuracy of the data and better understand road cycling performance in the field. This article aims to outline considerations in the quantification of cycling performance, also presenting an alternative method (i.e., monitoring race results) to allow for determination of unusual performance improvements

Training load and its role in injury prevention, part I: Back to the future

© by the National Athletic Trainers\u27 Association, Inc www.natajournals.org The purpose of this 2-part commentary series is† to explain why we believe our ability to control injury risk by manipulating training load (TL) in its current state is an illusion and why the foundations of this illusion are weak and unreliable. In part 1, we introduce the training process framework and contextualize the role of TL monitoring in the injury-prevention paradigm. In part 2, we describe the conceptual and methodologic pitfalls of previous authors who associated TL and injury in ways that limited their suitability for the derivation of practical recommendations. The first important step in the training process is developing the training program: the practitioner develops a strategy based on available evidence, professional knowledge, and experience. For decades, exercise strategies have been based on the fundamental training principles of overload and progression. Training-load monitoring allows the practitioner to determine whether athletes have completed training as planned and how they have coped with the physical stress. Training load and its associated metrics cannot provide a quantitative indication of whether particular load progressions will increase or decrease the injury risk, given the nature of previous studies (descriptive and at best predictive) and their methodologic weaknesses. The overreliance on TL has moved the attention away from the multifactorial nature of injury and the roles of other important contextual factors. We argue that no evidence supports the quantitative use of TL data to manipulate future training with the purpose of preventing injury. Therefore, determining \u27\u27how much is too much\u27\u27 and how to properly manipulate and progress TL are currently subjective decisions based on generic training principles and our experience of adjusting training according to an individual athlete\u27s response. Our message to practitioners is to stop seeking overly simplistic solutions to complex problems and instead embrace the risks and uncertainty inherent in the training process and injury prevention

Maximal sprint power in road cyclists after variable and nonvariable high-intensity exercise

This study compared the sprint performance of professional cyclists after 10 minutes of variable (VAR) or nonvariable (N-VAR) high-intensity cycling with sprint performance in a rested state. Ten internationally competitive male cyclists (mean ± SD: age, 20.1 ± 1.3 years; stature, 1.81 ± 0.07 m; body weight, 69.5 ± 4.9 kg; and V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak, 72.5 ± 4.4 ml·kg−1·min−1) performed a 12-second maximal sprint in 3 conditions: (a) a rested state, (b) after 10 minutes of N-VAR cycling, and (c) after 10 minutes of VAR cycling. The intensity during the 10-minute efforts gradually increased to replicate power output observed in the final section of cycling road races. During the VAR cycling, participants performed short (2 seconds) accelerations at 80% of their sprint peak power, every 30 seconds. Average power output, cadence, and maximal heart rate (HR) during the 10-minute efforts were similar between conditions (5.3 ± 0.2 W·kg−1, 102 ± 1 rpm, and 93 ± 3% HRmax). Postexercise blood lactate concentration and sessional perceived exertion were also similar (8.3 ± 1.6 mmol·L−1, 15.4 ± 1.3 [6–20 scale]). Peak and average power output and cadence during the subsequent maximal sprint were not different between the 3 experimental conditions (p > 0.05). In conclusion, this study showed that neither the VAR nor the N-VAR 10-minute efforts ridden in this study impaired sprint performance in elite competitive cyclists