Track cycling sprint sex differences using power data.

Objectives: Currently, there are no data on sex differences in the power profiles in sprint track cycling. This cross-section study analyses retrospective data of female and male track sprint cyclists for sex differences. We hypothesized that women would exhibit lower peak power to weight than men, as well as demonstrate a different distribution of power durations related to sprint cycling performance. Design: We used training, testing, and racing data from a publicly available online depository (www.strava.com), for 29 track sprint cyclists (eight women providing 18 datasets, and 21 men providing 54 datasets) to create sex-specific profiles. R2 was used to describe model quality, and regression indices are used to compare watts per kilogram (W/kg) for each duration for both sexes against a 1:1 relationship expected for 15-s:15-s W/kg. Results: We confirmed our sample were sprint cyclists, displaying higher peak and competition power than track endurance cyclists. All power profiles showed a high model quality (R2 ≥ 0.77). Regression indices for both sexes were similar for all durations, suggesting similar peak power and similar relationship between peak power and endurance level for both men and women (rejecting our hypothesis). The value of R2 for the female sprinters showed greater variation suggesting greater differences within female sprint cyclists. Conclusion: The main finding shows female sprint cyclists in this study have very similar relationships between peak power and endurance power as men. Higher variation in W/kg for women in this study than men, within these strong relationships, indicates women in this study, had greater inter-athlete variability, and may thus require more personalised training. Future work needs to be performed with larger samples, and at different levels to optimize these recommendations.

Power-duration relationship comparison in competition sprint cyclists from 1-s to 20-min. Sprint performance is more than just peak power.

Current convention place peak power as the main determinant of sprint cycling performance. This study challenges that notion and compares two common durations of sprint cycling performance with not only peak power, but power out to 20-min. There is also a belief where maximal efforts of longer durations will be detrimental to sprint cycling performance. 56 data sets from 27 cyclists (21 male, 6 female) provided maximal power for durations from 1-s to 20-min. Peak power values are compared to assess the strength of correlation (R2), and any relationship (slope) across every level. R2 between 15-s- 30-s power and durations from 1-s to 20-min remained high (R2 ≥ 0.83). Despite current assumptions around 1-s power, our data shows this relationship is stronger around competition durations, and 1-s power also still shared strong relationships with longer durations out to 20-min. Slopes for relationships at shorter durations were closer to a 1:1 relationship than longer durations, but closer to long-duration slopes than to a 1:1 line. The present analyses contradicts both well-accepted hypotheses that peak power is the main driver of sprint cycling performance and that maximal efforts of longer durations out to 20-min will hinder sprint cycling. This study shows the importance and potential of training durations from 1-s to 20-min over a preparation period to improve competition sprint cycling performance.

Overuse Injury, Substance Use, and Resilience in Collegiate Female Athlete.

BACKGROUND: Overuse injury is a common stressor experienced by female collegiate athletes and is often underreported. In response, athletes may develop negative coping skills such as substance use. Alternatively, resilience is a modifiable trait that may positively influence response to musculoskeletal injuries and substance use. PURPOSE: To provide an updated epidemiological profile of overuse injury and substance use and examine the relationship between resilience, overuse injury, and substance use among collegiate female athletes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Two-hundred and thirty female collegiate athletes were classified into overuse injury and resilience groups. Overuse injury, pain, and substance use incidence proportions (IP) were calculated. Kruskal-Wallis analyses were performed to investigate differences in substance use among resilience groups. Analyses of covariance were performed to evaluate differences in overuse injuries, substantial overuse injuries, and time loss injuries, among resilience groups. RESULTS: IP for pain was 45.0% (95% CI: 38.2-51.9); Overuse injury 52.0% (45.1-58.9); Alcohol use 35.1% (28.6-41.6); Electronic cigarette use 19.5% (14.6-24.9); Cigarette use 2.8% (6-5.1); and Drug use 3.3% (0.9-5.8). No significant differences were found between resilience groups for the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Overuse Injury Questionnaire (OSTRC) variables (Pain: p=0.102; Overuse injury: p=0.331; Substantial overuse injury: p=0.084; Not playing: p=0.058), alcohol (p=0.723), or combined substance use (p=0.069). CONCLUSIONS: Pain and overuse injury prevalence is high among female collegiate athletes. Alcohol followed by electronic cigarette use were the most commonly utilized substances. No significant differences were identified in substance use or overuse injury presentation between resilience groups, though further investigation is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Using Field Based Data to Model Sprint Track Cycling Performance.

Cycling performance models are used to study rider and sport characteristics to better understand performance determinants and optimise competition outcomes. Performance requirements cover the demands of competition a cyclist may encounter, whilst rider attributes are physical, technical and psychological characteristics contributing to performance. Several current models of endurance-cycling enhance understanding of performance in road cycling and track endurance, relying on a supply and demand perspective. However, they have yet to be developed for sprint-cycling, with current athlete preparation, instead relying on measures of peak-power, speed and strength to assess performance and guide training. Peak-power models do not adequately explain the demands of actual competition in events over 15-60 s, let alone, in World-Championship sprint cycling events comprising several rounds to medal finals. Whilst there are no descriptive studies of track-sprint cycling events, we present data from physiological interventions using track cycling and repeated sprint exercise research in multiple sports, to elucidate the demands of performance requiring several maximal sprints over a competition. This review will show physiological and power meter data, illustrating the role of all energy pathways in sprint performance. This understanding highlights the need to focus on the capacity required for a given race and over an event, and therefore the recovery needed for each subsequent race, within and between races, and how optimal pacing can be used to enhance performance. We propose a shift in sprint-cyclist preparation away from training just for peak power, to a more comprehensive model of the actual event demands.

Effect of cycling position on oxygen uptake and preferred cadence in trained cyclists during hill climbing at various power outputs.

Numerous researchers have studied the physiological responses to seated and standing cycling, but actual field data are sparse. One open issue is the preferred cadence of trained cyclists while hill climbing. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to examine the affect of cycling position on economy and preferred cadence in trained cyclists while they climbed a moderate grade hill at various power outputs. Eight trained cyclists (25.8 +/- 7.2 years, [Formula: see text] 68.8 +/- 5.0 ml kg(-1) min(-1), peak power 407.6 +/- 69.0 W) completed a seated and standing hill climb at approximately 50, 65 and 75% of peak power output (PPO) in the order shown, although cycling position was randomized, i.e., half the cyclists stood or remained seat on their first trial at each power output. Cyclists also performed a maximal trial unrestricted by position. Heart rate, power output, and cadence were measured continuously with a power tap; ventilation [Formula: see text], BF and cadence were significantly higher with seated climbing at all intensities; there were no other physiological differences between the climbing positions. These data support the premise that trained cyclists are equally economical using high or low cadences, but may face a limit to benefits gained with increasing cadence.