Taylor Daniel, Smith Mark F
School of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Lincoln Lincoln, UK.
Front Physiol. 2017 Jan 24;8:6. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00006. eCollection 2017.
To examine the effects of deceptively aggressive bike pacing on performance, pacing, and associated physiological and perceptual responses during simulated sprint-distance triathlon. Ten non-elite, competitive male triathletes completed three simulated sprint-distance triathlons (0.75 km swim, 500 kJ bike, 5 km run), the first of which established personal best "baseline" performance (BL). During the remaining two trials athletes maintained a cycling power output 5% greater than BL, before completing the run as quickly as possible. However, participants were informed of this aggressive cycling strategy before and during only one of the two trials (HON). Prior to the alternate trial (DEC), participants were misinformed that cycling power output would equal that of BL, with on-screen feedback manipulated to reinforce this deception. Compared to BL, a significantly faster run performance was observed following DEC cycling ( < 0.05) but not following HON cycling (1348 ± 140 vs. 1333 ± 129 s and 1350 ± 135 s, for BL, DEC, and HON, respectively). As such, magnitude-based inferences suggest HON running was more to be slower, than faster, compared to BL, and that DEC running was faster than both BL and HON. Despite a trend for overall triathlon performance to be quicker during DEC (4339 ± 395 s) compared to HON (4356 ± 384 s), the only significant and meaningful differences were between each of these trials and BL (4465 ± 420 s; < 0.05). Generally, physiological and perceptual strain increased with higher cycling intensities, with little, if any, substantial difference in physiological and perceptual response during each triathlon run. The present study is the first to show that mid-event pace deception can have a practically meaningful effect on multi-modal endurance performance, though the relative importance of different psychophysiological and emotional responses remains unclear. Whilst our findings support the view that some form of anticipatory "template" may be used by athletes to interpret levels of psychophysiological and emotional strain, and regulate exercise intensity accordingly, they would also suggest that individual constructs such as RPE and affect may be more loosely tied with pacing than previously suggested.
为了研究在模拟短距离铁人三项赛中，欺骗性激进的自行车配速对运动表现、配速以及相关生理和感知反应的影响。十名非精英、有竞争力的男性铁人三项运动员完成了三次模拟短距离铁人三项赛（0.75公里游泳、500千焦自行车骑行、5公里跑步），其中第一次建立了个人最佳“基线”表现（BL）。在其余两次试验中，运动员在自行车骑行时保持比BL高5%的功率输出，然后尽快完成跑步。然而，在这两次试验中，只有一次试验（HON）的运动员在试验前和试验期间被告知这种激进的骑行策略。在另一次试验（DEC）之前，参与者被错误告知自行车功率输出将与BL相等，并通过屏幕反馈来强化这种欺骗。与BL相比，DEC骑行后观察到跑步成绩显著更快（<0.05），而HON骑行后则没有（BL、DEC和HON的跑步成绩分别为1348±140秒、1333±129秒和1350±135秒）。因此，基于量级的推断表明，与BL相比，HON跑步更有可能变慢而不是变快，并且DEC跑步比BL和HON都快。尽管与HON（4356±384秒）相比，DEC期间的总体铁人三项赛成绩有更快的趋势（4339±395秒），但这些试验与BL（4465±420秒）之间唯一显著且有意义的差异是<0.05）。一般来说，生理和感知压力随着骑行强度的增加而增加，在每次铁人三项赛跑步期间，生理和感知反应几乎没有实质性差异。本研究首次表明，比赛过程中的配速欺骗对多模式耐力表现可能有实际意义的影响，尽管不同心理生理和情绪反应的相对重要性仍不清楚。虽然我们的研究结果支持这样的观点，即运动员可能会使用某种形式的预期“模板”来解释心理生理和情绪压力水平，并相应地调节运动强度，但它们也表明，诸如主观用力程度（RPE）和情感等个体因素与配速的关联可能比之前认为的更松散。
