Applied Sports Science and Exercise Testing Laboratory, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, Faculty of Science and Information Technology, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, Australia.
Sport and Exercise Science, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Moore Park, Australia.
J Strength Cond Res. 2019 Feb;33(2):538-543. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002003.
Novak, AR, Bennett, KJM, Pluss, MA, Fransen, J, Watsford, ML, and Dascombe, BJ. Power profiles of competitive and noncompetitive mountain bikers. J Strength Cond Res 33(2): 538-543, 2019-The performance of Olympic distance cross-country mountain bikers (XCO-MTB) is affected by constraints such as erosion of track surfaces and mass start congestion which can affect race results. Standardized laboratory assessments quantify interseasonal and intraseasonal cycling potential through the assessment of multiple physiological capacities. Therefore, this study examined whether the power profile assessment (PPA) could discriminate between competitive XCO-MTB and noncompetitive mountain bikers (NC-MTB). Second, it aimed to report normative power profile data for competitive XCO-MTB cyclists. Twenty-nine male participants were recruited across groups of XCO-MTB (n = 14) and NC-MTB (n = 15) mountain bikers. Each cyclist completed a PPA that consisted of increasing duration maximal efforts (6, 15, 30, 60, 240, and 600 seconds) that were interspersed by longer rest periods (174, 225, 330, 480, and 600 seconds) between efforts. Normative power outputs were established for XCO-MTB cyclists ranging between 13.8 ± 1.5 W·kg (5-second effort) and 4.1 ± 0.6 W·kg (600-second effort). No differences in absolute peak power or cadence were identified between groups across any effort length (p > 0.05). However, the XCO-MTB cyclists produced greater mean power outputs relative to body mass than the NC-MTB during the 60-second (6.9 ± 0.8 vs 6.4 ± 0.6 W·kg; p = 0.002), 240-second (4.7 ± 0.7 vs. 3.8 ± 0.4 W·kg; p < 0.001), and 600-second (4.1 ± 0.6 vs. 3.4 ± 0.3 W·kg; p < 0.001) efforts. The PPA is a useful discriminative assessment tool for XCO-MTB and highlights the importance of aerobic power for XCO-MTB performance.
诺瓦克、AR、班尼特、KJM、普卢斯、MA、弗兰森、J、沃茨福德、ML 和达斯科姆，BJ。竞技和非竞技山地自行车手的功率特征。J 力量与条件研究 33(2):538-543，2019-奥运会距离越野山地自行车（XCO-MTB）运动员的表现受到赛道表面侵蚀和大规模出发拥堵等限制因素的影响，这些因素会影响比赛结果。标准化的实验室评估通过评估多种生理能力来量化赛季间和赛季内的自行车潜力。因此，本研究旨在检验功率剖面评估（PPA）是否可以区分竞技 XCO-MTB 和非竞技山地自行车手（NC-MTB）。其次，旨在为竞技 XCO-MTB 自行车手报告规范的功率剖面数据。29 名男性参与者被招募到 XCO-MTB 组（n = 14）和 NC-MTB 组（n = 15）山地自行车手组中。每位自行车手都完成了一项 PPA，其中包括递增持续时间的最大努力（6、15、30、60、240 和 600 秒），在努力之间穿插更长的休息时间（174、225、330、480 和 600 秒）。为 XCO-MTB 自行车手建立了规范的功率输出范围，范围在 13.8±1.5 W·kg（5 秒努力）和 4.1±0.6 W·kg（600 秒努力）之间。在任何努力长度上，两组之间的绝对峰值功率或踏频都没有差异（p > 0.05）。然而，与 NC-MTB 相比，XCO-MTB 自行车手在 60 秒（6.9±0.8 对 6.4±0.6 W·kg；p = 0.002）、240 秒（4.7±0.7 对 3.8±0.4 W·kg；p < 0.001）和 600 秒（4.1±0.6 对 3.4±0.3 W·kg；p < 0.001）的努力中产生了更大的平均功率输出。PPA 是 XCO-MTB 的一种有用的鉴别评估工具，它强调了有氧能力对 XCO-MTB 性能的重要性。
