On- Versus Off-Bike Power Training in Professional Cyclists: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of resistance power training (RPT, training with the individualized load and repetitions that maximize power output) and cycling power training (CPT, short sprint training) in professional cyclists.

METHODS

The participants (20 [2] y, peak oxygen uptake 78.0 [4.4] mL·kg-1·min-1) were randomly assigned to perform CPT (n = 8) or RPT (n = 10) in addition to their usual training regime for 7 weeks (2 sessions/wk). The training loads were continuously registered using the session rating of perceived exertion. The outcomes included endurance performance (8-min time trial and incremental test), as well as measures of muscle strength/power (1-repetition maximum and mean maximum propulsive power on the squat, hip thrust, and lunge exercises) and body composition (assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry).

RESULTS

No between-group differences were found for training loads or for any outcome (P > .05). Both interventions resulted in increased time-trial performance, as well as in improvements in other endurance-related outcomes (ie, ventilatory threshold, respiratory compensation point; P < .05). A significant or quasi-significant increase (P = .068 and .047 for CPT and RPT, respectively) in bone mineral content was observed after both interventions. A significant reduction in fat mass (P = .017), along with a trend (P = .059) toward a reduced body mass, was observed after RPT, but not CPT (P = .076 for the group × time interaction effect). Significant benefits (P < .05) were also observed for most strength-related outcomes after RPT, but not CPT.

CONCLUSION

CPT and RPT are both effective strategies for the improvement of endurance performance and bone health in professional cyclists, although the latter tends to result in greater improvements in body composition and muscle strength/power.