Ji Sanghyeon, Donath Lars, Wahl Patrick
The German Research Center for Elite Sport Cologne, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Department of Preventative and Rehabilitative Sports and Performance Medicine, Institute of Cardiology and Sport Medicine, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
J Strength Cond Res. 2022 Dec 1;36(12):3280-3289. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004105. Epub 2021 Jul 26.
Ji, S, Donath, L, and Wahl, P. Effects of alternating unilateral vs. bilateral resistance training on sprint and endurance cycling performance in trained endurance athletes: A 3-armed, randomized, controlled, pilot trial. J Strength Cond Res 36(12): 3280-3289, 2022-Traditional preparatory resistance training for cyclists mainly relies on simultaneous bilateral movement patterns. This lack of movement specificity may impede transfer effects to specific aerobic and anaerobic requirements on the bike. Hence, this study investigated the effects of resistance training in alternating unilateral vs. simultaneous bilateral movement pattern on strength and anaerobic as well as aerobic cycling performance indices. Twenty-four trained triathletes and cyclists (age: 31.1 ± 8.1 years; V̇ o2 max: 57.6 ± 7.1 ml·min -1 ·kg -1 ) were randomly assigned to either an alternating unilateral (AUL), a simultaneous bilateral (BIL) training group or a control group (CON). Ten weeks of resistance training (4 × 4-10 repetition maximum) were completed by both training groups, although CON maintained their usual training regimen without resistance training. Maximal strength was tested during isometric leg extension, leg curl, and leg press in both unilateral and bilateral conditions. To compare the transfer effects of the training groups, determinants of cycling performance and time to exhaustion at 105% of the estimated anaerobic threshold were examined. Maximal leg strength notably increased in both training groups (BIL: ∼28%; AUL: ∼27%; p < 0.01) but not in CON (∼6%; p > 0.54). A significant improvement in cycling time trial performance was also observed in both training groups (AUL: 67%; BIL: 43%; p < 0.05) but not for CON (37%; p = 0.43). Bilateral group exhibited an improved cycling economy at submaximal intensities (∼8%; p < 0.05) but no changes occurred in AUL and CON (∼3%; p > 0.24). While sprint cycling performance decreased in CON (peak power: -6%; acceleration index: -15%; p < 0.05), improvement in favor of AUL was observed for acceleration abilities during maximal sprinting (20%; d = 0.5). Our pilot data underpin the importance of resistance training independent of its specific movement pattern both for improving the endurance cycling performance and maximal leg strength. Further research should corroborate our preliminary findings on whether sprint cycling benefits favorably from AUL resistance training.
季,S,多纳特,L,和瓦尔,P。交替单侧与双侧阻力训练对训练有素的耐力运动员短跑和耐力自行车运动表现的影响:一项三臂、随机、对照的试点试验。《力量与体能研究杂志》36(12): 3280 - 3289,2022年——传统的自行车运动员准备性阻力训练主要依赖于同时进行的双侧运动模式。这种运动特异性的缺乏可能会阻碍向自行车上特定有氧和无氧需求的转移效果。因此,本研究调查了交替单侧与同时双侧运动模式的阻力训练对力量、无氧以及有氧自行车运动表现指标的影响。24名训练有素的铁人三项运动员和自行车运动员(年龄:31.1±8.1岁;最大摄氧量:57.6±7.1毫升·分钟⁻¹·千克⁻¹)被随机分配到交替单侧(AUL)、同时双侧(BIL)训练组或对照组(CON)。两个训练组都完成了10周的阻力训练(4×4 - 10次最大重复量),尽管CON保持其常规训练方案,不进行阻力训练。在单侧和双侧条件下的等长伸腿、弯腿和腿部推举过程中测试最大力量。为了比较训练组的转移效果,检查了自行车运动表现的决定因素以及在估计无氧阈值的105%时的疲劳时间。两个训练组的最大腿部力量均显著增加(BIL:约28%;AUL:约27%;p<0.01),但CON组未增加(约6%;p>0.54)。两个训练组在计时赛自行车运动表现上也有显著改善(AUL:67%;BIL:43%;p<0.05),但CON组没有(37%;p = 0.43)。双侧训练组在次最大强度下的自行车经济性有所改善(约8%;p<0.05),但AUL组和CON组没有变化(约3%;p>0.24)。虽然CON组的短距离自行车运动表现下降(峰值功率:-6%;加速指数:-15%;p<0.05),但在最大冲刺期间,AUL组的加速能力有所改善(20%;d = 0.5)。我们的试点数据支持了阻力训练的重要性,无论其特定运动模式如何,对提高耐力自行车运动表现和最大腿部力量都很重要。进一步的研究应证实我们关于短距离自行车运动是否从AUL阻力训练中受益的初步发现。