Pallares Jesús G, Barranco-Gil David, Rodríguez-Rielves Víctor, de Pablos Raúl, Buendía-Romero Ángel, Martínez-Cava Alejandro, Franco-López Francisco, Sánchez-Redondo Iván R, Iriberri Jon, Revuelta Carlos, Lillo-Bevia José Ramón, Valenzuela Pedro L, Lucia Alejandro, Hernández-Belmonte Alejandro, Alejo Lidia B
Human Performance and Sports Science Laboratory, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Department of Sports Sciences. Faculty of Medicine, Health and Sports, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Biol Sport. 2025 Feb 5;42(3):185-195. doi: 10.5114/biolsport.2025.146790. eCollection 2025 Jul.
This randomized controlled trial compared the effectiveness of high-intensity off- and on-bike resistance training (RT) in well-trained cyclists. Thirty-seven cyclists incorporated into their cycling routine a 10-week RT only differing in the exercise used: full squat (off-bike RT, n = 12) or high-intensity all-out pedaling efforts (on-bike RT, n = 12). RT variables like intensity (% maximal dynamic force, MDF), volume, sets, and rest were identical between groups. A third group of cyclists who continued their cycling routine but did not include additional RT stimuli was used as a control (n = 13). The cycling volume at each intensity zone was also matched between the three groups. No significant differences were found between off- and on-bike RT in any parameter. RT groups improved the maximal aerobic power (ES ≥ 0.37) and that attained at the respiratory compensation point (RCP, ES ≥ 0.20). The on-bike RT also significantly enhanced power attained at the ventilatory threshold (ES = 0.24). Off-bike MDF was meaningfully enhanced by both RT groups (ES ≥ 0.16), whereas the on-bike group also significantly increased pedaling MDF (ES = 0.67). Quadriceps size was significantly increased by the off-bike group (ES = 0.22), whereas the on-bike RT also tended to augment this parameter (ES = 0.15) and patellar tendon size (ES = 0.35). Improvements in both RT regimes for time-to-exhaustion capacity (ES ≥ 0.30) were considerable but not significant. The off-bike group tended to increase injury-related symptoms (ES ≥ 0.33). The control group significantly decreased off-and on-bike MDF (ES ≤ -0.40) and quadriceps size (ES = -0.26). These findings suggest that high-intensity on-bike RT is an effective alternative to off-bike RT to safely increase strength, muscle-tendon structure, and cycling performance.
这项随机对照试验比较了高强度非骑行和骑行抗阻训练(RT)对训练有素的自行车运动员的效果。37名自行车运动员将为期10周的抗阻训练纳入其骑行日常训练中,两组抗阻训练仅在使用的练习上有所不同:全蹲(非骑行抗阻训练,n = 12)或高强度全力蹬踏(骑行抗阻训练,n = 12)。两组之间的抗阻训练变量,如强度(最大动态力量百分比,MDF)、训练量、组数和休息时间均相同。第三组自行车运动员继续其骑行日常训练,但不包括额外的抗阻训练刺激,作为对照组(n = 13)。三组之间在每个强度区域的骑行量也相匹配。在任何参数上,非骑行抗阻训练和骑行抗阻训练之间均未发现显著差异。抗阻训练组提高了最大有氧功率(效应量≥0.3