Traditional Versus Optimum Power Load Training in Professional Cyclists: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Time-course Changes of Field- and Laboratory-based Performance Indicators in Junior Cyclists Through a Season

This study aimed to assess the seasonal evolution of field-based and laboratory-based performance indicators in cyclists. Thirteen Junior male road cyclists (age 17.4±0.5 years) were followed up during a season, which was divided in three phases: early season (involving mainly training sessions), mid-season (including the first competitions), and late season (including the major competitions of the season). During each phase, field-based power output data were registered for the assessment of maximum mean power values, and laboratory-based endurance (ramp test and simulated 8-minute time trial), muscle strength/power (squat, lunge, hip thrust) and body composition indicators (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) were also assessed. A progressive (p<0.01) increase in maximum mean power values (e.g., 3.8±0.3 and 4.5±0.4 watts/kg in early and late season, respectively, for 60-minute efforts) and on 8-minute time trial performance (i.e., 5.3±0.3 and 5.6±0.4 watts/kg, respectively) was observed through the season. Yet, more "traditional" endurance indicators (i.e., ventilatory threshold, respiratory compensation point, or maximum oxygen uptake) seemed to show a ceiling effect beyond the mid-season. In addition, neither peak power output, body composition, nor muscle strength indicators followed a similar pattern to the aforementioned field-based indicators. In summary, in Junior cyclists field-based indicators seem more sensitive to monitor endurance cyclists' changes in actual fitness and performance capacity than more "traditional" laboratory-based markers in Junior cyclists.

Comparative analysis of endurance, strength and body composition indicators in professional, under-23 and junior cyclists

Purpose: To compare endurance, strength and body composition indicators between cyclists of three different competition age categories.

Methods: Fifty-one male road cyclists classified as either junior (n = 13, age 16.4 ± 0.5 years), under-23 [(U23), n = 24, 19.2 ± 1.3 years] or professional (n = 14, 26.1 ± 4.8 years) were studied. Endurance (assessed through a maximal incremental test and an 8-minute time-trial), strength/power (assessed through incremental loading tests for the squat, lunge and hip thrust exercises) and body composition (assessed through dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) were determined on three different testing sessions.

Results: U23 and, particularly professional, cyclists attained significantly (p < 0.05) higher values than juniors for most of the analyzed endurance indicators [time-trial performance, maximum oxygen uptake (VO_2max), peak power output (PPO), respiratory compensation point (RCP), and ventilatory threshold (VT)]. Significant differences (p < 0.05) between U23 and professionals were also found for time-trial performance, PPO and VT, but not for other markers such as VO_2max or RCP. Professional cyclists also showed significantly (p < 0.05) lower relative fat mass and higher muscle mass levels than U23 and, particularly, juniors. No consistent differences between age categories were found for muscle strength/power indicators.

Conclusion: Endurance (particularly time-trial performance, PPO and VT) and body composition (fat and muscle mass) appear as factors that best differentiate between cyclists of different age categories, whereas no consistent differences are found for muscle strength/power. These findings might help in performance prediction and/or talent identification and may aid in guiding coaches in the design of training programs focused on improving those variables that appear more determinant.

Internal Validity in Resistance Training Research: A Systematic Review

Ensuring internal validity is the key procedure when planning the study design. Numerous systematic reviews have demonstrated that considerations for internal validity do not receive adequate attention in the primary research in sport sciences. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to review methodological procedures in current literature where the effects of resistance training on strength, speed, and endurance performance in athletes were analyzed. A computer-based literature searches of SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Medline, and Web of Science was conducted. The internal validity of individual studies was assessed using the PEDro scale. Peer-reviewed studies were accepted only if they met all the following eligibility criteria: (a) healthy male and female athletes between the ages of 18-65 years; (b) training program based on resistance exercises; (c) training program lasted for at least 4 weeks or 12 training sessions, with at least two sessions per week; (d) the study reported maximum strength, speed, or endurance outcomes; and (e) systematic reviews, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies were excluded. Of the 6,516 articles identified, 133 studies were selected for rating by the PEDro scale. Sixty-eight percent of the included studies used random allocation to groups, but only one reported concealed allocation. Baseline data are presented in almost 69% of the studies. Thirty-eight percent of studies demonstrated adequate follow-up of participants. The plan to follow the intention-to-treat or stating that all participants received training intervention or control conditions as allocated were reported in only 1.5% of studies. The procedure of blinding of assessors was also satisfied in only 1.5% of the studies. The current study highlights the gaps in designing and reporting research in the field of strength and conditioning. Randomization, blinding of assessors, reporting of attrition, and intention-to-treat analysis should be more fully addressed to reduce threats to internal validity in primary research.

The Optimum Power Load: A Simple and Powerful Tool for Testing and Training

PURPOSE

The optimal power load is defined as the load that maximizes power output in a given exercise. This load can be determined through the use of various instruments, under different testing protocols. Specifically, the "optimum power load" (OPL) is derived from the load-velocity relationship, using only bar force and bar velocity in the power computation. The OPL is easily assessed using a simple incremental testing protocol, based on relative percentages of body mass. To date, several studies have examined the associations between the OPL and different sport-specific measures, as well as its acute and chronic effects on athletic performance. The aim of this brief review is to present and summarize the current evidence regarding the OPL, highlighting the main lines of research on this topic and discussing the potential applications of this novel approach for testing and training.

CONCLUSIONS

The validity and simplicity of OPL-based schemes provide strong support for their use as an alternative to more traditional strength-power training strategies. The OPL method can be effectively used by coaches and sport scientists in different sports and populations, with different purposes and configurations.

Traditional Versus Velocity-Based Resistance Training in Competitive Female Cyclists: A Randomized Controlled Trial

We assessed the effects of a short-term velocity-based resistance training (VBRT, where exercise intensity is individualized based on the loads and repetitions that maximize power output) program compared with traditional resistance training (TRT, where the same number of repetitions and relative load are used for every individual) on body composition, muscle strength/power, and endurance performance in competitive female cyclists. Seventeen participants were randomly assigned to 6 weeks (two sessions/week) of TRT (n = 8) or VBRT (n = 9), during which they maintained their usual endurance program. Both interventions included squat, hip thrust, and split squat exercises. Training loads were continuously registered, and outcomes were measures of muscle strength/power, body composition, and endurance performance (incremental test and 8-min time trial). No differences between TRT and VBRT groups were found for overall internal training loads during resistance training or cycling sessions (p > 0.05). Both interventions led to significant improvements in all strength/power-related outcomes, but VBRT induced greater improvements than TRT in maximum muscle strength and power as assessed with the hip thrust exercise (p < 0.05 for the group by time interaction effect). However, no significant group by time interaction effect was found for body composition or endurance performance-related outcomes. In conclusion, the addition of a short-term intervention of VBRT or TRT to the usual training regimen of competitive female cyclists improves muscle strength/power, albeit VBRT might induce superior gains on maximum strength/power for the hip thrust exercise.