Aerobic and Anaerobic Power Distribution During Cross-Country Mountain Bike Racing

Current Perspectives of Cross-Country Mountain Biking: Physiological and Mechanical Aspects, Evolution of Bikes, Accidents and Injuries

Mountain biking (MTB) is a cycling modality performed on a variety of unpaved terrain. Although the cross-country Olympic race is the most popular cross-country (XC) format, other XC events have gained increased attention. XC-MTB has repeatedly modified its rules and race format. Moreover, bikes have been modified throughout the years in order to improve riding performance. Therefore, the aim of this review was to present the most relevant studies and discuss the main results on the XC-MTB. Limited evidence on the topic suggests that the XC-MTB events present a variation in exercise intensity, demanding cardiovascular fitness and high power output. Nonetheless, these responses and demands seem to change according to each event. The characteristics of the cyclists differ according to the performance level, suggesting that these parameters may be important to achieve superior performance in XC-MTB. Moreover, factors such as pacing and ability to perform technical sections of the circuit might influence general performance. Bicycles equipped with front and rear suspension (i.e., full suspension) and 29″ wheels have been shown to be effective on the XC circuit. Lastly, strategies such as protective equipment, bike fit, resistance training and accident prevention measures can reduce the severity and the number of injuries.

Correlation between economy/efficiency and mountain biking cross-country race performance

This study investigated the correlation between cycling economy (CE) and gross efficiency (GE) in Olympic cross-country mountain biking (XCO-MTB) race performance. Also was examined the correlation between CE, GE, and peak oxygen uptake (VO_2peak). Sixteen male XCO-MTB athletes (30.9 ± 5.2 years, 68.7 ± 5.6 kg, 175.0 ± 5.7 cm, and VO_2peak: 65.4 ± 4.9 mL·kg^-1 min^-1) completed two experimental sessions. On the first, anthropometric assessments and a maximal incremental test were performed. The maximal incremental test was performed in the cycle ergometer to determine VO_2peak, CE, and GE. A week later, an XCO-MTB race was performed in the second visit, where the official race time was used as a performance indicator. An inverse, significant moderate correlation was found between race time (8318.3 ± 459.0 s) and both CE (r = -0.53; CI_95% = -0.84 to -0.10; p = 0.0008), and GE (r = -0.67; CI_95% = -0.89 to -0.22; p = 0.0001). However, the moderate correlation between CE and race time showed low power. No significant correlation was found between VO_2peak and either CE (r = -0.45; CI_95% = -0.77-0.06; p = 0.08) or GE (r = -0.47; CI_95% = -0.78-0.04; p = 0.07). In conclusion, gross efficiency is an important component of XCO-MTB race performance. The VO_2peak was not related to CE and GE. The evaluation of GE may be a useful addition to the battery of physiological tests in mountain bikers.

Exercise Intensity and Pacing Pattern During a Cross-Country Olympic Mountain Bike Race

Objective: To examine the power profiles and pacing patterns in relation to critical power (CP) and maximal aerobic power (MAP) output during a cross-country Olympic (XCO) mountain bike race.

Methods: Five male and two female national competitive XCO cyclists completed a UCI Cat. 1 XCO race. The races were 19 km and 23 km and contained five (female) and six (male) laps, respectively. Power output (PO) during the race was measured with the cyclists’ personal power meters. On two laboratory tests using their own bikes and power meters, CP and work capacity above CP (W') were calculated using three time trials of 12, 7, and 3 min, while MAP was established based on a 3-step submaximal test and the maximal oxygen uptake from the 7-min time trial.

Results: Mean PO over the race duration (96 ± 7 min) corresponded to 76 ± 9% of CP and 63 ± 4% of MAP. 40 ± 8% of race time was spent with PO > CP, and the mean duration and magnitude of the bouts >CP was ~8 s and ~120% of CP. From the first to last lap, time >CP and accumulated W' per lap decreased with 9 ± 6% and 45 ± 17%, respectively. For single >CP bouts, mean magnitude and mean W' expended decreased by 25 ± 8% and 38 ± 15% from the first to the last lap, respectively. Number and duration of bouts did not change significantly between laps.

Conclusion: The highly variable pacing pattern in XCO implies the need for rapid changes in metabolic power output, as a result of numerous separate short-lived >CP actions which decrease in magnitude in later laps, but with little lap-to-lap variation in number and duration.