Stationary roller versus velodrome for maximal cycling test: A comparison

1Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The present study aimed to compare the acute cardio-respiratory responses of elite cyclists to a maximal progressive exercise carried out in two different conditions: in a laboratory (using a braked roller) and in an uncovered velodrome. In both testing conditions, ten elite male cyclists (age, 22.3 ± 3.9 years) performed a maximal discontinuous progressive test of 6 minutes per level with 150 W of initial load and increasing 50 W at each level until exhaustion. The heart rate and the ventilation parameters were measured breath-by-breath using a portable metabolic cart gas analysis system with telemetry data transmission. In the first 4 levels of effort, no significant differences were found between the two test conditions regarding VO2, (p=0.193), heart rate (p=0.973) and pedaling cadence (p=0.116). Comparing the maximum values achieved by each athlete in both exercise conditions, significant differences were found for heart rate (p=0.008) and pedaling cadence (p=0.005) but not for VO2max and peak power. Each variable showed a strong correlation between both assessments (VO2, r=0.984, p=0,000; heart rate, r=0.944, p=0.005; pedaling cadence, r=0.900, p=0.014). The amount of variability explained by the linear regression model for both cardio-respiratory parameters also showed a good fit value close to one (VO2max, r2=0.968; heart rate, r2=0.892). Our results suggest that identical cycling protocols conducted in different testing conditions with the same bike leads to equivalent performance but significantly different pedaling cadence and heart rate responses. © 2014 Faculty of Education. University of Alicante.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Brito, J., Lopes, L., Conceição, A., Costa, A. M., & Louro, H. (2014). Stationary roller versus velodrome for maximal cycling test: A comparison. Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, 9(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.4100/jhse.2014.91.02

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free