The effect of time trial cycling position on physiological and aerodynamic variables

Making History in 1 h: How Sex, Aging, Technology, and Elevation Affect the Cycling Hour Record

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article was to analyze more than a century of cycling hour records (CHR) to examine the effects of sex, age, and altitude on cycling performance. Our hypotheses were that men's performance (distance) would exceed those of women by more than 10% but would decline at similar rates with aging and that altitude would have a small benefit, which might reach a maximum.

METHODS

Data were cultivated from the Facebook World Hour Record Discussion Group's crowd-sourced database of more than 600-known-hour records and verified through extensive online research and/or personal communication. Regression and statistical modeling were produced using STATA v15.0. R2 values were used to ascertain model quality, with four distinct models being produced for comparisons. Alpha was set at 0.05 significance for all tests.

RESULTS

R2 values ranged from 65% to 74.9%. Women's distances were 10.8% shorter ( P < 0.001) than those of men, but the difference was narrower than either the historical elite women's difference of 14.2% or the 2022 record difference of 13.3%. Age-related decline modeling indicates performance declines significantly past age 40 yr at a rate of 1.08% per year. Altitude had a significant ( P < 0.001) marginal improvement up to 1000 m before declining. The marginal benefits of altitude were small, but this is consistent with the finding benefits reach a maximum at a moderate altitude with "benefits" becoming ambiguous starting at ~1000 m. Technological advancement was estimated to be a small but significant ( P < 0.001) improvement of ~0.18% per year.

CONCLUSIONS

Across decades of CHR data in well-trained endurance cyclists, men are only ~11% faster, and this difference remains stable until at least age 80 yr. CHR attempts greater than 500 m likely offer at best a small advantage. Despite small year-on-year improvements, the CHR has likely improved more than 10 km because of technological advancements.

The relationship between pedal force application technique and the ability to perform supramaximal pedaling cadences

This study aimed to examine the relationship between the pedal force application technique under a specific competitive condition and the ability to perform steady-state pedaling at a supramaximal cadence during a special pedaling test. A total of 15 competitive male cyclists and 13 active, healthy men (novice cyclists, hereafter, novices) performed the pedaling technique test. The test imitated a road cycling competition condition (80% VO2 peak and a cadence of 90 rpm). Additionally, they performed a supramaximal cadence test that evaluated the ability to perform steady-state pedaling for an ultra-high cadence (range of 160–220 rpm) of 30 s stably with a 0.1 kgf. For the pedaling technique test, kinetic data were obtained by the pedal-shaped force platform at 1,000 Hz, and the pedaling technique was determined by the index of force effectiveness (IFE). For the supramaximal cadence test, kinematic data were obtained using a motion capture system at 200 Hz. The supramaximal pedaling cadence (C_max) was determined by measuring exercise time and targeted pedaling cadence. The IFE was 48.0 ± 9.7% in cyclists and 32.0 ± 5.9% in novices. The C_max was 215.5 ± 8.8 rpm in cyclists and 192.2 ± 13.0 rpm in novices. These values were significantly higher for cyclists than for novices. C_max was moderately correlated with IFE (r = 0.64). No significant correlation was observed between C_max and IFE for cyclists only; in contrast, a moderate correlation was observed between these parameters for novices only (r = 0.67). In conclusion, the pedal force application technique under a specific competitive condition is related to the ability to perform steady-state pedaling for supramaximal cadence during the test. Therefore, C_max may be able to explain pedal force application techniques without the need for expensive devices for novices.

Using Field Based Data to Model Sprint Track Cycling Performance

Cycling performance models are used to study rider and sport characteristics to better understand performance determinants and optimise competition outcomes. Performance requirements cover the demands of competition a cyclist may encounter, whilst rider attributes are physical, technical and psychological characteristics contributing to performance. Several current models of endurance-cycling enhance understanding of performance in road cycling and track endurance, relying on a supply and demand perspective. However, they have yet to be developed for sprint-cycling, with current athlete preparation, instead relying on measures of peak-power, speed and strength to assess performance and guide training. Peak-power models do not adequately explain the demands of actual competition in events over 15-60 s, let alone, in World-Championship sprint cycling events comprising several rounds to medal finals. Whilst there are no descriptive studies of track-sprint cycling events, we present data from physiological interventions using track cycling and repeated sprint exercise research in multiple sports, to elucidate the demands of performance requiring several maximal sprints over a competition. This review will show physiological and power meter data, illustrating the role of all energy pathways in sprint performance. This understanding highlights the need to focus on the capacity required for a given race and over an event, and therefore the recovery needed for each subsequent race, within and between races, and how optimal pacing can be used to enhance performance. We propose a shift in sprint-cyclist preparation away from training just for peak power, to a more comprehensive model of the actual event demands.

The Effect of Upper-Body Positioning on the Aerodynamic–Physiological Economy of Time-Trial Cycling

Purpose: Cycling time trials (TTs) are characterized by riders’ adopting aerodynamic positions to lessen the impact of aerodynamic drag on velocity. The optimal performance requirements for TTs likely exist on a continuum of rider aerodynamics versus physiological optimization, yet there is little empirical evidence to inform riders and coaches. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between aerodynamic optimization, energy expenditure, heat production, and performance. Methods: Eleven trained cyclists completed 5 submaximal exercise tests followed by a TT. Trials were completed at hip angles of 12° (more horizontal), 16°, 20°, 24° (more vertical), and their self-selected control position. Results: The largest decrease in power output at anaerobic threshold compared with control occurred at 12° (−16 [20] W, P = .03; effect size [ES] = 0.8). There was a linear relationship between upper-body position and heat production (R2 = .414, P = .04) but no change in mean body temperature, suggesting that, as upper-body position and hip angle increase, convective and evaporative cooling also rise. The highest aerodynamic–physiological economy occurred at 12° (384 [53] W·CdA−1·L−1·min−1, ES = 0.4), and the lowest occurred at 24° (338 [28] W·CdA−1·L−1·min−1, ES = 0.7), versus control (367 [41] W·CdA−1·L−1·min−1). Conclusion: These data suggest that the physiological cost of reducing hip angle is outweighed by the aerodynamic benefit and that riders should favor aerodynamic optimization for shorter TT events. The impact on thermoregulation and performance in the field requires further investigation.

Selection of Posture for Time-Trial Cycling Events

Cyclists usually define their posture according to performance and comfort requirements. However, when modifying their posture, cyclists experience a trade-off between these requirements. In this research, an optimization methodology is developed to select the posture of cyclists giving the best compromise between performance and comfort. Performance was defined as the race time estimated from the power delivery capacity and resistive forces. Comfort was characterized using pressure and vibration indices. The optimization methodology was implemented to select the aerobars’ height for five cyclists riding on 20-km time-trial races with different wind speed and road grade conditions. The results showed that the reduction of the aerobars’ height improved the drag area (−10.7% ± 3.1%) and deteriorated the power delivery capacity (−9.5% ± 5.4%), pressure on the saddle (+16.5% ± 11.5%), and vibrations on the saddle (+6.5% ± 4.0%) for all the tested cyclists. It was observed that the vibrations on the saddle imposed the greatest constraint for the cyclists, limiting the feasible exposure time and, in some cases, modifying the result obtained if the posture was selected considering only performance. It was concluded that optimal posture selection should be performed specifically for each cyclist and race condition due to the dependence of the results on these factors.

Estimation of an Elite Road Cyclist Performance in Different Positions Based on Numerical Simulations and Analytical Procedures

The aim of this study was to use numerical simulations and analytical procedures to compare a cyclist's performance in three different cycling positions. An elite level road cyclist competing at a national level was recruited for this research. The bicycle was 7 kg and the cyclist 55 kg. A 3D scan was taken of the subject on the competition bicycle, wearing race gear and helmet in the upright position, in the handlebar drops (dropped position) and leaning on the elbows (elbows position). Numerical simulations by computer fluid dynamics in Fluent CFD code assessed the coefficient of drag at 11.11 m/s. Following that, a set of assumptions were employed to assess cycling performance from 1 to 22 m/s. Drag values ranged between 0.16 and 99.51 N across the different speeds and positions. The cyclist mechanical power in the elbows position differed from the upright position between 0 and 23% and from the dropped position from 0 to 21%. The cyclist's energy cost in the upright position differed 2 to 16% in comparison to the elbows position and the elbows position had less 2 to 14% energy cost in comparison to the dropped position. The estimated time of arrival was computed for a 220,000 m distance and it varied between 7,715.03 s (2 h:8 min:24 s) and 220,000 s (61 h:6 min:40 s) across the different speeds and positions. In the elbows position, is expected that a cyclist may improve the winning time up to 23% in comparison to he upright and dropped position across the studied speeds.

Reducing Aerodynamic Drag by Adopting a Novel Road-Cycling Sprint Position

Purpose: To assess the influence of seated, standing, and forward-standing cycling sprint positions on aerodynamic drag (CdA) and the reproducibility of a field test of CdA calculated in these different positions. Methods: A total of 11 recreational male road cyclists rode 250 m in 2 directions at around 25, 32, and 40 km·h−1 and in each of the 3 positions, resulting in a total of 18 efforts per participant. Riding velocity, power output, wind direction and velocity, road gradient, temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure were measured and used to calculate CdA using regression analysis. Results: A main effect of position showed that the average CdA of the 2 d was lower for the forward-standing position (0.295 [0.059]) compared with both the seated (0.363 [0.071], P = .018) and standing positions (0.372 [0.077], P = .037). Seated and standing positions did not differ from each other. Although no significant difference was observed in CdA between the 2 test days, a poor between-days reliability was observed. Conclusion: A novel forward-standing cycling sprint position resulted in 23% and 26% reductions in CdA compared with a seated and standing position, respectively. This decrease in CdA could potentially result in an important increase in cycling sprint velocity of 3.9–4.9 km·h−1, although these results should be interpreted with caution because poor reliability of CdA was observed between days.

Considerations on the Assessment and Use of Cycling Performance Metrics and their Integration in the Athlete's Biological Passport

Over the past few decades the possibility to capture real-time data from road cyclists has drastically improved. Given the increasing pressure for improved transparency and openness, there has been an increase in publication of cyclists' physiological and performance data. Recently, it has been suggested that the use of such performance biometrics may be used to strengthen the sensitivity and applicability of the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) and aid in the fight against doping. This is an interesting concept which has merit, although there are several important factors that need to be considered. These factors include accuracy of the data collected and validity (and reliability) of the subsequent performance modeling. In order to guarantee high quality standards, the implementation of well-structured Quality-Systems within sporting organizations should be considered, and external certifications may be required. Various modeling techniques have been developed, many of which are based on fundamental intensity/time relationships. These models have increased our understanding of performance but are currently limited in their application, for example due to the largely unaccounted effects of environmental factors such as, heat and altitude. In conclusion, in order to use power data as a performance biometric to be integrated in the biological passport, a number of actions must be taken to ensure accuracy of the data and better understand road cycling performance in the field. This article aims to outline considerations in the quantification of cycling performance, also presenting an alternative method (i.e., monitoring race results) to allow for determination of unusual performance improvements.

Positive Pacing Strategies Are Utilized by Elite Male and Female Para-cyclists in Short Time Trials in the Velodrome

In para-cycling, competitors are classed based on functional impairment resulting in cyclists with neurological and locomotor impairments competing against each other. In Paralympic competition, classes are combined by using a factoring adjustment to race times to produce the overall medallists. Pacing in short-duration track cycling events is proposed to utilize an “all-out” strategy in able-bodied competition. However, pacing in para-cycling may vary depending on the level of impairment. Analysis of the pacing strategies employed by different classification groups may offer scope for optimal performance; therefore, this study investigated the pacing strategy adopted during the 1-km time trial (TT) and 500-m TT in elite C1 to C3 para-cyclists and able-bodied cyclists. Total times and intermediate split times (125-m intervals; measured to 0.001 s) were obtained from the C1-C3 men's 1-km TT (n = 28) and women's 500-m TT (n = 9) from the 2012 Paralympic Games and the men's 1-km TT (n = 19) and women's 500-m TT (n = 12) from the 2013 UCI World Track Championships from publically available video. Split times were expressed as actual time, factored time (for the para-cyclists) and as a percentage of total time. A two-way analysis of variance was used to investigate differences in split times between the different classifications and the able-bodied cyclists in the men's 1-km TT and between the para-cyclists and able-bodied cyclists in the women's 500-m TT. The importance of position at the first split was investigated with Kendall's Tau-b correlation. The first 125-m split time was the slowest for all cyclists, representing the acceleration phase from a standing start. C2 cyclists were slowest at this 125-m split, probably due to a combination of remaining seated in this acceleration phase and a high proportion of cyclists in this group being trans-femoral amputees. Not all cyclists used aero-bars, preferring to use drop, flat or bullhorn handlebars. Split times increased in the later stages of the race, demonstrating a positive pacing strategy. In the shorter women's 500-m TT, rank at the first split was more strongly correlated with final position than in the longer men's 1-km TT. In conclusion, a positive pacing strategy was adopted by the different para-cycling classes.

Effect of different aerodynamic time trial cycling positions on muscle activation and crank torque

To reduce air resistance, time trial cyclists and triathletes lower their torso angle. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of lowering time trial torso angle positions on muscle activation patterns and crank torque coordination. It was hypothesized that small torso angles yield a forward shift of the muscle activation timing and crank torque. Twenty-one trained cyclists performed three exercise bouts at 70% maximal aerobic power in a time trial position at three different torso angles (0°, 8°, and 16°) at a fixed cadence of 85 rpm. Measurements included surface electromyography, crank torques and gas exchange. A significant increase in crank torque range and forward shift in peak torque timing was found at smaller torso angles. This relates closely with the later onset and duration of the muscle activation found in the gluteus maximus muscle. Torso angle effects were only observed in proximal monoarticular muscles. Moreover, all measured physiological variables (oxygen consumption, breathing frequency, minute ventilation) were significantly increased with lowering torso angle and hence decreased the gross efficiency. The findings provide support for the notion that at a cycling intensity of 70% maximal aerobic power, the aerodynamic gains outweigh the physiological/biomechanical disadvantages in trained cyclists.