The Effect of Variable Gradients on Pacing in Cycling Time-Trials

Abstract

It has been reported that performance in cycling time-trials is enhanced when power is varied in response to gradient although such a mechanical pacing strategy has never been confirmed experimentally in the field. The aim of this study was, therefore, to assess the efficacy of mechanical pacing by comparing a constant power strategy of 255 W with a variable power strategy that averaged to 255 W over an undulating time-trial course. 20 experienced cyclists completed 4 trials over a 4 km course with 2 trials at an average constant power of 253 W and 2 trials where power was varied in response to gradient and averaged 260 W. Time normalised to 255 W was 411±31.1 s for the constant power output trials and 399±29.5 s for the variable power output trials. The variable power output strategy therefore reduced completion time by 12±8 s (2.9%) which was significant (p<0.001). Participants experienced difficulty in applying a constant power strategy over an undulating course which acted to reduce their time gain. It is concluded that a variable power strategy can improve cycling performance in a field time-trial where the gradient is not constant.

Key words

pacing - modeling - time-trial - cycling

References

• 1 Atkinson G, Brunskill A. Pacing strategies during a cycling time trial with simulated headwinds and tailwinds.  Ergonomics. 2000;  43 1449-1460
• 2 Atkinson G, Davison R, Jeukendrup A, Passfield L. Science and cycling: current knowledge and future directions for research.  J Sports Sci. 2003;  21 767-787
• 3 Atkinson G, Peacock O, Passfield L. Variable versus constant power strategies during cycling time-trials: prediction of time savings using an up-to-date mathematical model.  J Sports Sci. 2007;  25 1001-1009
• 4 Atkinson G, Peacock O, Law M. Acceptability of power variation during a simulated hilly time trial.  Int J Sports Med. 2007;  28 157-163
• 5 Bertucci W, Duc S, Villerius V, Pernin JN, Grappe F. Validity and reliability of the PowerTap mobile cycling powermeter when compared with the SRM Device.  Int J Sports Med. 2005;  26 868-873
• 6 Chaffin ME, Berg K, Zuniga J, Hanumanthu VS. Pacing pattern in a 30-minute maximal cycling test.  J Strength Cond Res. 2008;  22 2011-2017
• 7 Gordon S. Optimising distribution of power during a cycling time trial.  Sports Eng. 2005;  8 81-90
• 8 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. International Journal of Sports Medicine – Ethical Standards in Sport and Exercise Science Research.  Int J Sports Med. 2009;  30 701-702
• 9 Landau S, Everitt B. A Handbook of Statistical Analysis Using SPSS. London: Chapman & Hall; 2004
• 10 Lander PJ, Butterley RJ, Edwards AM. Self-paced exercise is less physically challenging than enforced constant pace exercise of the same intensity: influence of complex central metabolic control.  Br J Sports Med. 2009;  43 789-795
• 11 Liedl MA, Swain DP, Branch JD. Physiological effects of constant versus variable power during endurance cycling.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999;  31 1472-1477
• 12 Martin JC, Milliken DL, Cobb JE, McFadden KL, Coggan AR. Validation of a mathematical model for road cycling power.  J Appl Biomech. 1998;  14 276-291
• 13 Palmer GS, Noakes TD, Hawley JA. Effects of steady-state versus stochastic exercise on subsequent cycling performance.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1997;  29 684-687
• 14 Paton CD, Hopkins WG. Ergometer error and biological variation in power output in a performance test with three cycle ergometers.  Int J Sports Med. 2006;  27 444-447
• 15 Swain DP. A model for optimizing cycling performance by varying power on hills and in wind.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1997;  29 1104-1108
• 16 UK National 10 Time Trial Results . Available at http://www.rttc.org.uk [Accessed 21st December 2009]

Correspondence