BackgroundCoaches continually seek new ways of doing things and also refine existing techniques to improve sporting performance. Coaches are currently experimenting using ischaemic preconditioning (IPC) over consecutive days in the hope of improving competitive performances.AimsFirst, to quantify the physiological impact of 1 week of IPC on simulated Keirin cycling performance. Second, to investigate if biochemical stress markers are affected over the treatment period.MethodsUsing a randomised, sham-controlled design, 18 active adults undertook seven consecutive days of IPC treatment (4×5 min occlusion/reperfusion) applied to each leg at either 220 mm Hg (treatment, n=9) or 20 mm Hg (sham, n=9). Urinary measures of inflammation, oxidative stress and indirect nitric oxide synthesis were undertaken daily. A simulated Keirin cycling competition (4×30 s Wingate tests) was performed on day 10, with baseline and postintervention cycling VO2max (days 1, 11 and 18) and 30 s Wingate tests (day 2) undertaken for comparison.ResultsThe treatment group had enhanced mean cycling power (3.4%), while neopterin and biopterin in conjunction with total neopterin were significantly lower (p<0.05) and total biopterin significantly greater (p<0.05) during the simulated Keirin. Aerobic fitness measures significantly improved from baseline to postintervention (VO2peak: 12.8% ↑, maximal aerobic power: 18.5% ↑).ConclusionsSeven consecutive days of IPC improved aerobic and anaerobic capacity measures, with modulations in oxidative stress, immune system activation and nitric oxide/catecholamine synthesis.

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.

Ischemic preconditioning (IP) has a small benefit on exercise performance, but differences in the IP method, performance tasks and exercise modality have made providing practical coach guidelines difficult. We investigated the performance-enhancing effects of IP on cyclists by comparing the frequency of IP application over a 7-day period. Using a randomized, sham-controlled, single-blinded experiment, 24 competitive age-group track cyclists (38±12 years) were assigned to one of three twice-daily (sham: 20 and 20 mmHg; once-a-day: 20 and 220 mmHg; twice-a-day: 220 and 220 mmHg) IP leg protocols (4 × 5 min ischemia/5 min reperfusion alternating between legs) over seven consecutive days. A 4000-m cycling-ergometer time trial was completed before, immediately following and one week after the protocols. Neither mean power, nor 4000-m performance time nor VO 2 were significantly affected by either of the IP protocols compared to the sham at any time point following treatment. Repeated application of IP over seven days did not enhance the performance of trained cyclists in a 4000-m laboratory time trial. More research is required to understand how changes to methodological variables can improve the chances of IP successfully enhancing athlete performance.

No abstract

(1) Background: This report examines the unique demands of off-road triathlon (XT) by presenting physiological, field, and race data from a national champion off-road triathlete using several years of laboratory and field data to detail training and race intensity. (2) Methods: Laboratory and field data were collected when the athlete was at near peak fitness and included oxygen consumption (VO2), heart rate (HR), power output (W), and blood lactate (BLC) during cycling and running, while HR, cycling W, and running metrics were obtained from training and race data files over a period of seven years. Intensity was described using % HR max zones (Z) 1 &amp;lt; 75%, 2 = 75 - 87%, and Zone 3 &amp;gt; 87%, and W. An ordinary least squares analysis was used to model differences between event types. (3) Results: Weather conditions were not different across events. XT events had twice the elevation change (p&amp;lt;0.01) and two-three times greater W&rsquo; (p&amp;lt; 0.001) than road triathlon (ROAD), but similar HR intensity profiles (max, avg, and zones); both events are predominately performed at &amp;gt; Z2 or higher intensity. Championship XT events were longer (p&amp;lt;0.01) , with higher kJ expenditure (p&amp;lt;0.001). OLS modelling suggested three variables were strongly related (R2 = 0.84; p &amp;lt; 0.0001) to cycling performance: event type (XT vs ROAD), total meters climbed, and total bike duration. Championship XT runs were slower than either regional (p&amp;lt;0.05) or ROAD (p&amp;lt;0.01) runs, but HR intensity profiles similar. OLS modelling indicates that slower running is linked to either greater total bike kJ expenditure (R2 = 0.57; p&amp;lt;0.001), or total meters gained (R2 = 0.52; p&amp;lt;0.001). Race simulation data support these findings but failed to produce meaningful differences in running. Conclusions: XT race demands are unique and mirror MTB and trail running demands. XT athletes must be mindful of developing anaerobic fitness, technical ability, and aerobic fitness, all of which contribute to off-road cycling economy. It is unclear whether XT cycling affects subsequent running performance different from ROAD cycling.