Heart rate profiles and energy cost of locomotion during cross-country skiing races

Mognoni, P.; Rossi, Giulio De; Gastaldelli, Franco; Canclini, Arrigo; Cotelli, F.

doi:10.1007/s004210100432

Cited by 37 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the development of ski skating several investigations have examined the physiological responses for both skating and classical skiing and further compared the relative economy of these techniques (e.g., Karvonen et al 1987Karvonen et al , 1989Saibene et al 1989;Hoffmann et al , 1998Mygind et al 1994;Mognoni et al 2001). Far fewer studies have done n=6 except for 3°where n=5.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Ski skating technique and physiological responses across slopes and speeds

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Appropriate technique choice may affect ski performance. V2 ski skating technique has in recent years become more widely applied on uphill terrain where V1 technique has typically been used. This investigation compared physiological responses of skiers using V1 and V2 techniques during uphill treadmill roller-skiing. Part 1: six skiers from B-level national ski teams participated in technique comparisons performed under six uphill conditions (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 degrees) with speeds selected so external work was approximately constant for each slope. The 12 trials of 5-min steady-state skating were randomly distributed across two test sessions of six trials each. Heart rate (HR), oxygen consumption (VO(2)), blood lactate concentration (La) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured. Part 2: 15 skiers from A-level and B-level national ski teams participated in V1-V2 technique comparison on constant slope (5 degrees) with five speeds ranging from 2.25 to 3.25 m s(-1). In two test sessions of V1 or V2 skating (randomly assigned for 2 days) similar characteristics as Part 1 were measured. Across all variables consistent responses were observed for both the experimental parts. As slope increased, V2 skating became increasingly costly compared to V1 skating. At constant slope across the range of speeds, V2 was more costly than V1 skating. This suggests that it may be disadvantageous for skiers to use V2 instead of V1 skating technique on moderate to steep uphill terrain. Doing so may result in elevated HR, La, and VO(2) compared to V1 skating at the same speed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Ski skating technique and physiological responses across slopes and speeds

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In association with superior performance on the uphill sections of a race (Bergh and Forsberg 2000;Andersson et al 2010;Sandbakk et al 2011), world-class skiers exhibit high capacities for delivery of aerobic energy (Ingjer 1991;Holmberg et al 2007). However, it is not known whether their higher rates of uphill work during competitions reflect solely a higher expenditure of energy (i.e., an elevated metabolic rate) (Mognoni et al 2001) or if they are able to obtain higher work rates at similar metabolic rates as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

The influence of incline and speed on work rate, gross efficiency and kinematics of roller ski skating

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During competitions, elite cross-country skiers produce higher external work rates on uphill than on flat terrain. However, it is not presently known whether this reflects solely higher energy expenditure. Furthermore, the kinematic factors associated with these higher rates of uphill work have not yet been examined. Therefore, in the present investigation the work rate and associated kinematic parameters at similar metabolic rates during roller ski skating on flat and uphill terrains have been compared. Seven elite male skiers performed six 5-min sub-maximal exercise bouts at the same low, moderate and high metabolic rates on 2 and 8% inclines, while roller skiing on a treadmill employing the G3 skating technique. The work rate was calculated as work against gravity and friction, whereas the energetic equivalent of VO(2) was taken as the metabolic rate. Gross efficiency was defined as work rate divided by metabolic rate. Kinematic parameters were analyzed in three dimensions. At the same metabolic rate, the work rate, cycle rate, work per cycle and relative duration of propulsive phases during a cycle of movement were all higher on the 8% than on the 2% incline at all speeds (all P < 0.05). At similar work rates, gross efficiency was greater on the 8% incline (P < 0.05). In conclusion, these elite skiers consistently demonstrated higher work rates on the 8% incline. To achieve the higher work rates on the steeper incline, these elite skiers employed higher cycle rates and performed more work per cycle, in association with a longer relative propulsive phase.

show abstract

“…However, some authors have reported no correlation between economy and performance for 'on-snow' cross-country skiing. For example, no relationship was found between energy cost and speed in skating (Hynynen et al, 2000;Mognoni et al, 2001) or the classical technique (McDougall et al, 1979). The reasons why a correlation between performance and ski economy was observed with the two-skate, one-skate and conventional techniques, but not the offset technique, are unclear.…”

Section: Relationship Between the Aerobic Energy Cost And Performancementioning

confidence: 84%

“…Therefore, friction drag may help to explain the differences in results between studies and may influence inter-individual differences in performance. In the present study, the between-subjects coefficient of variation was 9-11%, which is comparable to that for the energy cost of running (9.3%), swimming (9%) and as measured over a fiat ski-skating section of a crosscountry race (see Mognoni et al, 2001) . One could have expected greater variability between participants in the one-skate condition, since this technique is used more frequently by elite than recreational skiers and is assumed to require more technical skill and greater upper-body strength .…”

Section: Variability In Energy Costmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Little information is available about metabolic responses measured 'on snow' . It has generally been reported that skating techniques on flat terrain are more ( ~ 1 0-20%) economical than the diagonal stride or double pole techniques, except at low speeds and/or when friction drag is high (Saibene et al, 1989;Clifford, 1990, 1992;Hynynen et al, 2000;Mognoni et al, 2001). Using the classic technique, skiers of different standards were shown not to differ in energy cost (McDougall et al, 1979).…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Energy cost of different skating techniques in cross-country skiing

Millet¹,

Boissiere²,

Candau³

2003

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to compare the aerobic energy cost of four 'on-snow' skating techniques in cross-country skiing and to examine the relationships between performance and aerobic energy cost. Twelve male skiers from recreational to national standard performed four level skating trials of 6 min duration in random order, each at the same submaximal velocity but with a different skating technique: (1) 'offset' (V1), using a double asymmetrical and asynchronous pole plant as weight is transferred to one ski; (2) 'two-skate' (V2A), where the pole plant is symmetrical; (3) 'one-skate' (V2), where there is a pole plant as weight is transferred to each ski; and (4) 'conventional', without poles. Oxygen uptake (VO2), pulmonary ventilation, the respiratory exchange ratio and heart rate were measured using a K4(b2) portable gas analyser. The aerobic energy cost (VO2/mean speed) and heart rate were higher (P < 0.05) in the one-skate than in the offset condition. This may be explained by the greater and more efficient use of the upper body and the lower variation in centre of gravity velocity in the offset condition. The aerobic energy cost was 5-9% higher (P < 0.01) in the conventional than in the other techniques, probably because of the shorter duration of propulsive forces within a cycle in the conventional skating condition. Moreover, in ski skating, the mechanical efficiency (propulsive forces/total forces) was shown to be higher in the upper than in the lower limbs. The correlation coefficient between performance and aerobic energy cost was significant in the two-skate (r = 0.68, P = 0.02), one-skate (r = 0.72, P = 0.01) and conventional (r = 0.62, P = 0.04) conditions, but not in the offset condition (r = 0.50, P = 0.10). Our results stress the importance of the upper body component in cross-country skiing and that the aerobic energy cost discriminates between skiers of different standards.

show abstract

Heart rate profiles and energy cost of locomotion during cross-country skiing races

Cited by 37 publications

References 8 publications

Ski skating technique and physiological responses across slopes and speeds

Ski skating technique and physiological responses across slopes and speeds

The influence of incline and speed on work rate, gross efficiency and kinematics of roller ski skating

Energy cost of different skating techniques in cross-country skiing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About