Temporal Activity in Particular Segments and Transitions in The Olympic Triathlon

Abstract

The Olympic Triathlon is a combined endurance sport. It includes back-to-back swimming, cycling, running and the transition between events (T1 & T2). The aim of the current study was to analyse the possible relationship between the Lost Time T1 & T2 and overall performance. The results showed that the percentages of total time corresponding to each part of the race were: 16.2% for swimming, 0.74% for the swimming-cycling transition (T1), 53.07% for cycling, 0.47% for the cycling-running transition (T2) and 29.5% for running. The correlations between each part of the race and the final placing were: r=0.36 for swimming, r=0.25 for T1, r=0.62 for the cycling, r=0.33 for T2, and r=0.83 for the running. Also, values of r=0.34 & r=0.43 were obtained for Lost Time T1 and Lost Time T2, respectively. In conclusion, losing less time during T2 has been demonstrated to be related to obtaining a better final result.

Is the Bike Segment of Modern Olympic Triathlon More a Transition towards Running in Males than It Is in Females?

“…Depending on the individual athletes relative cycling and running ability [18], failure to enter said pack(s), and a subsequent increase in power output/effort during the bike leg in order to try to catch up to the front pack(s), may then negatively impact running performance. In accordance with the results of previous studies [6,17] we found no differences in bike splits within male different ranking groups. As regards to the women, only the first 16 athletes (G1 to G3) had similar bike splits confirming that even at this level females are divided in more groups, further apart, as compared to males.…”

“…They reported that the medalists swam significantly faster than the lower placed athletes (i.e., those who finished 4–10th and above 10th place). On the other hand, Cejuela et al, [17] when analyzing the top races from 2000–2008, observed a low correlation between swimming and overall performance. Therefore, it seems that at least for the best athletes (placing up to 16th overall in the event) swimming performance levelled off from the introduction of new WTS format, and that swimming performance does not discriminate between different performance levels at the top level of professional triathlon.…”

“…Similarly, Cejuela et al [17] studied nine top level male competitions from 2000–2008. Their analysis included the lost time in each transition—calculated as the time lag between the first triathlete who started cycling or running and the rest of the athletes who arrived in the transition area with the same pack.…”

Untitled

“…However, researchers have studied other aspects of transition, going beyond the mere space limits that are set by the rules. These issues are specified in representative studies including: quick transaction (Cejuela et al, 2008(Cejuela et al, , 2011(Cejuela et al, , 2013; the effects of drafting during swimming on subsequent cycling performance (Bentley et al, 2007;Ortega, 2013); physiological and biomechanical adaptations to the cycle to run transition (Taylor et al, 2011); strategy swimming pace (Delextrat et al, 2003;Commotto et al, 2011;Rivas Feal, 2011); effect of swimming intensity (Peeling et al, 2005); analysis of performance factors ; analysis of transition time (Cejuela et al, 2008); the lost time in T1 &/or T2 (Paton and Hopkins, 2005;Cejuela et al, 2011Cejuela et al, , 2013; change in neuromuscular control, running kinematics, muscle recruitment or motor coordination after cycling (Chapman et al, 2008;Chapman et al, 2009;Cala et al, 2009;Bonacci et al, 2010aBonacci et al, , 2010b Bonacci et al, 2011a;Bonacci et al, 2011b)… This study is focused only on the last part of T1. It is the moment in which, with every necessary thing for pedalling, the triathlete takes down his bike and moves through the box zone on foot (where all the bikes are hanging), next to the bike, taking it as fast as possible (normally running) with it at their side so as not to lose the group which could be formed, and can be more comfortable in the cyclic sector.…”

Untitled

“…The "open" concept, which has multiple interpretations, and all from different fields of expertise, is about what happens during the "transition", and has made for various studies including: quick transaction and analysis of transition time; the lost time in T1 & T2 (Cejuela et al, 2008(Cejuela et al, , 2011; the effects swimming intensity on subsequent cycling performance (Peeling et al, 2005;Bentley et al, 2007); effect of cycling intensity (Hausswirth et al, 2001;Bernard et al, 2007); physiological and biomechanical adaptations to the cycle to run transition (Sleivert and Rowlands, 1996;Hue et al, 1998;Diaz Molina et al, 2009;Daniel et al, 2011); strategy swimming pace (Chatard et al,1998;Delextrat et al, 2003;Commotto et al, 2011;Rivas Feal, 2011); analysis of performance factors in sprint distance ; competitive performance of elite olympic-distance triathletes (Paton and Hopkins, 2005); temporal activity in particular segments and transitions (Cejuela et al, 2013);change in neuromuscular control, running kinematics, muscle recruitment or motor coordination after cycling (Chapman et al, 2008;Chapman et al, 2009;Cala et al, 2009;Bonacci et al, 2010aBonacci et al, , 2010b Bonacci et al, 2011a;Bonacci et al, 2011b); rating of perceived exertion during cycling and subsequent running economy in triathletes (Bonacci et al, 2013) As seen, it seems that researchers address the T1 (or T2) as cardiorespiratory, physiological, metabolic, neuromuscular control problems, or a waste of time, and their influence on the final result, without considering that the simple act of how triathletes mount a bike can determine their end performance (loss of group). On one hand, it is a matter of skill, and on the other hand, choosing the appropriate way depending on the circumstances or the situation in the transition area and the judge's line.…”