Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJobson, Simon A.
dc.contributor.authorNevill, Alan M.
dc.contributor.authorPalmer, G.S.
dc.contributor.authorJeukendrup, A.E.
dc.contributor.authorDoherty, Michael
dc.contributor.authorAtkinson, Greg
dc.date.accessioned2007-01-25T16:21:46Z
dc.date.available2007-01-25T16:21:46Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.date.submitted2007-01-25
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Sports Sciences, 25(1): 3-9
dc.identifier.issn0264-0414
dc.identifier.pmid17127577
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/02640410500520526
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/7757
dc.descriptionMetadata plus link
dc.description.abstractPrevious researchers have identified significant differences between laboratory and road cycling performances. To establish the ecological validity of laboratory time-trial cycling performances, the causes of such differences should be understood. Hence, the purpose of the present study was to quantify differences between laboratory- and road-based time-trial cycling and to establish to what extent body size [mass (m) and height (h)] may help to explain such differences. Twenty-three male competitive, but non-elite, cyclists completed two 25 mile time-trials, one in the laboratory using an air-braked ergometer (Kingcycle) and the other outdoors on a local road course over relatively flat terrain. Although laboratory speed was a reasonably strong predictor of road speed (R2=69.3%), a significant 4% difference (P < 0.001) in cycling speed was identified (laboratory vs. road speed: 40.4 +/- 3.02 vs. 38.7 +/- 3.55 km . h-1; mean +/- s). When linear regression was used to predict these differences (Diff) in cycling speeds, the following equation was obtained: Diff (km . h-1)=24.9 - 0.0969 . m - 10.7 . h, R2=52.1% and the standard deviation of residuals about the fitted regression line=1.428 (km . h-1). The difference between road and laboratory cycling speeds (km . h-1) was found to be minimal for small individuals (mass=65 kg and height=1.738 m) but larger riders would appear to benefit from the fixed resistance in the laboratory compared with the progressively increasing drag due to increased body size that would be experienced in the field. This difference was found to be proportional to the cyclists' body surface area that we speculate might be associated with the cyclists' frontal surface area.
dc.format.extent130952 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all?content=10.1080/02640410500520526
dc.subjectLinear regression
dc.subjectBody mass
dc.subjectHeight
dc.subjectBody surface area
dc.subjectAllometric modelling
dc.titleThe ecological validity of laboratory cycling: Does body size explain the difference between laboratory- and field-based cycling performance?
dc.typeJournal article
dc.format.digYES
html.description.abstractPrevious researchers have identified significant differences between laboratory and road cycling performances. To establish the ecological validity of laboratory time-trial cycling performances, the causes of such differences should be understood. Hence, the purpose of the present study was to quantify differences between laboratory- and road-based time-trial cycling and to establish to what extent body size [mass (m) and height (h)] may help to explain such differences. Twenty-three male competitive, but non-elite, cyclists completed two 25 mile time-trials, one in the laboratory using an air-braked ergometer (Kingcycle) and the other outdoors on a local road course over relatively flat terrain. Although laboratory speed was a reasonably strong predictor of road speed (R2=69.3%), a significant 4% difference (P < 0.001) in cycling speed was identified (laboratory vs. road speed: 40.4 +/- 3.02 vs. 38.7 +/- 3.55 km . h-1; mean +/- s). When linear regression was used to predict these differences (Diff) in cycling speeds, the following equation was obtained: Diff (km . h-1)=24.9 - 0.0969 . m - 10.7 . h, R2=52.1% and the standard deviation of residuals about the fitted regression line=1.428 (km . h-1). The difference between road and laboratory cycling speeds (km . h-1) was found to be minimal for small individuals (mass=65 kg and height=1.738 m) but larger riders would appear to benefit from the fixed resistance in the laboratory compared with the progressively increasing drag due to increased body size that would be experienced in the field. This difference was found to be proportional to the cyclists' body surface area that we speculate might be associated with the cyclists' frontal surface area.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record