The effect of environmental conditions on performance in timed cycling events

Air temperature, pressure and humidity are environmental factors that affect air density and therefore the relationship between a cyclist’s power output and their velocity. These environmental factors are changeable and are routinely quite different at elite cycling competitions conducted around the world, which means that they have a variable effect on performance in timed events. The present work describes a method of calculating the effect of these environmental factors on timed cycling events and illustrates the magnitude and significance of these effects in a case study. Formulas are provided to allow the calculation of the effect of environmental conditions on performance in a time trial cycling event. The effect of environmental factors on time trial performance can be in the order of 1.5%, which is significant given that the margins between ranked performances is often less than this. Environmental factors may enhance or hinder performance depending upon the conditions and the comparison conditions. To permit the fair comparison of performances conducted in different environmental conditions, it is recommended that performance times are corrected to the time that would be achieved in standard environmental conditions, such as 20 oC, 760 mmHg (1013.25 hPa) and 50% RH.

Influence of pacing on reliability of middle-distance cycling performance

The purpose of the present study was to examine the reliability of middle distance cycling time trials using fast-, even-, and slow-starts. Eighteen endurance-trained male cyclists [mean ± standard deviation; VO2peak 63.1 ± 6.1 mL⋅kg-1⋅min-1] performed nine cycling time trials where the total external work (96.5 ± 11.2 kJ) was identical to the better of two, 5-minute habituation time trials. Power output during the first quarter of the time-trials (24.1 ± 2.8 kJ) was fixed to induce fast-, even- or slow-starting strategies (60, 75 and 90 s, respectively). In consecutive sessions, participants performed three trials of each pacing condition although the order of these pacing conditions was counterbalanced. Average power output and performance time were unaffected by trial number in the fast- (P = 0.60), even- (P = 0.18) and slow-start (P = 0.53) trials. In all three pacing conditions, average power output was highly reliable and similar between trial 1 to 2 and trial 2 to 3 in fast- (standard error of measurement; SEM=8.3 and 8.2W), even (coefficient of variation; CV=2.8 and 2.4%) and slow-start (CV=2.4 and 1.5%) trials. In conclusion, the reproducibility of 5-min cycling time trials is unaffected by starting strategy and is acceptable following two selfpaced habituation trials. Research examining the influence of pacing strategies may therefore be conducted without the need for familiarisation trials using each individual pacing condition.