To design an effective training programme, it is vital to
comprehend the physical demands and element pertaining to an athlete’s specific
sport, in this case a road sprint cyclist. An understanding of these demands
would place both coach and athlete in a better position to facilitate safe and
effective training (Menaspà, p 38. 2013), not only will this improve
performance but also reduce or prevent injury too. With many races set
specifically for road sprinters; “7 out
of ten 21 stages within Grand Tours” (Menaspà, p 35. 2013). Thus, the ability to sprint is an
important aspect and would place cyclist in better position in terms of
performance result. A research conducted on cyclists both under 23-year olds professional
and an inexperience non-professional competing internationally, shown that sprinters
with the ability produce peak power of 15.2 W.kg and an average power output of
12.9 W.kg in 14 seconds have every possibility to attain victory (Martin et al. 2007).

According to Lucia et al. (1998) cyclists of certain specialties have
comparable body features. Sprint cyclist and flat terrain cyclist were found to
have similar anthropometrics “usually
taller and heavier” (Lucia et al., 2001; Sallet et al. 2006). Yet,
significantly different to other specialist riders (Peinado
et al. 2011). Several studies have concluded that cyclist performance is
not only reliance to the physiological demands made, but also their morphology has
a great correlation to the effort made during forward movement, and to some
extend dictate a cyclist role within a team in competitions (Peinado et al. 2011).

Cyclists
often employ tactic to conserve energy approximately by 25% by positioning
themselves at the rear of a peloton prior to start of a sprint to mitigate
aerodynamic drag. Hence why, the ability to generate high speed swiftly is key
to narrowing a gap, breaking away or sprinting to finish (Mujika et al. p 284.
2016). However,
this tactic can be disadvantageous since the cyclist must increase speed in a
short span to pass the leading riders to emerge victorious (Martin
et al. p 15. 2007). Other variables to factor in too are bike
position; i.e. standing or seated (Menaspà, p 38. 2013).

 

Sprint cycling is classified as non-impact activity, but due to the high
repetitive actions cyclists are also susceptible to injuries such as anterior
knee pain and posterior leg pain (calf and hamstring) (Adams p 8. 2014). Studies has found cyclist
on average will pedal 5700 times per leg in an hour. As duration and intensity
increase biomechanical faults with be exposed. Poor ergonomic too will lead to
sprains and strains in joints and muscles respectively (Adams p 8. 2014). Muscle injuries do in
most cases lead to strength asymmetry (Rannama et al. 2015). It has been reported
that ankle plantar flexors activity in pedalling power is reduce with higher
Cadence of 120 rpm. However, there are studies that concluded bilateral
asymmetry of muscle strength were non-significant in other sport related
movements (Rannama et al. p 248. 2015).

Main
section (800-1000 words approx):Introduce the test (s) and rationalise your selection choice. Explain
what it measures and critically evaluate the choice against other tests where
appropriate. For example, would it be considered to be a gold standard test.
You might like to explore validity and reliability data.

Design in
the 1970s, the Wingate test,
sometimes called the Wingate anaerobic test, is a use to measure the strength, power, and endurance of a sportsperson.
It is conducted on a static bike, built exclusively to test anaerobic power in
a lab based setting. It has the facility to measure energy data, in form of
watts based on the cyclist maximal pedal effort for a given time (Ungvarsky, et al. (encyclopedia) 2016). The
30 Wingate test has been widely used to measure anaerobic capacity and has a
very strong correlation in short sports that required all-out efforts (Calbet et al. p 308. 1997). An athlete’s fitness status
will determine their anaerobic threshold. For example, Gastin et al. (1994) in
their observation noted that more time (60 seconds plus) was needed to determine
maximal oxygen deficit in a highly conditioned endurance and sprint sportsperson
(Calbet et al. p 308. 1997).

 

The
Wingate test offer specificity in terms of return to sport ergometer compare to
Cunningham speed test; which is a non-cycling based anaerobic assessment, at
high impact with steep gradient that places the foot in dorsiflexion. Therefore,
stretching (eccentrically) and extremely loading the calf muscles. Wingate, is
non-impact and less strenuous to the ankle plantar flexors; the production of power in cycling is ultimately reliance
on the kinetic chain muscles interactions; data has shown the knee generates
49% of the pedalling power, 32% at the hip and the ankle 9% (Martin et al. p 7. 2007). Despite the specificity,
Wingate test is only for anaerobic energy because it is an all-out sprint test.
Menaspà et
al. 2013 discussed high
qualities of aerobic and anaerobic capacity are paramount in sprint cycling. Any
alteration in speed or time would target different energy systems.

 

 

Reliability – researchers indicated that, during a 30-second Wingate
test, the energy contribution of the ATP-PC pathway is 28%, of the glycolytic
pathway is 56%, and of the aerobic pathway is only 16%.

Research has found the glycolytic (anaerobic) energy system

 

Another reason is that the resistance used by Maud and Shultz’ of 0.075 kp/kg
BM, although it was the original resistance suggested for the test by Ayalon et
al,’ was later shown to be too low to produce optimal PP and MP measurements.
The resistance of 0.085 kp/kg BM used in the current study elicited higher power
measurements.’^” In fact, an increase beyond the resistance level of the
current study has been shown to continue to increase PP but MP begins to
decrease, which provides some rationale for the use of 0.085 kp/kg BM.
Moreover, Maud and Shultz’^ did not report whether

Reference
values from the current study may be used by coaches and athletes to help
determine success in power sports and to monitor progress of anaerobic-training
programs for male athletes. Even though the WAnT has been the most used test of
anaerobic capacity, it does have limitations. It appears to be highly specific
in terms of the energy systems used for many athletic endeavours but lacks the
sport-specific muscle activation pattern of most sports, except for cycling and
possibly speed skating. Further research may

 

 

 

 

 

The most
critical components of cycling fitness are cardiovascular, power, muscular
endurance, and body composition (Zupan et al. p 2598. 2009). Anaerobic exercise is
the exertion of energy without the consumption of oxygen; lasting up to
approximately 90 seconds (Wilmore
et al. 2004). According to Calbet et al.1997 concluded, the Wingate test
of 80 to 90% of the oxygen deficit incurred is valid as an estimate of the
anaerobic threshold. The ability to sustain anaerobic pathway efficiently will
lead to the athlete’s success, after using adenosine triphosphate
phosphocreatine (ATP-PCr) energy system; which can last between 3 to 15 seconds
(Zupan et al. p 2598.
2009). However, it is worth pointing out that
road sprint cyclist will rely heavily on aerobic pathway in some Grand Tours
due to elevated terrains or extreme distances (Menaspà et al. p 339. 2013).

 

It measures “Anaerobic threshold is calculated dividing
mean power by the cyclist body
weight (kg). Anaerobic power is gained by dividing peak power by body weight (kg). Peak power is the highest power
output recorded during the test (Simpson et al. 2017). Fatigue
Index percentage was calculated by the following equation: Peak P (W) –
Minimum P (W) ÷ Peak P (W) x 100. Fatigue
index represents the percent decrease in power output from the beginning of
the test to the end of the test. Total work was computed by multiplying average
watts by test duration” (Simpson et al. 2017).

 

In 2001.
Martin et al in their studies of determinants of maximal cycling power;
reported crank lengths do not have any effect on power during maximal sprints. However,
if variations of 50 mm or more in crank length couple together with high pedalling
rate can have positive influence in maximal power production (Martin et al. p 6. 2007).
While it
has being widely hypotheses that maximal power to be main determinant of sprint
performance. However, in a study conducted by Dorel et al (2005) reported a
significant correlation with power output in relation to cyclist frontal area
and sprint performance (Menaspà, p. 35 2013).
These findings may invalidate any results obtain from Wingate test in terms of
sprint performance. Sprint
cyclist produce around 8 to 12% more power in standing position during the
early phase of a Wingate sprint test (Martin et al. 2007).