The performance of Olympic distance cross-country mountain bikers (XCO-MTB) is affected by constraints such as erosion of track surfaces and mass start congestion which can affect race results. Standardised laboratory assessments quantify inter-seasonal and intra-seasonal cycling potential through the assessment of multiple physiological capacities. Therefore, this study examined whether the power profile assessment could discriminate between competitive XCO-MTB and non-competitive mountain bikers (NC-MTB). Secondly, it aimed to report normative power profile data for competitive XCO-MTB cyclists. Twenty-nine male participants were recruited across groups of XCO-MTB (n=14) and NC-MTB (n=15) mountain bikers. Each cyclist completed a power profile assessment that consisted of increasing duration maximal efforts (6, 15, 30, 60, 240 and 600 s) that were interspersed by longer rest periods (174, 225, 330, 480 and 600 s) between efforts. Normative power outputs were established for XCO-MTB cyclists ranging between 13.8 ± 1.5 W·kg (5 s effort) to 4.1 ± 0.6 W·kg (600 s effort). No differences in absolute peak power or cadence were identified between groups across any effort length (p>0.05). However, the XCO-MTB cyclists produced greater mean power outputs relative to body mass than the NC-MTB during the 60 s (6.9 ± 0.8 vs 6.4 ± 0.6 W·kg; p=0.002), 240 s (4.7 ± 0.7 vs 3.8 ± 0.4 W·kg; p<0.001) and 600 s (4.1 ± 0.6 vs 3.4 ± 0.3 W·kg; p<0.001) efforts. The power profile assessment is a useful discriminative assessment tool for XCO-MTB and highlights the importance of aerobic power for XCO-MTB performance.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2019.
All research outputs
#21,234,867
of 34,151,039 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#5,050
of 7,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,969
of 488,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#67
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,151,039 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 488,858 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
