1 / 1

Background and Purpose

ROLLERS VERSUS TRAINERS: 10-KM TIME TRIAL. T. Devlin 1 , P. Barham 1 , A. Berni 1 , C. Cundari 1 , B. Davis 1 , A. Doty 1 , M. Eudy 1 , C. Fordham 1 , T. Milleson, T. Osmon 1 , S. Reybold 1 , A. Springhetti 1 , T. Barreira, Ph.D. 2 and W. Tseh, Ph.D. 1

lloyd
Download Presentation

Background and Purpose

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ROLLERS VERSUS TRAINERS: 10-KM TIME TRIAL T. Devlin1, P. Barham1, A. Berni1, C. Cundari1, B. Davis1, A. Doty1, M. Eudy1, C. Fordham1, T. Milleson, T. Osmon1, S. Reybold1, A. Springhetti1, T. Barreira, Ph.D. 2 and W. Tseh, Ph.D. 1 1University of North Carolina Wilmington 2Pennington Biomedical Research Center Background and Purpose Practitioners, coaches, and cycling enthusiasts have debated which training tool is the most effective in enhancing cycling performance. Due to the paucity of research, the objective of this investigation, therefore, was to determine which cycling training device, Rollers or Trainers, is most effective in improving a 10-km time trial. Methodology Eight male and six female volunteers provided informed consent prior to participation. After assessing baseline 10-km time trials, participants were randomly selected into one of three groups: Rollers (R), Trainers (T), or Control (C). Participants using R or T attended 24 workout sessions throughout an 8-wk period (F: 3 days/week; I: 65-80% HRmax; D: 40 min; M: R or T). ANCOVA was used to determine if significant mean differences between groups existed in the post-assessment 10-km time trial when controlling for baseline values. Bonferroni post-hoc testing was used to determine mean differences between groups. Table 2. Mean group values pre- and post-intervention. ap ≤ 0.05 There were no significant mean differences in baseline 10-km time trial between R, T, and C groups [F = 0.34, p = .72]. There was a significant mean difference in 10-km time trial improvement between groups post-assessment when controlling for baseline values (F = 17.04, p <.001). Participants training with R improved by 20.4s [t(4) = 4.86, p = .008] and T participants improved by 12.8s [t(4) = 4.57, p = .01], while there was no significant improvement for C. Conclusions Participants using R and T displayed significant decrements in time with respect to the 10-km time trial. However, R had a greater improvement in 10-km time trial when compared to T. Supported by ELITE S.r.l.; Via Fornaci, 4; 35014 Fontaniva (Pd); Italy Results Table 1. Descriptive statistics for sample (N = 14)

More Related