Why the study?
Does standing position compared to seated position alter physiological responses and VO2max in competitive road cyclists during uphill climbing?
Does standing position compared to seated position alter physiological responses and VO2max in competitive road cyclists during uphill climbing?
Standing position during moderate hill climbing is less economical but decreases sensation of leg effort during steep hill climbing in competitive cyclists.
Standing may lower leg RPE on steep grades without changing VO2max; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Seven competitive road cyclists (M +/- SE = 23.7 +/- 1.5 yr, 70.5 +/- 1.7 kg) participated to determine the effects of cycling body position on physiological responses during uphill cycling and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). There was no significant difference in VO2max between seated and standing positions on a cycle ergometer (66.4 +/- 1.6 vs. 66.4 +/- 1.7 ml . kg-1 . min-1). When the subjects rode their own bicycle on a treadmill, oxygen uptake and heart rate were significantly (p < 0.05) higher during standing when subjects bicycled at 20.0 km . h-1 (4% grade), but no difference was observed when riding at 12.3 km . h-1 (10% grade). Leg RPE was significantly (p < 0.05) lower for standing position up a 10% grade. The results suggest that the standing position is less economical during moderate hill climbing, but during steep hill climbing, it results in a decreased sensation of effort in the legs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tanaka et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: