A Comparison of Different Prerace Warm-Up Strategies on 1-km Cycling Time-Trial Performance.

Abstract

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) and postactivation potentiation (PAP) are warm-up strategies proposed to improve high-intensity sporting performance. However, only few studies have investigated the benefits of these strategies compared with an appropriate control (CON) or an athlete-selected (SELF) warm-up protocol. Therefore, this study examined the effects of 4 different warm-up routines on 1-km time-trial (TT) performance with competitive cyclists. In a randomized crossover study, 12 well-trained cyclists (age 32 [10] y, mass 77.7 [4.6] kg, peak power output 1141 [61] W) performed 4 different warm-up strategies-(CON) 17 minutes CON only, (SELF) a self-determined warm-up, (IPC) IPC + CON, or (PAP) CON + PAP-prior to completing a maximal-effort 1-km TT. Performance time and power, quadriceps electromyograms, muscle oxygen saturation (SmO2), and blood lactate were measured to determine differences between trials. There were no significant differences (P > .05) in 1-km performance time between CON (76.9 [5.2] s), SELF (77.3 [6.0] s), IPC (77.0 [5.5] s), or PAP (77.3 [5.9] s) protocols. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in mean or peak power output between trials. Finally, electromyogram activity, SmO2, and recovery blood lactate concentration were not different between conditions. Adding IPC or PAP protocols to a short CON warm-up appears to provide no additional benefit to 1-km TT performance with well-trained cyclists and is therefore not recommended. Furthermore, additional IPC and PAP protocols had no effect on electromyograms and SmO2 values during the TT or peak lactate concentration during recovery.