Search

The dietary intake and eating behavior of a group of professional elite road cyclists during high intensity training and competition was compared. Their eating pattern consisted of several snacks throughout the race or training, a meal eaten no later than 1 hr postexercise, supper, and breakfast. Protein intake showed a significant difference between evaluation times expressed in three ways: per total amount intake, by kg body weight, and percentage of energy supplied. Due to the high energy intake of these cyclists during training and competition (22.9 +/- 1.5, 22.4 +/- 1.7 MJ, respectively) they presented a high consumption of each macronutrient both in competition and in training. The eating behavior of these athletes was similar during breakfast (possibility to choose from among approximately 25 foods) and supper (set menu), with variation in the energy intake and a similar relative contribution of the different macronutrients. In general, it is possible to consider the professional road cyclists as a homogeneous group with a similar nutrition intake, eating habits, and nutritional needs throughout the more demanding periods of the season. Furthermore, differences found in protein intake between periods could not be explained by differences in the food available in competition and training periods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Here, we compared the maximal lactate steady state velocity (vMLSS) estimated from a single- visit protocol (v5 à 2000) to the traditional multi-day protocol (vMLSS). Furthermore, we determined whether there was a lactate steady state during the time limits (Tlim) at vMLSS or v5 à 2000. Eight runners completed a half marathon (HM), the traditional protocol to determine the vMLSS and the 5 à 2000 m test in a randomised order, and a Tlim at vMLSS and at v5 à 2000 in a randomised order. The vMLSS (13.56 ± 0.90 km·h-1) was higher than the v5 à 2000 (12.93 ± 0.90 km·h-1, p = 0.001) and comparable to the vHM (13.34 ± 0.75 km·h-1). The vMLSS (r = 0.83) and the v5 à 2000 (r = 0.91) were associated with the vHM but were not indicative of the competition pace. The Tlim at vMLSS (64 ± 15 min) was lower than the Tlim at v5 à 2000 (94 ± 21 min) and the HM time (95 ± 5 min). In both Tlim, lactate was lower at 45 min than upon finishing the effort and was predictive of its duration (p < 0.05). Our results indicate that the 5 à 2000 m test can be equally useful to assess runners as the traditional MLSS protocol and that there is no lactate steady state during the Tlim at vMLSS or at v5 à 2000. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Here, we compared the maximal lactate steady state velocity (vMLSS) estimated from a single- visit protocol (v5 × 2000) to the traditional multi-day protocol (vMLSS). Furthermore, we determined whether there was a lactate steady state during the time limits (Tlim) at vMLSS or v5 × 2000. Eight runners completed a half marathon (HM), the traditional protocol to determine the vMLSS and the 5 × 2000 m test in a randomised order, and a Tlim at vMLSS and at v5 × 2000 in a randomised order. The vMLSS (13.56 ± 0.90 km·h-1) was higher than the v5 × 2000 (12.93 ± 0.90 km·h-1, p = 0.001) and comparable to the vHM (13.34 ± 0.75 km·h-1). The vMLSS (r = 0.83) and the v5 × 2000 (r = 0.91) were associated with the vHM but were not indicative of the competition pace. The Tlim at vMLSS (64 ± 15 min) was lower than the Tlim at v5 × 2000 (94 ± 21 min) and the HM time (95 ± 5 min). In both Tlim, lactate was lower at 45 min than upon finishing the effort and was predictive of its duration (p < 0.05). Our results indicate that the 5 × 2000 m test can be equally useful to assess runners as the traditional MLSS protocol and that there is no lactate steady state during the Tlim at vMLSS or at v5 × 2000. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]