Different Effect of Cadence on Cycling

Efficiency between Young and Older Cyclists

MASSIMO SACCHETTI1, MAURO LENTI1, ALESSANDRO SCOTTO DI PALUMBO1, and GIUSEPPE DE VITO2
1
Department of Human Movement and Sport Sciences, University of Rome, Rome, ITALY; and 2UCD School of
Public Health, Physiotherapy and Population Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, IRELAND

ABSTRACT
SACCHETTI, M., M. LENTI, A. S. DI PALUMBO, and G. DE VITO. Different Effect of Cadence on Cycling Efficiency between
Young and Older Cyclists. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 42, No. 11, pp. 2128–2133, 2010. Purpose: We investigated the difference in
the cadence–efficiency relationship between young and older competitive cyclists. Methods: Eight young (24.3 T 5.3 yr) and eight
older (65.6 T 2.8 yr) competitive cyclists participated in two laboratory sessions. The first consisted of an incremental maximal cycling
test to determine the freely chosen pedal cadence and the maximal power output at V̇O2max and the second for the determination of
gross efficiency (GE), calculated as the ratio of external work and energy expenditure (V̇O2). The latter test consisted of 6-min cycling
exercise bouts at 40% and 60% of maximal power output and at a cadence of 40, 60, 80, 100, and 120 rpm. Results: GE was lower
in older cyclists than that in young cyclists at all cadences considered and at both levels of power output (P G 0.01). Peak efficiency was
reached at 60 rpm in young cyclists (21.2% T 1.9%), whereas in older cyclists this was observed already at 40 rpm and was not
different from that at 60 rpm (18.3% T 0.6%). The decline in GE with the increase in cadence was more pronounced in older than in
young cyclists (P G 0.01) and was mitigated by the increase in power output more in the latter than in the former. These observations
were in line with a lower freely chosen cadence recorded during the maximal test in older than that in young (P G 0.01). Conclusions:
The present data indicate that the effect of cadence on cycling efficiency is different between young and older cyclists and that it seems
more disadvantageous for the latter to use high cadences. This may help explain why our older cyclists chose to pedal at lower cadences
than the younger. Key Words: MASTER ATHLETE, PEDAL RATE, FREELY CHOSEN PEDAL RATE, CADENCE–EFFICIENCY
RELATIONSHIP, AGING

C
ycling efficiency has been extensively studied in the
last century, either to understand the effect of ex-
ternal workload on physiological stress or to better
APPLIED SCIENCES
reported (11) and connected to a higher performance during
a simulated 1-h time trial (21).
Aging has a profound effect on muscle fiber type dis-

comprehend the factors influencing exercise performance.
Indeed, efficiency is considered one of most important fac-
tors affecting endurance performance in competitive cyclists
(9,24). Among the several factors that have been considered
to characterize cycling efficiency, power output, pedaling
rate, and their interaction received particular considera-
tion (14) also to try to explain why young cyclists normally
choose to pedal at higher cadences than that characterized
by the lowest energy cost in laboratory-based studies.
An additional factor that has been linked to efficiency in
cycling is represented by fiber type distribution. In par-
ticular, a direct relationship between the proportion of type
I muscle fibers and the gross cycling efficiency has been
Address for correspondence: Massimo Sacchetti, Ph.D., Department of
Human Movement and Sports Sciences, University of Rome ‘‘Foro
Italico,’’ Piazza Lauro De Bosis 15, 00135 Rome, Italy; E-mail:
massimo.sacchetti@uniroma4.it.
Submitted for publication January 2010.
Accepted for publication March 2010.
0195-9131/10/4211-2128/0
MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISEÒ
Copyright Ó 2010 by the American College of Sports Medicine
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181e05526
tribution and properties (6,12,36) and has therefore the po-
tential to affect efficiency. On the other hand, maintenance
of high levels of physical activity can mitigate the effect
of the aging process on skeletal muscle (13). Surprisingly,
efficiency in the older population has not been thoroughly
investigated; most of the studies available on older athletes,
which have focused on running economy, have suggested
that this does not significantly change with age (23,29).
To date, only few studies have investigated cycling effi-
ciency in older (65–70 yr old) (2–4) or middle-aged (around
50 yr old) (1) individuals, whereas the evidence concerning
older cyclists is more scarce (31). Among these studies, one
(31) reported a similar cycling economy in a group of 35- to
75-yr-old cyclists but did not consider the effect of cadence.
Conversely, Bell and Ferguson (4) measured cycling effi-
ciency at different cadences in young and older physically
active but untrained women, but their findings might not
directly translate to what is occurring in men who main-
tained a high level of physical activity throughout their life,
as it is often the case in older master athletes.
With this in mind, we compared cycling efficiency in young
and older competitive cyclists with a special emphasis on
verifying the effect of cadence and power output because
these are the two most important factors explaining its acute
changes. The freely chosen cadence (FCC) during an

2128

Copyright @ 2010 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
TABLE 1. Characteristics of the subjects. ized breakfast (30 kJIkgj1, 60% carbohydrate, 25% fat, 15%
Young Older protein) 3 h before.
Age (yr) 24.3 T 5.3* 65.6 T 2.8 The exercise protocol consisted of 6 min of cycling
Height (cm) 175 T 5 173 T 6
Body mass (kg) 63.9 T 4.2* 73.1 T 6.9
exercise at a cadence of 40, 60, 80, 100, and 120 rpm per-
BMI (kgImj2) 20.7 T 1.8* 24.3 T 2.0 formed in a randomized order and at an external power
Values are presented as mean T SD. output equivalent to 40% and 60% of MPO. The two
* P G 0.05 vs older. intensities were selected with the aim of ensuring aerobic
energy turnover in all exercise bouts. The recovery time
incremental cycling test was also investigated to evaluate between each cycling bouts was 5 min, during which the
possible relationships with the effect of cadence on efficiency. subjects ingested water to maintain fluid balance.
We hypothesized that compared with younger cyclists, Before each exercise test, the cycle ergometer was ad-
older cyclists choose spontaneously a lower pedaling cadence justed to reproduce the position of the subjects while riding
their own bicycles. Throughout the trials, laboratory condi-
and that this is related to the specificity of the efficiency–
cadence relationship. tions remained stable in a range of 50%–60% humidity
and 19-C–22-C, and subjects were cooled using a fan.
Subjects were instructed to refrain from exercise during the
METHODS last 2 d preceding the experimental trials.
Subjects Determination of efficiency. During the 6-min cycling
bouts, ventilatory and gas exchange variables were measured
A total of 16 well-trained male competitive cyclists, eight breath by breath. V̇O2 and RER values recorded during the
young (Y; 24 T 5 yr) and eight older (O; 64 T 4 yr), par- last 3 min of each exercise bout were averaged for the com-
ticipated in this study. The characteristics of the two study putation of efficiency. Energy expenditure (kJIminj1) was
groups are reported in Table 1. Before entering the study, the calculated using the caloric equivalent of V̇O2 at a given
older subjects underwent medical screening to exclude car- RER. Gross efficiency (GE) was calculated as the ratio be-
diovascular, orthopedic, and metabolic diseases. The study tween the work accomplished (watt converted into kilojoules
was approved by the local ethical committee. After being per minute) and the energy expended.
informed about the purpose of the study and the possible
risks connected with the experimental procedures, each par- Data Analysis
ticipant signed an informed consent.
A repeated-measure ANOVA was used to evaluate the
Experimental Protocol effect of power output and cadence on GE, with between-

APPLIED SCIENCES
group measures to determine the effect of age.
Subjects visited the laboratory in two occasions, sepa-
Differences in FCC during the incremental test between the
rated by at least 3 d. During the first visit, subjects per-
two groups were tested using an ANOVA for repeated-
formed a maximal incremental exercise test to exhaustion
measures (power output) with group as between-subjects
on an electromagnetically braked cycle ergometer (Lode,
factor.
Gronigen, The Netherlands) for the determination of maxi-
If the ANOVA indicated a significant main effect, a post
mal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max) and maximal power output
hoc Student t-test with Bonferroni correction was used to
(MPO) at which V̇O2max was reached. After a standard
locate the differences. Differences in the extreme values of
warm-up at 50 W in O and 100 W in Y, the workload was
GE (60–120 rpm) between Y and O were evaluated using
increased every 3 min by 25 W, and the test was terminated
the Student t-test. Data are presented as mean T SD. The
when the criteria for documentation of V̇O2max were met
alpha level was set a priori at 0.05.
(plateau in V̇O2 despite increasing work rate; RER Q 1.1;
reaching of age-predicted HRmax (220 j age)). The venti-
latory and gas exchange variables were measured using a RESULTS
breath-by-breath gas analyzer (Quark b2 Cosmed, Rome,
Incremental cycling test. V̇O2max and MPO were sig-
Italy). Before each test, the gas analyzers were calibrated
nificantly higher in Y than that in O (Table 2). The analysis
with gases of known concentration, whereas the turbine was
calibrated using a 3-L syringe.
To investigate possible between-group differences in the TABLE 2. Maximal values recorded during the incremental cycling test.
freely chosen pedal rate at the different work rates, volun- Young Older
teers did not receive any information about the cadence V̇O2max (mLIminj1) 4312 T 389* 3121 T 357
they were adopting during the incremental tests and were V̇O2 (mLIminj1Ikgj1) 67.6 T 6.5* 42.7 T 3.2
not told that it was one of the parameters of interest. MPO (W) 381 T 12* 244 T 26
HRmax (beatsIminj1) 190 T 10* 155 T 10
On the second occasion, the volunteers underwent the ex-
Values are presented as mean T SD.
perimental trial to evaluate cycling efficiency. Subjects arrived * P G 0.05 vs older.
at the laboratory in the morning after consuming a standard- V̇O2max, maximal oxygen uptake; MPO, maximal power output.

CYCLING EFFICIENCY IN OLDER CYCLISTS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercised 2129

Copyright @ 2010 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 6% in O (P G 0.001) and by 4% T 4 % in Y and 18% T 5%
in O (P G 0.001) at 40% and 60% MPO, respectively.

DISCUSSION
In the present study, we investigated cycling GE differ-
ences between young and older cyclists, with a special
emphasis on verifying the effect of adopting different
pedaling rates. The main findings were a) a lower cycling
efficiency at the same relative workload in O than that in Y
for a wide spectrum of cadences, b) a lower freely chosen
pedal rate and most efficient cadence in O than that in Y,
and c) a higher reduction in GE with the increase in ped-
aling rate in O than that in Y. This effect was attenuated by
FIGURE 1—FCC in young and older cyclists during the incremental the increase in power output more in Y than that in O.
maximal cycling test. Values are presented as mean T SD. *P G 0.01. Among the different factors affecting cycling endurance
performance, those resulting in a high mechanical efficiency
of the FCC during the incremental test revealed that the are considered to play a key role (15). Despite thorough
older cyclists were pedaling at lower cadences (P G 0.01) investigation of cycling efficiency in young volunteers, there
than Y at all levels of exercise intensity (Fig. 1). is a paucity of data concerning older individuals, athletes
Efficiency trials. During the exercise bouts conducted
at 60% MPO, the maximal values of RER were 0.93 T 0.02
in Y and 0.92 T 0.02 in O, indicating a major contribution
of aerobic pathways to energy expenditure.
The effect of cadence and power output on GE in the two
study groups is depicted in Figure 2. At all pedal rates and
at both levels of power output, GE was higher in Y than that
in O (P G 0.01).
GE was significantly influenced by pedaling cadence
(F = 137, P G 0.0001), and this effect was different in Y
APPLIED SCIENCES

versus O (F = 7.772, P G 0.01).

The cadence resulting in the highest value of GE was
60 rpm in Y, whereas in O GE at 40 and 60 rpm was not
significantly different. This trend was observed at both
levels of power (60% and 40% MPO).
From 60 to 120 rpm and at 40% MPO, GE decreased
by 21% T 5% in Y and by 30% T 5% in O (P G 0.01).
The difference between groups in the reduction of GE
when increasing cadence from 60 to 120 rpm was even
more pronounced at 60% MPO (11% T 3% in Y and
23% T 5% in O) and was meaningful, as indicated by an
effect size of 1.8 and 2.6 at 40% and 60% of MPO,
respectively.
With the increase in power output, GE increased in both
groups and at all pedaling rates. Peak efficiency (at 60 rpm)
increased from 21.2% T 1.9% to 23.7% T 1.8% in Y and
from 18.3% T 0.6 % to 20.7% T 1.7 % in O.
A significant interaction between cadence and power
output was found (F = 3.225, P = 0.016). This was evident
as an attenuation of the reducing effect of high cadences on
GE (difference between 60 and 120 rpm), which was, how-
ever, more pronounced in Y than that in O (P G 0.05).
Figure 3 shows the mean fractional utilization of V̇O2max
FIGURE 2—GE in young (A) and older (B) cyclists at the different
as a function of cadence. From 60 to 120 rpm, relative cadences and at 40% and 60% of maximal power output (MPO). Val-
exercise intensity increased by 9% T 2% in Y and 22% T ues are presented as mean T SD. *P G 0.05 vs 60 rpm; #P G 0.05 vs O.

2130 Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org

Copyright @ 2010 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

FIGURE 3—Fractional utilization of maximal aerobic power
(%V̇O2max) in young and older cyclists at the different cadences and
at 40% (A) and 60% (B) of maximal power output (MPO). Values are
presented as mean T SD. *P G 0.05 vs 60 rpm; #P G 0.05 vs O.
either trained or untrained. Most of the studies available on
efficiency in master athletes have been performed in runners
and suggest that running economy may be similar between
young and older athletes (29). However, running economy
and cycling efficiency are influenced by different factors,
such as the capacity of the muscles to store and release
elastic energy in the former (35) or the possibility of mod-
ulating the force exerted at a given power output using dif-
ferent cadences in the latter (26).
In the present study, we found a lower GE in O than that
in Y at the same relative workload for a wide spectrum of
cadences. To date, few studies have examined cycling effi-
ciency in older individuals, with a variety of populations
investigated. Peiffer et al. (31) reported a similar cycling
economy in master cyclists of different ages. However, in
that study, cadence was not controlled, subjects were only
tested at the same absolute workload, and the caloric equiv-
alent of V̇O2 at a given RER was not considered. These
factors make the comparison with the results of the present
study very difficult. Conversely, Bell and Ferguson (4) re-
cently measured cycling efficiency at different cadences in
CYCLING EFFICIENCY IN OLDER CYCLISTS
Copyright @ 2010 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
older and young women and found, in agreement with the
present results, a trend for a lower efficiency at same rel-
ative workload in the former. Conversely, Astrand (3)
reported a similar cycling efficiency irrespective of age. On
the other hand, it should be recognized that the choice of
the cadence and the power output used to test cycling effi-
ciency in the different studies represent a critical issue
and make the comparison very difficult. Moreover, because
of the effect of power output on efficiency and the lower
absolute power output used in the older cyclists, we cannot
rule out the possibility of a similar efficiency when testing
the two groups at the same absolute workload.
To the best of our knowledge and in contrast to the pleth-
ora of data available in younger cyclists, no studies have
investigated the relation between pedaling rate and GE in
older cyclists.
The most efficient cadence recorded in our younger cy-
clists was within the range (60–80 rpm) previously reported
(5,8,14). Moreover, in accordance with previous observa-
tions in young individuals (7,32), GE decreased with the
increase in cadence, both in Y and in O. However, despite
a similar trend, GE in O peaked already at 40 rpm whereas
was maximal at 60 rpm in Y. These results are in line with
Bell and Ferguson’s (4) observations in young and elderly
untrained women and suggest a shift of the most efficient
cadence toward lower values with aging. Furthermore, the
decline in GE at high cadences was steeper in O than that
in Y, indicating a lower advantage of the older cyclists in
using shorter gears, that is, those resulting in shorter dis-
tances covered in each pedal cycle, for a given speed.
With regard to the relationship between efficiency and
APPLIED SCIENCES
FCC, several investigations indicated that young cyclists
normally choose to pedal on the road at higher cadences
(27,34) than those resulting as the most efficient in the
laboratory setting (5,7,8,16,18,28,32,37). In contrast, de-
spite the common observation that older cyclists pedal on
the road at lower rates than their younger training com-
panions, this has never been translated into scientific evi-
dence. We found that FCC throughout the incremental
maximal cycling test was nearly constant in both groups
but was significantly lower in O than that in Y. On the
basis of a recent report (25), we cannot rule out that using
cadence and gears to control the work rate instead of relying
on a fixed power output maintained independently of ca-
dence would have resulted in a different trend in FCC
during the incremental test; however, the divergence dis-
covered in the absolute FCC values between Y and O re-
mains. The present data, therefore, raise the possibility
that the peculiarity of the cadence–efficiency relationship
in O may be linked to their lower FCC.
An interesting observation of the present study is the
different effect of the increase in cadence on the fractional
utilization of V̇O2max in Y versus O. A significant dif-
ference in efficiency was found at 40 rpm and both at 40%
and 60% MPO when the two groups were exercising at
exactly the same relative intensity. At all other cadences
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercised 2131
 (especially at 100 and 120 rpm), O were pedaling at a
higher %V̇O2max. The higher increase in relative work-
load with the increase in pedaling rate in the older cyclists
implies that cadence has a different effect on endurance
performance potential with respect to the young.
It is possible that young cyclists with a higher V̇O2max do
not necessarily have to try to maximize efficiency because
a greater metabolic power output at higher cadences may
be more relevant to performance than the concomitant,
but marginal, decrease in efficiency. The situation is likely
to be very different for the master cyclists who respond to
an increase in cadence with a higher metabolic cost and
possess a more limited maximal aerobic power. Therefore,
for the older cyclist, pedaling outside of the most efficient
cadence range may be much more demanding and detri-
mental to performance than for young athletes. This might
explain the choice of older cyclists to pedal at lower rates
than their younger counterpart. Indeed, the pronounced ef-
fect of even small variations in GE on cycling perfor-
mance has been previously highlighted in relation to time
trials (22,30) or to performance changes throughout the
same (20) or several competitive seasons (10,33). From this
point of view, the differences in GE between groups and
with cadence appear relevant for performance.
In accordance with previous reports in young cyclists
(7,17,32), in the present study the increase in power out-
put resulted in a higher GE at all cadences in both Y and
O. However, whereas the reduction in efficiency from 60
to 120 rpm was attenuated with the increase in power in
young cyclists, this was less evident (about half) in older
cyclists (7,32).
APPLIED SCIENCES
A proposed explanation for the reduction of the cadence
effect at high power outputs is that the cost of moving the
legs with a high frequency represents a lower proportion of
the total energy expenditure (32). Along this line, it is pos-
REFERENCES
1. Adams WC. Influence of age, sex, and body weight on the
energy expenditure of bicycle riding. J Appl Physiol. 1967;22(3):
539–45.
2. Amati F, Dube JJ, Shay C, Goodpaster BH. Separate and com-
bined effects of exercise training and weight loss on exercise
efficiency and substrate oxidation. J Appl Physiol. 2008;105(3):
825–31.
3. Astrand I. Aerobic work capacity in men and women with special
reference to age. Acta Physiol Scand Suppl. 1960;49(169):1–92.
4. Bell MP, Ferguson RA. Interaction between muscle tempera-
ture and contraction velocity affects mechanical efficiency during
moderate-intensity cycling exercise in young and older women.
J Appl Physiol. 2009;107(3):763–9.
5. Belli A, Hintzy F. Influence of pedalling rate on the energy cost of
cycling in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2002;88(1–2):158–62.
6. Brunner F, Schmid A, Sheikhzadeh A, Nordin M, Yoon J, Frankel
V. Effects of aging on Type II muscle fibers: a systematic review
of the literature. J Aging Phys Act. 2007;15(3):336–48.
7. Chavarren J, Calbet JA. Cycling efficiency and pedalling fre-
quency in road cyclists. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1999;
80(6):555–63.
2132 Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine
Copyright @ 2010 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
sible to speculate that the cost of moving the legs could be
more influential in O than that in Y because of their lower
maximal aerobic power. This was reflected also in the ob-
served higher increase in the fractional utilization of
V̇O2max with cadence in O than that in Y at the lower level
of power output.
In addition, a difference in the share of noneffective
forces with the increase in power output cannot be excluded
because it has been reported to lessen with the increase in
power output in young (38). Finally, the increase in the cost
for stabilizing the upper body at the higher cadences (19)
and power outputs might differ between Y and O. Taken
together, these data suggest that O cyclists, differently from
Y, would not benefit from pedaling at high pedaling rates
when riding at higher power outputs. Hence, the choice
of using a given cadence to minimize energy expenditure
appears more crucial for young than for older cyclists.
In conclusion, the results of the present study indicate
that GE is lower in older than that in young cyclists when
pedaling at the same relative intensities and for a wide
spectrum of cadences. The increase in pedaling rate reduces
GE more in older than that in young cyclists, and it is met-
abolically more demanding in the former than that in the
latter. Moreover, the increase in power output mitigates
the effect of higher cadences in reducing GE more in young
and less in older cyclists. In addition, older cyclists are
most efficient at a lower cadence than the young ones.
Taken together, these data suggest that controlling ca-
dence is more crucial for older than for the young cyclists
and may help explain why the former choose to pedal at
lower rates than the latter.
The study was supported by the Università degli studi di Roma
Foro Italico (grant No. N.250-07).
The results of the present study do not constitute endorsement
by the American College of Sports Medicine.
8. Coast JR, Welch HG. Linear increase in optimal pedal rate with
increased power output in cycle ergometry. Eur J Appl Physiol
Occup Physiol. 1985;53(4):339–42.
9. Coyle EF. Physiological determinants of endurance exercise
performance. J Sci Med Sport. 1999;2(3):181–9.
10. Coyle EF. Improved muscular efficiency displayed as Tour de
France champion matures. J Appl Physiol. 2005;98(6):2191–6.
11. Coyle EF, Sidossis LS, Horowitz JF, Beltz JD. Cycling efficiency
is related to the percentage of type I muscle fibers. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 1992;24(7):782–8.
12. D’Antona G, Pellegrino MA, Adami R, et al. The effect of ageing
and immobilization on structure and function of human skeletal
muscle fibres. J Physiol. 2003;552(Pt 2):499–511.
13. D’Antona G, Pellegrino MA, Carlizzi CN, Bottinelli R. Deterio-
ration of contractile properties of muscle fibres in elderly subjects
is modulated by the level of physical activity. Eur J Appl Physiol.
2007;100(5):603–11.
14. Ettema G, Loras HW. Efficiency in cycling: a review. Eur J Appl
Physiol. 2009;106(1):1–14.
15. Faria EW, Parker DL, Faria IE. The science of cycling: factors
affecting performance—part 2. Sports Med. 2005;35(4):313–37.
http://www.acsm-msse.org
16. Foss O, Hallen J. The most economical cadence increases
with increasing workload. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2004;92(4–5):
443–51.
17. Gaesser GA, Brooks GA. Muscular efficiency during steady-rate
exercise: effects of speed and work rate. J Appl Physiol. 1975;
38(6):1132–9.
18. Hansen EA, Andersen JL, Nielsen JS, Sjogaard G. Muscle fibre
type, efficiency, and mechanical optima affect freely chosen pedal
rate during cycling. Acta Physiol Scand. 2002;176(3):185–94.
19. Hansen EA, Jorgensen LV, Sjogaard G. A physiological counter-
point to mechanistic estimates of ‘‘internal power’’ during cycling
at different pedal rates. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2004;91(4):435–42.
20. Hopker J, Coleman D, Passfield L. Changes in cycling efficiency
during a competitive season. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(4):
912–9.
21. Horowitz JF, Sidossis LS, Coyle EF. High efficiency of Type I
muscle fibers improves performance. Int J Sports Med. 1994;
15(3):152–7.
22. Jeukendrup AE, Craig NP, Hawley JA. The bioenergetics of
World Class Cycling. J Sci Med Sport. 2000;3(4):414–33.
23. Joyner MJ. Physiological limiting factors and distance running:
influence of gender and age on record performances. Exerc Sport
Sci Rev. 1993;21:103–33.
24. Joyner MJ, Coyle EF. Endurance exercise performance: the
physiology of champions. J Physiol. 2008;586(1):35–44.
25. Leirdal S, Ettema G. Freely chosen pedal rate during free cycling
on a roller and ergometer cycling. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2009;106(6):
799–805.
26. Lollgen H, Graham T, Sjogaard G. Muscle metabolites, force, and
perceived exertion bicycling at varying pedal rates. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 1980;12(5):345–51.
27. Lucia A, Hoyos J, Chicharro JL. Preferred pedalling cadence in
professional cycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001;33(8):1361–6.
CYCLING EFFICIENCY IN OLDER CYCLISTS
Copyright @ 2010 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
28. Marsh AP, Martin PE, Foley KO. Effect of cadence, cycling
experience, and aerobic power on delta efficiency during cycling.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(9):1630–4.
29. Morgan DW, Martin PE, Krahenbuhl GS. Factors affecting run-
ning economy. Sports Med. 1989;7(5):310–30.
30. Passfield L, Doust JH. Changes in cycling efficiency and perfor-
mance after endurance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;
32(11):1935–41.
31. Peiffer JJ, Abbiss CR, Chapman D, Laursen PB, Parker DL.
Physiological characteristics of masters-level cyclists. J Strength
Cond Res. 2008;22(5):1434–40.
32. Samozino P, Horvais N, Hintzy F. Interactions between cadence
and power output effects on mechanical efficiency during sub
maximal cycling exercises. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2006;97(1):133–9.
33. Santalla A, Naranjo J, Terrados N. Muscle efficiency improves
over time in world-class cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;
41(5):1096–101.
34. Sassi A, Rampinini E, Martin DT, Morelli A. Effects of gradient
and speed on freely chosen cadence: the key role of crank inertial
load. J Biomech. 2009;42(2):171–7.
35. Saunders PU, Pyne DB, Telford RD, Hawley JA. Factors affecting
running economy in trained distance runners. Sports Med. 2004;
34(7):465–85.
36. Trappe S, Gallagher P, Harber M, Carrithers J, Fluckey J, Trappe
T. Single muscle fibre contractile properties in young and old men
and women. J Physiol. 2003;552(Pt 1):47–58.
37. Umberger BR, Gerritsen KG, Martin PE. Muscle fiber type effects
on energetically optimal cadences in cycling. J Biomech. 2006;
39(8):1472–9.
38. Zameziati K, Mornieux G, Rouffet D, Belli A. Relationship
between the increase of effectiveness indexes and the increase of
muscular efficiency with cycling power. Eur J Appl Physiol.
2006;96(3):274–81.
APPLIED SCIENCES
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercised 2133