Interchangeability between the Data Obtained by Two Powermeters during Road Cycling Competitions: A Case Study

Javier Iglesias-Pino, Alba Herrero-Molleda (), Jaime Fernández-Fernández and Juan García-López
Additional contact information
Javier Iglesias-Pino: Faculty of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences, AMRED, Human Movement and Sports Performance Analysis, Universidad de León, 24071 León, Spain
Alba Herrero-Molleda: Faculty of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences, AMRED, Human Movement and Sports Performance Analysis, Universidad de León, 24071 León, Spain
Jaime Fernández-Fernández: Faculty of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences, AMRED, Human Movement and Sports Performance Analysis, Universidad de León, 24071 León, Spain
Juan García-López: Faculty of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences, AMRED, Human Movement and Sports Performance Analysis, Universidad de León, 24071 León, Spain

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 24, 1-6

Abstract: Various power meters are used to assess road-cycling performance in training and competition, but no previous study has analyzed their interchangeability in these conditions. Therefore, the purpose was to compare the data obtained from two different power meters (PowerTap vs. Power2Max) during cycling road races. A national-level under-23 male competitive cyclist completed six road-cycling official competitions (five road races and one individual time trial), in which power output was simultaneously registered with the two power meters. After this, the main power output variables were analyzed with the same software. The average and critical power obtained from the PowerTap power meter were slightly lower than from the Power2Max power meter (3.56 ± 0.68 and 3.62 ± 0.74 W·kg −1 , 5.06 and 5.11 W·kg −1 , respectively), and the correlations between both devices were very high (r ≥ 0.996 and p < 0.001). In contrast, the PowerTap power meter registered a significantly higher ( p < 0.05) percentage of time at <0.75 and >7.50 W·kg −1 and power profile at 1, 5 and 10 s. In conclusion, the data obtained in competitions by the two power meters were interchangeable. Nevertheless, the Power2Max power meter underestimated the pedaling power during short and high-intensity intervals (≤10.0 s and >7.50 W·kg −1 ) compared to the PowerTap power meter. Therefore, the analysis of these efforts should be treated with caution.

Keywords: cycling; competition analysis; power profile; critical power (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/16446/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/16446/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:24:p:16446-:d:996925

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().