Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 5 of 5 items for
- Author: Teun van Erp x
- Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Monitoring Progress in Professional Cycling: From Submaximal Testing to the Use of Field Data
Robert P. Lamberts and Teun van Erp
The IJSPP Twitter Account: Our Secondary Step to Narrow the Gap Between Sport Science and Sport Practice
Jos J de Koning, Teun van Erp, Rob Lamberts, Stephen Cheung, and Dionne Noordhof
The Evolution of Applied Research on Sports Physiology and Performance: An Appreciation to the Athletes and Teams for Sharing Their Data
Robert P. Lamberts, Teun van Erp, Dajo Sanders, Karen E. Welman, and Øyvind Sandbakk
Antidoping 2.0: Is Adding Power-Output Data to the Antidoping Pool the Next Step? Experts’ Viewpoint
Sebastian Sitko, Pedro Valenzuela, Nathan Townsend, Marco Pinotti, Mikel Zabala, Xabier Artetxe, Gabriele Gallo, Manuel Mateo-March, Dajo Sanders, Frédéric Grappe, David C. Clarke, Teun van Erp, and Aitor Viribay
Background: Efforts are needed to improve antidoping procedures. The widespread use of power meters among cyclists could help in this regard. However, controversy exists on whether performance monitoring through power-output data could be of help for antidoping purposes. Purpose: The objective of the present study was to provide insight into the feasibility and utility of implementing power-based performance monitoring in elite cycling. An expert panel of 15 applied sport scientists and professional cycling coaches were asked for their opinions and perspectives on incorporating power data into the antidoping risk-assessment process. Results: Two different viewpoints were identified from the responses provided by the experts. Some believed that power monitoring could be implemented as an antidoping tool, provided that several surmountable challenges are first addressed. These authors provided suggestions related to the potential practical implementation of such measures. Others, on the contrary, believed that power meters lack sufficient reliability and suggest that the professional cycling world presents conflicts of interest that make this intervention impossible to implement nowadays. Conclusions: The debate around the utility of power-meter data in the antidoping fight has been ongoing for more than a decade. According to the opinions provided by the experts’ panel, there is still no consensus on the real utility and practical implementation of this intervention.
The Evolution of World-Class Endurance Training: The Scientist’s View on Current and Future Trends
Øyvind Sandbakk, David B. Pyne, Kerry McGawley, Carl Foster, Rune Kjøsen Talsnes, Guro Strøm Solli, Grégoire P. Millet, Stephen Seiler, Paul B. Laursen, Thomas Haugen, Espen Tønnessen, Randy Wilber, Teun van Erp, Trent Stellingwerff, Hans-Christer Holmberg, and Silvana Bucher Sandbakk
Background: Elite sport is continuously evolving. World records keep falling and athletes from a longer list of countries are involved. Purpose: This commentary was designed to provide insights into present and future trends associated with world-class endurance training based on the perspectives, experience, and knowledge of an expert panel of 25 applied sport scientists. Results: The key drivers of development observed in the past 10–15 years were related to (1) more accessible scientific knowledge for coaches and athletes combined with (2) better integration of practical and scientific exchange across multidisciplinary perspectives within professionalized elite athlete support structures, as well as (3) utilization of new technological advances. Based on these perspectives, we discerned and exemplified the main trends in the practice of endurance sports into the following categories: better understanding of sport-specific demands; improved competition execution; larger, more specific, and more precise training loads; improved training quality; and a more professional and healthier lifestyle. The main areas expected to drive future improvements were associated with more extensive use of advanced technology for monitoring and prescribing training and recovery, more precise use of environmental and nutritional interventions, better understanding of athlete–equipment interactions, and greater emphasis on preventing injuries and illnesses. Conclusions: These expert insights can serve as a platform and inspiration to develop new hypotheses and ideas, encourage future collaboration between researchers and sport practitioners, and, perhaps most important, stimulate curiosity and further collaborative studies about the training, physiology, and performance of endurance athletes.
