Road cycling: lessons from the elites

What does it really take to attain elite levels of road cycling performance? SPB looks at recent research and data from an actual case study

We all know that the professional road cyclists – for example those competing in the Tour de France - are extremely fit and possess tremendous endurance capacity. But how does this translate into actual performance parameters, which aspects of performance matter most, and how can amateurs use this information to inform their own training? In this article, we will look at some recent research data gathered from the pros, and use the example of an actual elite rider performing at the World Championships to illustrate what this means in practice.

The road to cycling fitness

Most professional road cycling competitions last between one hour (eg a time trial in the World Championships) and 100 hours (eg the Tour de France – raced in stages). Given the range of race lengths, the nature of the events (race or time trial) and the varying terrain (flat to mountainous), it is not surprising that professional road cyclists show different physical characteristics. For example, time-trial specialists who race mainly on flat courses (where absolute power matters) tend to be more heavily built with higher levels of peak power. By contrast, those who race longer distances and over hillier terrain tend to be lighter built with less peak power but higher sustainable power-to-weight ratios (see this article about power vs. power to weight).

Regardless, the aerobic and power capabilities are extremely impressive. Research shows that pro cyclists will typically have maximal power outputs in the range of 370 to 570 watts, and a maximal oxygen uptake (in absolute terms) of around 4.4 to 6.4 litres/minute⁽¹⁾. Make no mistake, these figures are impressive; a 75kg rider with an uptake of 6.0 litres/minute has a relative oxygen uptake (ie per kilo) of 80mls/kg/min, which is right up there with highest values recorded for endurance athletes.

However, what really counts in endurance performance is not so much the maximum oxygen uptake that an athlete can achieve. Instead, it is about what proportion of the maximum power/oxygen uptake can an athlete sustain for long periods before lactate accumulation becomes an issue and starts to slow performance? Here, the performance of pro cyclists is no less impressive, with the best cyclists managing to achieve power outputs of 300 to 500 watts (81-88% of maximum power) at the onset of blood lactate accumulation⁽¹⁾.

Data from racing

Much of the data on the physiology and performance of cyclists has been derived from laboratory studies. However, with the advance of portable electronic performance monitoring over the past few years, gathering actual race data is becoming ever more feasible and practical. In a joint Dutch-South African study published last September, researchers analyzed race data from top five finishers in World Championship races over the period 2012-2019⁽²⁾. This study included data from 33 pro cyclists competing in a total of 177 races and who achieved a top-5 finish. Each of these top finishes was classified as one of the following:

• A flat sprint finish
• A mixed flat and mountain race with an uphill finish
• A mixed flat and mountain race with a level sprint finish
• A full mountain race

In particular, the researchers looked at maximal mean power (MMP) outputs - the maximum sustainable power for a given duration - across a wide range of durations (5 seconds to 60 minutes), expressed in both absolute terms (Watts) and relative terms (in Watts per kilogram of bodyweight). The purpose of this was to see which MMP duration was most important for success in each of the race types.

Endurance riders need sprinting power

The results showed that short-duration maximum power outputs for less than 60 seconds - both in relative and in absolute terms – were the key factor when it came to success in flat sprint finishes and semi-mountain races with a sprint finish. Longer-duration power outputs (over 3 minutes) were the key to success in semi-mountain races with an uphill finish, and to a lesser extent in full mountain races. Of even greater importance for mountain races however were high relative MMPs (ie high watts per kilo) for durations over ten minutes. Together, these data suggest that although road cycling relies on high levels of endurance and aerobic fitness lasting for periods of one to several hours, it is the ability of cyclists to sustain very high intensities for much shorter periods of time (one to ten minutes) that often determines whether they are ‘merely excellent’ performers, or up there with the very best contesting the number one spot on the podium!

---

---

Sprinters need endurance too

The findings above suggest that while excellent endurance is essential, the ability to sprint – often for several minutes – is what marks out the true champions. Another recent study also suggests this is the case – but from the reverse prospective. In this study, titled: ‘Demands of the Tour de France: A Case Study of a World-Class Sprinter’, researchers gathered data on the riding intensities, total loads, and performance characteristics of a world-class sprinter competing in the Tour de France⁽³⁾.

In this study, power output data was collected and analyzed from four separate Tour de France races: 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017. The data collected was as follows:

• The overall load
• The riding intensity distribution in five power output zones
• The maximal average sustained power output for different durations

The stages during which the data was collected were classified divided in accordance with those used by the race organizers – ie flat, semi-mountainous, mountainous, and (team) time trials. In addition, based on their location within the stage, mountain passes were further classified as beginning, middle, or end of the stage.

The findings were as follows:

• Time trials were associated with higher intensities but a lower overall load compared to the other stage types. In other words, the average intensity for a time trial was higher than for a road stage, but because the duration was shorter, the total loading was less.
• The mountain stages required a higher average intensity and imposed a higher loading compared to flat and semi-mountainous stage.
• The flat stages required higher 1-minute maximum power outputs, but the mountainous stages required higher 20-minute maximum power outputs.

When the intensity data across all types of stages was combined, the researchers concluded that cyclists who were categorized as sprinters actually sustain a higher load and spend more time in the high-intensity zones when competing in stage races such as the Tour de France than previously reported values suggested.

Implications for amateur cyclists

The key take home message from these findings is that while road cycling is primarily an endurance sport, and successful cyclists need to have high levels of aerobic fitness, this in itself is not enough. What really marks out the very best cyclists from the rest of the pack is the ability to sustain very high power outputs across a range of durations – from one to twenty minutes, often repeatedly. The case study below of Polish rider Michal Kwiatkowski beautifully illustrates this concept.

Overall, these findings underline the importance of a training approach that builds excellent base endurance/aerobic capacity through long, steady state rides carried out at a low-moderate intensity, but that also develops the capacity to produce and sustain extremely intense bursts for much shorter durations – for example using sessions of very high intensity intervals over durations of 1-10 minutes. Interestingly, this mirrors the ‘polarized’ approach to training, which is a concept we have explored in depth previously in SPB (see this article). In a polarized approach, endurance athletes spend much of their time training at a relatively easy/low intensity, but supplement this with sessions of very high-intensity work conducted at over 90% of VO2max. The evidence suggests that (for elite athletes at least), using a polarized approach, (easy + very intense sessions) is much more likely to yield success than churning spending lots of time at moderate-hard intensities (as many amateur athletes tend to do)!

---

Case study: Michal Kwiatkowski

Michal Kwiatkowski of Poland competes in the 2017 Tour de France stage-20 individual time trial.

On 28^th September 2014, Polish cycling professional Michal Kwiatkowski won an amazing victory at the World Cycling Championships. After more than six hours in the saddle, Kwiatkowski launched a daring attack in the final kilometres, first bridging the gap to the lead group then breaking away from that group in a solo effort for the finish. With a total distance of 254kms (159 miles) and 4,200m (13,900ft) of climbing, the 14-lap course was hugely challenging for all of the riders. However, a closer look at Kwiatkowski’s Quark power meter data reveals just how superb his feat was.

Impressive or astounding?

At first glance, his power figures for the race as a whole, while impressive, might not seem astounding:

• Average power output of 240 watts (3.54 watts per kilo of bodyweight - W/kg)
• Peak 1-hour power of 300 watts (4.42W/kg)
• Average heart rate of 148bpm
• 5,490 calories burned

For example, a reasonably fit 80kg club rider knocking out a 10-mile time trial in 26:00 minutes needs to sustain an average power output of around 240 watts – ie not so very different. But that’s where the similarity ends; not only did Kwiatkowski average 240 watts over six and a half hours, it’s his ability (and that of the pros generally) to put the hammer down and keep it down that separates them from lesser accomplished cyclists (see box 1)!

Calm before the storm

For the first 6hrs 20mins, Kwiatkowski’s teammates worked hard to protect him. By riding in his teammates’ slipstream, Kwiatkowski saved valuable energy reserves – a vital part of his winning strategy (see box 2). Indeed, data from a ‘middle of the pack’ 2011 Tour de France rider (Chris Horner of Radioshack) shows that in the flat sections, speeds of 40kmh or faster could be maintained at a power output of only 150 watts, illustrating the huge benefit of drafting. Of course, Kwiatkowski had to work much harder up the hills – gravity is no respecter of slipstreaming – but here his relatively svelte weight of 68kg was a big plus, reducing his energy consumption compared to heavier riders.

---

Box 1: Us and them

The key determinant of success in road racing is ‘maximum sustainable power’ measured in watts per kilo of bodyweight (W/kg). A reasonably fit recreational rider might typically be able to sustain around 6.5W/kg, 3.0W/kg and 2.6W/kg for 1, 5 and 20 minutes respectively. A competitive club rider at cat 2 level might be able to manage around 8.5W/kg, 4.9W/kg and 4.3W/kg respectively.

To put this in perspective, Contador’s ascent of Verbier in stage 15 of the 2009 Tour de France took 20mins 55secs, during which he sustained an incredible power output of 6.8W/kg. Similarly, in the run up to the 2011 Tour, Bradley Wiggins practiced 25-minute climbs sustaining 6.6W/kg while 1996 Tour de France winner Bjarne Riis was reckoned to sustain 7.0W/kg in the big climbs!

Maximum peak power for sprinting is also important – for example to ‘jump’ ahead at the start of a breakaway or sprinting for the finish line. Kwiatkowski’s final attack for the line attack started after nearly 6.5 hours in the saddle and lasted around three minutes. One minute into the attack, he was powering along at 706 watts (10.4W/kg) and he sustained over 500 watts output for the entire attack – that’s over 7W/kg. It’s this ability to get the hammer down and keep it there even after hours of sapping racing that marks the pros apart!

---

Box 2: Conserving energy to win

Kwiatkowski needed to be in superb physical condition to win the race but his team’s tactics were also vital for success. As well as protecting him from wind drag, the team brought Kwiatkowski to the front of the chasing pack, allowing him to descend quickly, carrying as much speed as possible into the bends and eliminating excessive braking and the need to keep re-accelerating.

These tactics enabled Kwiatkowski to significantly reduce his overall power output prior to the big attack, which helped in two ways:

1. It enabled his muscles to derive a greater proportion of their energy aerobically - ie without the production of excessive lactate. Although muscles can clear lactate after hard efforts during a race, it invariably comes at a price of greater fatigue later on in the race. Of course, Kwiatkowski’s lactate levels would have rocketed during the final attack but as he was only minutes from the finishing line, this wasn’t an issue!
2. It enabled his muscles to burn more fat for energy while conserving precious stores of muscle glycogen – the only source of energy for the very high-intensity effort that was to follow in the final moments of the race.

---

---

The attack

With all the right foundations in place, Kwiatkowski launched his attack by jumping away from the main chasing group to catch the lead group. To do this, he unleashed a half-minute burst averaging 436 watts (6.43W/kg) at 53kmh, during which his peak power hit 928 watts (!) – a key point in the race. After catching the lead group, Kwiatkowski took a very short breather. But with only a narrow lead over the chasing peloton that included many of the favourites, he couldn’t afford to sit in the lead group too long. After less than a minute of recovery, he attacked again – this time for the finish line.

The final sprint

His sprint away from the lead group lasted around 3 minutes, during which he sustained over 500 watts, peaking over 700 watts. Having got away, he kept the pressure on right to the line, sustaining an average power of 415 watts and a speed of 60kmh for the final 1.7km. To produce these numbers at anytime is extremely impressive, and something that most cyclists could only dream of. To produce them right at the end of a 253km, 6.5-hour race through mountainous terrain however is testament to Kwiatkowski’s extraordinary ability, and underlines the performance gulf between the pros and the rest of us!

References

1. Sports Med. 2001;31(7):479-87
2. Human Kinetics 2021; 17(2) 203-209
3. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2021 Sep 1;16(9):1363-1370