Premium
Summaries of Papers
Author(s) -
Andreas Konekamp,
David Gordon Wilson
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
british journal of dermatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.304
H-Index - 179
eISSN - 1365-2133
pISSN - 0007-0963
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2133.1991.tb05547.x
Subject(s) - medicine
The purpose of this investigation was to Human Power Number 46, winter 1998-99 15 determine the effect of three different trunk angles (60,90, and 120 degrees relative to the ground) on power production of 16 male recreational cyclists (age 20-36) when the hip, knee, and ankle angles were con trolled. Wingate anaerobic tests were per formed on a modified Monark cycle ergometer against a resistance of 85 glkg of the subjects' body mass (5.0 J/crank rev/kg BM). The order of test conditions was ran domly assigned, with a minimum of 24 hours between sessions. A OM MANOVA and post-hoc testS revealed that peak power at the 60and 90-degree trunk angle was sig nificantly greater than that at the 120 degree angle. and mean power in the 90-degree angle was significantly greater than that at the 120-d~gree angle. It was concluded that changes in cycling trunk angle may affect peak power and mean power. The results of this study would suggest that, although a reclining position (120 degree trunk angle) may be more comfort able, it is not effective in power production. The reason? A reclining position where the feet are above the hips forces the cyclist to overcome not just the ergometer resistance, but also the weight of the legs. An analogy to this would be to cycle in an completely inverted position. In this position, it would be more effective to pull on the pedals, using gravity and the weight ofone's legs (than to push against the pedals to over come the leg weight and gravity). A neutral position (9Q-degree trunk angle to the ground) or one where the leg weight assists in pushing the pedals (60-