No abstract

The purpose of the study was to compare the psychophysiological response of climbers of a range of abilities (lower grade to advanced) when ascending identical climbing routes on a climbing wall and a rotating treadwall. Twenty-two female climbers (31.2 ± 9.4 years; 60.5 ± 6.5 kg; 168.6 ± 5.7 cm) completed two identical 18 m climbing trials (graded 4 on the French Sport scale) separated by 1 week, one on the treadwall (climbing low to the ground) and the other on the indoor wall (climbing in height). Indirect calorimetry, venous blood samples and video-analysis were used to assess energy cost, hormonal response and time-load characteristics. Energy costs were higher during indoor wall climbing comparing to those on the treadwall by 16% (P < 0.001, $$\upmu _{{\text{p}}}^{2}$$ μ p 2  = 0.48). No interaction of climbing ability and climbing condition were found. However, there was an interaction for climbing ability and post-climbing catecholamine concentration (P < 0.01, $$\upmu _{{\text{p}}}^{2}$$ μ p 2  = 0.28). Advanced climbers’ catecholamine response increased by 238% and 166% with respect to pre-climb values on the treadwall and indoor wall, respectively; while lower grade climbers pre-climb concentrations were elevated by 281% and 376% on the treadwall and indoor wall, respectively. The video analysis showed no differences in any time-motion variables between treadwall and indoor wall climbing. The study demonstrated a greater metabolic response for indoor wall climbing, however, the exact mechanisms are not yet fully understood.

Background. The aim of the study was to compare the involvement of upper body muscles during double poling and SkiErg Concept 2 workout and verify its specificity for cross-country skiing. Methods. Ten elite Czech cross-country skiers performed double poling and SkiErg workout. Electromyography of selected upper body muscles and cycle characteristics were analysed. To monitor the electrical activity of muscles, we used the device ME6000. Data were analysed using Mega Win and MATLAB software version R2012b. Results. Relative poling phase during double poling was 30.30 ± 2.02% and during SkiErg workout 54 ± 3.36%. Pre-activation of trunk flexors was significantly higher during double poling due to high and forward body position before pole plant. Pre-activation of trunk flexors was not significantly different as pre-activation of shoulder and elbow extensors during SkiErg workout. Deactivation of these muscles came significantly later during SkiErg workout. Conclusion. SkiErg cannot be considered a specific training method for cross-country skiing. It can be recommended to obtain specific power, but long-term application may cause disruption of double poling technique, especially timing of trunk flexors, shoulder and elbow extensors.

No abstract

No abstract