LAUSR

PURPOSE To optimize the recovery phase between heats in ski-mountaineering sprint competitions, this study investigated whether an active recovery protocol on an ergocycle could improve subsequent performance compared with a self-selected recovery strategy. METHODS Thirteen elite ski mountaineers (9 men and 4 women) performed 3 sprints with 2 different recovery conditions (Ergo vs Free) in a randomized order. The Ergo condition involved a 10-minute constant-intensity exercise on an ergocycle performed at 70% of maximum heart rate. For the Free condition, the athlete was asked to self-select modality. At the end of the third sprint, a passive recovery (seated) was prescribed for both protocols. Sprint performance (time) and physiological parameters (lactate concentration [La], heart rate [HR], and rating of perceived exertion [RPE]) were recorded from each sprint and recovery phase. RESULTS In the Ergo vs Free protocols, sprint times (177 [24] s vs 176 [23] s; P = .63), recovery average HR (70% [2.9%] vs 71% [5.2%] of maximal HR), and RPE (16.7 [1.5] vs 16.8 [1.5]; P = .81) were not significantly different. However, [La] decreased more after Ergo (-2.9 [1.8] mmol·L-1) and Free (-2.8 [1.8] mmol·L-1) conditions compared with passive recovery (-1.1 [1.6] mmol·L-1; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS The use of an ergocycle between heat sprints in ski mountaineering does not provide additional benefits compared with a recovery strategy freely chosen by the athletes. However, active conditions provide a faster [La] reduction compared with passive recovery and seem to be a more suitable strategy between multiple-heat sprints.