Performance determinants and evidence-based practice in track cycling: A survey of coaches, practitioners, and athletes.

Objectives: This study examined how track cycling coaches, practitioners, and athletes: develop knowledge and practices; value performance areas; and, implement research into practice.

Design: Cross-sectional survey.

Methods: An online REDCap survey of track cycling coaches, practitioners, and athletes was conducted involving questions related to demographics, performance area importance, knowledge acquisition and application, research relevance, and research direction.

Results: A total of 159 responses were received from coaches (n = 55), practitioners (n = 29), and athletes (n = 75). Participants' highest track cycling competition level involvement ranged from local/regional (12.7%) to Olympic/Paralympic (39.9%). Respondents primarily develop practices by observing 'the sport' or 'others competing/working in it' (both 85.8%). Practitioners develop practices through self-guided learning (96.4%). The primary reason for practice use was prior experience (84.9%), whilst individuals were least likely to use practices resulting in marginal gains with potentially negative outcomes (27.3%). Areas of greatest perceived importance were Aerodynamics, Strength & Conditioning, and Tactics (all >96% agreed/strongly agreed). Scientific evidence for Tactics (30%) and Mental Skills (26%) was perceived to be lacking, resulting in greater reliance on personal experience (74% and 62%, respectively) to inform training decisions. The main barrier to implementing research into practice was athlete buy-in (84.3%).

Conclusions: Within track cycling, informal learning was most popular amongst respondents. Greater reliance on personal experience within evidence-based practice for many performance areas aligns with limited existing research. Most respondents reported multiple barriers affecting research implementation in practice.