Back

Sharing power: effects of rider ability and position on tandem performance

Smit, A.; van Ewijk, J.; Janssen, I.; Janssen, T. W. J.; Hofmijster, M. J.

2026-03-30 physiology
10.64898/2026.03.25.714296 bioRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTandem cycling requires a coordinated effort between the pilot and the stoker. Previous research suggests that randomly paired tandem cyclists produce lower power output than when cycling solo. This study examined how a cyclists individual ability and their position on the tandem (pilot or stoker) affects pair performance, when partners are either closely matched or differ substantially in solo cycling capacity, as this might be relevant for training and selection. MethodsTwenty-three trained cyclists completed three 10-minute time trials: solo, equal-capacity tandem ([≤]25 W difference in solo performance), and unequal-capacity tandem ([≥]40 W difference). Mean power output, heart rate, cadence, and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were recorded. Positions (pilot or stoker) were counterbalanced. Linear mixed-effects models assessed effects of capacity and position. ResultsRelative to solo cycling, equal-capacity tandem pairs revealed lower power output (-3.9%), lower heart rate (-2.3%), and lower RPE (-11.5%). Unequal-capacity tandems differed from solo only in heart rate (-2.7%). Stokers produced lower power relative to solo (-5.3%) and relative to pilots (-3.7%) and reported lower RPE relative to solo (-13.9%), while pilots matched their solo power at a lower heart rate (-2.9%). Cadence did not differ across conditions. Total tandem power averaged 95.6% of combined solo power, and differences in partner capacity did not significantly affect combined power output. ConclusionThis study provides the first known experimental data on how partner matching affects individual and combined power output in tandem cycling. Equal- and unequal-capacity tandem pairs showed similar performance. Lower power and RPE among stokers suggest reduced engagement or a redistribution of effort between riders. These findings highlight that effective tandem performance depends on physiological capacity and rider position on the tandem, but not on the difference in capacity between partners.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 7%
22.4%
2
European Journal of Applied Physiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.4%
4
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
8.2%
5
Journal of Applied Physiology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 24%
4.8%
7
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
8
Experimental Physiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
9
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.9%
10
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.6%
11
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
12
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
13
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
16
American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
17
Human Movement Science
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
18
Function
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
19
American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology
32 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
npj Microgravity
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
22
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
23
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 58%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
25
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
26
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
27
Integrative Organismal Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%