The Real Science of Sport Podcast

In this week's Spotlight, we swing the light from cycling to doping, via trans news updates and some success stories from our Discourse members. We kick off with a chat about whether we've been too obsessed with power numbers, and not talking enough about speed, as pointed out by Christoph Roodhooft of Alpecin's pro-cycling team. We discuss what it means to be an "economic cyclist", which allows Gareth to propose the concept of "physiological frugality", which we are 100% sure will take over from "durability" as the next-big-thing in elite cycling by 2027!We also chat briefly about positive fuelling experiences shared with us by Discourse members, who've managed to push their energy intakes up thanks to the experts we've heard from on the pod. We check in on some controversial topics, including the transgender athletes in sport debate, where a new paper, a legal decision and an imminent IOC election are all in the spotlight, and finally, we briefly discuss Shelby Houlihan's own words about her doping defence in an interview with Letsrun.com.Show notesAs mentioned, Discourse is our VIP Community where you can share bicarb recipes, tales of fuel success, and a whole lot more! You become a member by pledging a small amount on Patreon, which you can access here, and that will give you access to all the chat and sports science insights from members.LinksThe GCN segment discussed on the show, giving rise to Gareth's concept of "frugality"The Handelsman & Bermon paper that is discussed brieflyFull Decision in the Hamilton vs Telegraph press complaintThis is the full, in-depth analysis I did for Letsrun on the Shelby Houlihan decision, including the wrong application or misunderstanding of the Technical Document, and the carbon isotope ratio analysis that refuted Houlihan's argumentsThe interview Houlihan did last week with Letsrun, as alluded to by Gareth in the podcast

On today's Spotlight, we ask why runners are racing faster than ever? The same could also be said of cyclists, and we use an intriguing article by Amby Burfoot to explore and discuss the possible contributors, ranging from super shoes to the "Bannister effect". It leads us back to ground we've covered before (shoe tech, carbs), some areas we have yet to cover in detail (bicarbonate), and down some dark alleys that may contain the future (and possibly present) of doping methods.We also talk about technology in sport, and about which sports have seen the biggest, fastest leaps as a result of innovation, taking a quick tour of some other devices that have 'recalibrated' sporting performances and human limits.Finally, we discuss some of the science and performances in the Zwift Academy 2025, the latest iteration of a competition to identify and recruit aspirant cyclists into two professional cycling teams. We explore the tests used on the show, their value, and how hugely confounded the talent prediction is, even in a sport as measurable as cycling.Show notesAs mentioned, Discourse is where it all goes down, and here's where you click to become a member for a small monthly donation. Sign up as a Patron, and you'll have access to this community, and all the fascinating insights shared by fellow listenersLinksSean Ingle's article on that four-minute mile projectionAmby Burfoot's intriguing thought experiment canvassing opinion on what is driving faster running performancesThe paper mentioned on the show describing novel drugs to "manage classical heme disorders" - not a huge leap to performance enhancement, but the molecular switch approach to doping may be a concernThe podcast we once did on technology in sport - includes klapskates, swimsuits, and bicyclesThe BBC article on the increasing prevalence of obesity and overweightThe Lancet study described in the BBC articleThe first episode of the 2025 Zwift Academy, the rest can be found on the same channelSome normative power output from elite men, and elite women's cycling. Compare yourself to the pros. I'll put the summary tables up on Discourse for members

In this Spotlight, Ross and Gareth become "bros" to discuss and critique a recent paper that forecasts a sub-4 min mile in women (specifically, Faith Kipyegon) if drafting strategies were improved. Ross explains his skepticism and reaction to straw man arguments in media about the paper, and the framing of the seven second improvement required as a "mental barrier". This ushers in a new segment for the show, "Grinds my Gears!".We also learn from a Discourse member, @pauliuspeciura, about how to execute a textbook heat adaptation strategy for a race he participated in recently. We talk about the physiology of heat adaptation, and how to implement a downscaled, but necessary approach to heat in your next race. We also briefly touch on two bits of news, one concerning an increasing lack of physical activity in children in the UK, and other a peculiar, though not unique, explanation for doping contamination in the recent case of triathlete Imogen Simmonds**Ross mentioned a USA Sprinter who was cleared of a positive drug test after using "passionate kissing" as a defence. That was Gil Roberts, not Derrick Brew as mentioned (article link below). Roberts, incidentally, got cleared of this positive result in 2017, but then had another doping violation in 2022 (16 month ban) and then another in 2023, and is now serving an 8 year ban!Show notesSpotlights are inspired by Discourse, and then the discussion continues there after! If you want to become a member of that community, here's the link to Patreon, where you sign up, and then it'll direct you to the Discourse Platform where the floor is yours!LinksArticle in the Guardian that talks about the decline in numbers of PE Teachers in BritainA paper in the BJSM on the physical activity issues and the need to optimize social factorsImogen Simmonds' post on the doping positive for Ligandrol. Time will tell whether there's more to itThe news piece on Gil Roberts and the passionate kissing defenceDiscourse Member Paulius Peciura discusses his heat adaptation strategy and race outcome here - Note: Discourse members onlyThe paper analysing Kipyegon's World Record, postulating the sub-4 is possible with a massive 75% drafting benefitThe New York Times piece on the sub-4 theory that contains the quotes that ground Ross' gears!

Dr. Stephen Seiler is arguably the world authority on endurance training, and popularized the concept of polarized training. But a new paper has revealed some fresh insights into training polarization which suggest that the training structure may only be suitable for certain types of athletes. Enjoy this deep dive into one of the most-discussed endurance topics as we break down the theory, look at the results of this ground-breaking systematic review, discuss how the results can inform training protocols and what future studies are needed. Seiler is an exercise physiologist and Professor of Sports Science from the University of Agder in Norway.SHOW NOTESTHE PAPER ON Training Intensity Distribution Intervention will Produce the Greatest Improvements in Maximal Oxygen Uptake and Time-Trial Performance in Endurance Athletes? A Systematic Review.

This week's spotlight turns to the indoor tracks and roads of the world, as we discuss the continuing recalibration of running performance. Every USA Men's Indoor distance record was broken in the course of a week, with two world records among the performances. One of those world records didn't last the week, as Jakob Ingebrigtsen broke it in France. Then on the roads, Jacob Kiplimo took the half marathon into a new galaxy with a sub-57 performance. The two-hour marathon is now clearly within reach. Gareth and Ross discuss those performances, and inspired to some Discourse, look back at a 2008 paper that analyzed race-horses and greyhounds to make predictions about how fast humans can still run. We check in those predictions to discover how shoe tech has moved some events ahead of the curve.We also shine one last Spotlight on the Janik Sinner three month ban, elaborating on a few matters that arose since our previous emergency Spotlight, and explain why some of the vilification of anti-doping's process may be unwarranted, and in some instances (Tim Henman!) completely detached from reality!Join DiscourseFor more conversation and insight, join our Discourse community where fellow listeners, experts and enthusiasts offer thoughts and opinions on this issue, and many more sports science topics. Membership requires that you become a Patron of the site, here, with a small monthly pledge to become part of our VIP communityShow notesThe Mark Denny study using horses and greyhounds to predict human limits, as discussedThe Iga Swiatek Reasoned Decision, where Points 40 and 41 explain No Fault and Utmost Caution principles

Dr Joe Warne is a former international athlete and the key instigator of the Sports Science Replication Centre at the Technological University in Dublin. Having also worked as a performance coach Warne has spent hours both testing and working with modern tech devices with a key interest in finding out how reliable and trustworthy the data is. In this interview, the team discusses the metrics you can best trust, how to interpret the data you get correctly, and what the future of wearable tech and exercise data could be.

Tennis star Janik Sinner has accepted an immediate three-month suspension for his 2024 clostebol positives. In this emergency Spotlight, Gareth and Ross discuss the agreement between Sinner and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), and explain why both parties would have been incentivized to reach a settlement rather than go to arbitration at CAS in mid-April. We offer insights and early thoughts on whether, as claimed by Nick Kyrgios, this is "a bad day for tennis", or whether a three-month ban is justified and appropriate, giving the accepted facts of the case and what could be proven in previous tribunals.Join DiscourseFor more conversation and insight, join our Discourse community where fellow listeners, experts and enthusiasts offer thoughts and opinions on this issue, and many more sports science topics. Membership requires that you become a Patron of the site, here, with a small monthly pledge to become part of our VIP communityShow notes:WADA's full statement on the settlementBBC article on the settlement, as read in the podcastYouTube channel Tennis Talk, who we heard from in the podcast

In this Spotlight, we address some noteworthy recent developments in the regulation and protection of women's sport. In the most significant of these, World Athletics have announced proposals, still in consultation, that would compel elite female participants to undergo a screening test that looks for the SRY gene as an eligibility requirement. Ross explains why this step, inevitable and necessary for women's sport to deliver on its purpose, may be the most important one taken by any sport in the last few years. We also discuss other proposals that strengthen World Athletics' protection of women's athletics, as well as an Executive Order on women's sport signed by Donald Trump, the NCAA response to that EO, and what this all means for this ongoing controversial issue.Become a Discourse member and drive the SpotlightIf you enjoy the Spotlights, and want to weigh in on these and other topics, consider becoming a Patron of the show, and get full access to the Discourse community! Here's where you go to make a small pledge and become a Patron, and that'll open up this portal to a world of sports science, performance and health conversations!Links to topics and articles we discussed on the showWorld Athletics page explaining the proposals and the consultation process that includes the pre-clearance (cheek swab) methodThe full World Athletics document outlining proposed changes to eligibilityThe academic article that a group of us wrote last year, explaining how screening should be implemented to support protection of the female categoryGreg Brown's paper comparing boys to girls in running eventsSame author, same approach, different sport - here's Greg Brown's analysis of boys and girls in swimmingMarina Hyde's article that describes how issues are bundled rather than assessed on their merits, to the detriment, sometimes, of realityNCAA update on changes to their eligibility policy, where they take a step towards protecting women's sport, but fail to base it on biologyThe Executive Order signed by Trump earlier this weekThe larger Executive Order that helpfully defines sex, male and female with implications for policy