Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Drafting occurs when athletes follow closely behind another to reduce aerodynamic resistance, lowering their biomechanical, physiological, and psychobiological load. However, it is unclear how aware athletes and coaches are of this advantage and how it is applied in training and competition. The aim of this study was to investigate the beliefs and attitudes of athletes and coaches towards drafting. An online survey was conducted with athletes (N = 236) and coaches (N = 79) active in cycling, skating and running. They answered five items on a Likert scale and answered one open question (“what is needed for optimal drafting?”). Thematic analysis revealed six themes, emphasizing the complexity and interpersonal nature of the drafting skill. Overall, 91.3% of respondents agreed that drafting can improve sports performance (60.5% strongly agree), while only 1.7% strongly disagreed. Yet, few indicated that they regularly worked on improving their drafting skills in training (16.4%). There was a moderate correlation between awareness and training on drafting, for athletes (r_s= 0.31, p < 0.001) and coaches (r_s= 0.35, p < 0.05). The findings demonstrate that athletes and coaches are generally aware of the advantages of drafting and recognise it as an important, complex and multifaceted skill. Yet, paradoxically, only few see value in exploring and improving this skill during training. This study highlights a critical gap between theoretical understanding and practical application, revealing a missed opportunity in athlete development.

Keywords

Aerodynamic drag cycling running skating slipstreaming strategic cognition technical skills

Introduction

In a variety of sports, such as cycling, skating and running, athletes follow closely behind one or more competitors to reduce the aerodynamic resistive forces; this is called drafting.¹ Wind tunnel research has shown that the leading athlete shields the one behind from wind resistance by creating a vortex, which reduces aerodynamic drag for the trailing athlete and, to some extent, also for the leader.² Drafting can lower resistive forces by up to 38% in cycling,³ 23% in skating,² and 6.5% in running.⁴ In these endurance sports, athletes can enhance performance by either increasing power output or reducing resistive forces, such as through drafting, thereby improving efficiency.

A recent systematic literature review and meta-analysis, investigating real-world conditions across sport disciplines, showed that drafting can significantly reduce the biomechanical, physiological, and psychobiological load on the athlete.⁵ These benefits are influenced by factors such as athletes’ drafting techniques,⁵ frontal area,^2–4 and movement velocity⁶ and are most effectively by staying as close as possible behind the leader and through synchronizing movement towards the same rhythm/technique.⁷ Drafting during a race also presents a strategic and tactical social dilemma because all athletes want to hide behind others to save energy⁸ making teamwork and anticipating opponents’ behavior crucial.⁹ Awareness of drafting benefits and its use in competition might be influenced by factors such as age and experience, as they play a key role in refining the alignment between individual's performance capabilities and the task demands.¹⁰ Indeed, the integration of environmental factors to optimize one's own effort regulation and performance has been demonstrated to be a skill that both develops with age and is acquired through training and experience.^11–13 Coaches and athletes have different roles in optimizing performance: athletes actively manage their training and energy expenditure,^14,15 while coaches guide skill development and monitor progress.¹⁶ Together, they apply strategies such as drafting, making it essential to consider perspectives from both groups to inform future decision-making.

Although drafting is known to reduce resistive forces and improve efficiency, it is unclear whether athletes and coaches are aware of these benefits and use this information to gain an advantage in practice and competition. The aim of this study is to bridge the gap between theoretical understanding and practical application by investigating athletes’ and coaches’ beliefs and attitudes towards the potential advantages of drafting. Four key questions are examined: (1) what do athletes and coaches consider necessary for effective drafting? It is hypothesized that they will follow the guidelines as described in the scientific literature, and emphasize technique, synchronization, positioning, and teamwork.^5,7 (2) Do beliefs and attitudes towards drafting differ between athletes and coaches, and across sports? Differences between athletes and coaches are likely to arise from their roles within the social environment. In addition, variation in movement velocity and the nature of the sport are expected to drive the differences between cycling, skating and running. (3) How do age and experience affect attitudes and beliefs on drafting? Older and more experienced athletes are expected to be more aware of drafting benefits and incorporate them more in practice and competition. (4) How strong is the correlation between awareness of the benefits of drafting and their incorporation into training? Anecdotal evidence suggests that improving drafting skills is currently not widely integrated into training practices.¹⁷

Methods

Procedure

An online survey was distributed to athletes and coaches in cycling, skating and running. After the respondents gave written consent, the survey started with six demographic questions (trainer/coach or athlete, age, sex, primary sport activity, level of competition and years of sport experience). It was followed by a small explanation about drafting: “In a variety of sports, athletes follow closely behind one or more athletes to reduce the aerodynamic resistive forces; this is called drafting. For example, when you cycle close behind someone to avoid the wind.” The survey included one item on the respondents outlook on drafting, using a 6-point Likert scale¹⁸ (1 = ‘Totally disagree’, 2 = ‘Disagree’, 3 = ‘Neutral’, 4 = ‘Agree’, 5 = ‘Totally agree and 6 = ‘I do not know’), four items based on a 5-point Likert scale¹⁸ (1 = ‘Never’, 2 = ‘Seldom’, 3 = ‘Sometimes’, 4 = ‘Often’, 5 = ‘Always’), and one open-ended question (Table 1).

Table 1.

Questionnaire for athletes and coaches. The items for coaches are presented in italics.

6-point Likert scale (Totally disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Totally agree, I do not know^a)

I am aware that drafting can improve my sports performance.

I am aware that drafting can improve the sports performance of my athletes.

5-point Likert scale (Never, Seldom, Sometimes, Often, Always)

I use drafting during competitions.^b

My athletes use drafting during competitions.^b

Drafting improves my sports performance during competition.^b

Drafting improves the sports performance of my athletes during competition.^b

I use drafting during my training.

My athletes use drafting during training.

I work to improve my drafting skills during training.

I let my athletes practice on drafting skills during training.

Open question

What is needed for optimal drafting? Fill in minimal 1 answer.

The answer I do not know was excluded from data analyses.

Participation levels Do not participate/coach in competition and Recreational were excluded from data analyses.

Sample selection

The survey was distributed through physical and digital posters to reach as many athletes and coaches as possible across different sports and of various years of experience and performance levels, from all over the world. The online questionnaire was available to athletes and coaches for six months (July-December 2024). Both Dutch and English versions of the survey were provided. The sports were selected due to the frequent use of drafting and the particular benefits it provides in these sports, as demonstrated by previous research.⁵ The sports were categorized into three main groups: cycling, skating, and running.

Ethical considerations

The study protocol and informed consent procedure was approved by the ethics committee of the Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences of the University of Groningen (research code: PSY-1920-S-0449). Respondents gave written consent. It is in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki.

Data analyses

The open-ended question, What is needed for optimal drafting?, was categorized into subthemes using thematic analysis following the guidelines by Braun & Clarke.¹⁹ After becoming familiar with the responses, the authors identified and developed themes that encapsuled the key insights. This analysis is conducted by two authors (FB, ME) independently of each other. A third author (BH) reviewed and compared the results from these two analyses. Ultimately, all five authors discussed the outcomes, and themes were adjusted where necessary.

The answer: “I do not know” from the 6-point Likert scale was excluded from further analyses. Only respondents from the regional, national or international competition levels were included in the analysis of the two items regarding competition. The responses were reported as median values with corresponding ranges. All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 30 with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.

A Kruskal-Wallis H test was performed to examine differences across the three sports for each of the items. When a significant effect was found, post-hoc pairwise comparisons were conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. Additionally, the Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare responses on each of the items between athletes and coaches. For the Mann-Whitney U tests, the asymptotic significance was reported, unless the exact significance value was available.

The effect of age and years of experience on each of the items was investigated using Spearman's rank correlation (Spearman's rho). The relationships between the items I am aware that drafting can improve my sports performance and I work to improve my drafting skills during training, using Spearman's rank correlation. These analyses were performed separately for athletes and coaches, and for the different sports. If a significant effect for age or experience was found for either of these questions, the associated variable was included as a covariate in further correlation analysis (i.e., partial correlation). Correlation coefficients were interpreted as follows: no association (0–0.10), weak (0.10–0.29), moderate (0.30–0.49), and strong (0.50–1.00).²⁰

Results

A total of 321 respondents completed the questionnaire (Table 2). In total, six respondents were excluded because their sport was beyond the scope of this study (rowing and hockey). For respondents active in triathlon (n = 10), only responses to the open-ended question were included in the analysis. Athletes had an average age of 29.1 ± 11.8 years and coaches 45.6 ± 13.9 years, with years of experience averaging 9.4 ± 8.3 years for athletes and 11.5 ± 10.8 years for coaches. The majority of the respondents were from the Netherlands. Participation level was categorized into five levels, with the first four based on TIER 1–5²¹ (international, national, regional, and recreational), and level 5 comprising respondents who do not participate in competitions.

Table 2.

Characteristics of the respondents in N and mean ± SD.

	Athletes	Coaches
Gender
Male	152	54
Female	84	23
Prefer not to say		2
Age in years	29.1 ± 11.8	45.6 ± 13.9
Sport
Cycling	92	21
Skating	61	34
Running	76	21
Triathlon	7	3
Participation level
International (Tier 4 and 5)	16	16
National (Tier 3)	56	19
Regional (Tier 2)	44	13
Recreational (Tier 1)	86	21
Do not participate/coach in competition	34	10
Years of experience	9.4 ± 8.3 years	11.5 ± 10.8 years
Total	236	79

Thematic analysis

Through thematic analysis, 294 responses to the open-ended question were divided into 422 statements. These statements were divided into six themes: presence of others, environmental factors and material, technical skills, mental skills, strategic cognition and training. The last four themes were further categorized into personal (related to the athlete self) and interpersonal (answers given in relation to another athlete) (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Distribution of statements across the six themes and their subthemes on what is considered needed for optimal drafting.

Presence of others

In 21% of the statements, the presence of other people is mentioned. It was stated that drafting is only possible when other people are present, as they create the necessary conditions for it. For example, teammates, opponents or a peloton. These other athletes must also possess certain characteristics, such as being of similar or slightly larger physique. Respondents indicated that it was beneficial for the leader to have the same or a higher velocity and efficient movements, allowing the drafting athlete to adapt to theirs.

Environmental factors and material

In 10% of the statements, environmental factors and material were mentioned. For drafting to be effective, it must be permitted within the context of the sport, event, or training session. In certain competitions, however, drafting is explicitly prohibited by regulations or simply not feasible because the activity is performed individually. Key conditions such as a headwind, high velocity, and a well-designed course were deemed essential. Additionally, aerodynamic equipment was thought to be able to further optimise the benefits of drafting. An example of a statement in this theme: The drafting effect is greater in headwind conditions and at higher speeds.

Technical skills

In 15% of the statements, technical skills were mentioned. It was reported that the drafting athlete needs to have strong technical skills and adaptability, ensuring they can move in the same stroke and rhythm as their predecessor while maintaining an aerodynamic posture. This requires both technical and rhythmic adaptability, as well as control over their technique and good proficiency on, for example, the bike. Technical skills can be divided into the skills of the drafting athlete themselves (e.g., “a good aerodynamic posture”) and their technical ability to adjust to the leader's movements (e.g., “ability to ride closely behind the leader”).

Mental skills

Mental skills were mentioned in 14% of the statements. According to the statements, confidence, bravery, and courage are essential for optimal drafting (e.g., “courage to ride close to someone's wheel”). These can be further divided into the athlete's confidence in their own abilities and their trust in the leader, both of which are necessary for effective drafting.

Strategic cognition

Strategic cognition was the largest theme, accounting for 35% of the statements. It encompasses several key aspects, including staying as close as possible to the predecessor, maintaining the same stroke, being aware of and sensing the wind, and selecting the optimal position. The respondents indicated that making strategic decisions is necessary for effective drafting.

Training

This was the smallest theme, making up 5%. Topics such as the importance of training with others on positioning and riding closely behind them to gain experience in drafting were highlighted.

Quantitative analysis

Figure 2 displays the responses to the Likert-scale questions. Participation levels “Do not participate/coach in competition” and “Recreational” were excluded from data analyses on the two questions: I use drafting during competitions and Drafting improves my sports performance during competition. Only non-significant differences are presented, as all other comparisons yielded statistically significant effects. The only exception was the first question for coaches, which showed no significant effect; therefore, post hoc testing was not performed. Table A1 in the appendix displays the percentage of responses for athletes and coaches. The results of statistical tests comparing each item between athletes and coaches, and across sports, are reported in Tables A2–4 in the appendix.

Figure 2.

Responses (median and range) to the five items from athletes and coaches, both overall and across three sports, with non-significant differences (ns) indicated above, all other differences are significant.

Generally, respondents were aware that drafting could improve sport performance (60.5% always, 30.8% often). However, only cyclists indicated that drafting benefits them in competition (59%) and clearly stated that they use it during races (71.8%). Although athletes across sports mentioned that they use drafting during training (38.2% often, 16.4% always), they also indicated that they did not work to improve their drafting skills during training (21.5% sometimes, 27.6% seldom, 36.8% never). Similarly, most coaches scored neutral or negative for the use of drafting in competition (63.8%) and improving it during training (76.3%), suggesting that it was not a priority for their athletes to work on improving their drafting skills during training session.

For athletes, there was either no association or a weak correlation for age and experience across the survey items (Table 3). For coaches, the exception was the item I use drafting during competitions, which showed a moderate negative correlation with age (r = −0.43, p < 0.01). This indicated that younger coaches reported that their athletes use drafting more frequently during competitions.

Table 3.

Spearman's rho correlations and corresponding 95% confidence intervals for age and experience across five items for athletes and coaches. The items for coaches are presented below the table using superscript.

	Athletes		Coaches
	Age	Experience	Age	Experience
I am aware that drafting can improve my sports performance.^a	N = 229−.05[−.19, .08]	N = 219.01[−.13, .15]	N = 75−.21[−.42, .03]	N = 75−.07[−.30, .16]
Drafting improves my sports performance during competition.^b	N = 110.10[−.01, .28]	N = 109−.20*[−.38, −.00]	N = 46−.15[−.43, .16]	N = 47.03[−.27, .32]
I use drafting during competitions.^c	N = 110.16[−.03, .34]	N = 109−.23*[−.41, −.04]	N = 46−.43**[−.65, .15]	N = 47−.26[−.52, .04]
I use drafting during my training.^d	N = 229−.19**[−.32, −.06]	N = 221.14*[.00, .27]	N = 75−.16[−.38, .08]	N = 75.18[−.06, .40]
I work to improve my drafting skills during training.^e	N = 229−.06[−.19, .08]	N = 223−.04[−.17, .10]	N = 75−.09[−.31, .15]	N = 75.19[−.05, .41]

*p < 0.05 **p < 0.01

I am aware that drafting can improve the sports performance of my athletes.

Drafting improves the sports performance of my athletes during competition.

My athletes use drafting during competitions.

My athletes use drafting during training.

I let my athletes practice on drafting skills during training.

Lastly, there was a moderate positive correlation between the items I am aware that drafting can improve my sports performance and I work to improve my drafting skills during training, for both athletes (r = 0.31, p < 0.001, 95%, Confidence Interval [0.18, 0.42], n = 223) and coaches (r = 0.35, p < 0.01, 95%, CI [0.13, 0.54], n = 76). Stratified analysis across sports revealed that correlations were observed for athletes and coaches active in skating and running, but not in cycling (Appendix Table A5).

Discussion

This study aimed to investigate the beliefs and attitudes of athletes and coaches participating in cycling, skating and running, regarding the potential advantages of drafting. The results reveal that although many athletes and coaches are aware of the benefits of drafting, it is not consistently used in competition or systematically developed during training. Echoing findings by Washif et al.,²² the results highlight a disconnect between knowledge and beliefs and applied practice in sport and coaching environments, with in this case drafting benefits acknowledged in theory but rarely addressed in training routines. These findings indicate that while drafting is widely recognized as beneficial, its practical implementation and focused training could be further developed, especially in sports which are characterized by drafting benefits such as high-velocity endurance sports.

From what is considered needed for optimal drafting, athletes and coaches place around one third of the factors outside of the drafting athlete's control, such as the presence of others²³ (teammates or suitable opponents moving at equal or higher velocity), as well as environmental factors and material²⁴ (favourable wind, aerodynamic gear, appropriate course). That leaves around two third of the factors related to the drafting athletes themselves. These are the technical skills (aerodynamic posture, rhythm control), mental skills (confidence, trust, and courage in close-quarters movement), and particularly strategic cognition (tactical positioning, wind awareness, and timing).^5,25 According to the respondents, the drafting athlete does not only need to be able to perform the movements ‘in isolation’ (i.e., the ‘personal’ skills) but also in relation to the leading athlete (the ‘interpersonal’ skills). As such, the themes reflect a shared understanding of drafting as a multifaceted dynamic skill requiring both physical and mental preparedness as well as environmental adaptation. It is therefore remarkable that, despite their knowledge and awareness on this topic, trainers and coaches assign only a minimal number of statements on what is needed for optimal drafting to training (5%).

The majority of the respondents (91.3%) agreed that drafting can improve sports performance, which is supported by existing literature demonstrating clear aerodynamic and physiological advantages.⁵ However, a considerable proportion of respondents remained not completely aware of its benefits, suggesting variation in perceived relevance across sports. This may be explained by differences in the distinct task requirements regarding how relevant and applicable drafting is across various sports. Cyclists were the most aware of drafting's benefits and reported using it most frequently in competition. This is consistent with current knowledge, as the effects of drafting are more pronounced at higher velocities and longer duration.⁵ Because cycling typically involves both high velocities (e.g., 45 km/h) and extended race durations (e.g., 6 h), drafting becomes particularly advantageous. While speed skating is also a high-velocity sport, competitions are generally much shorter in duration and often involve individual events where drafting is not possible. However, with an increasing number of team events being introduced to make the sport more appealing, drafting becomes increasingly important in speed skating as well. In running, drafting is possible in middle and long-distance events, but as the slowest of these three sports, the relative aerodynamic benefit is smaller.²⁶

Athletes and coaches may recognize drafting's benefits, yet the present study findings clearly indicate that they are not aware of, and do not actively work on, improving their drafting skills. Several factors might contribute to this gap. Drafting is often used as a training method to achieve higher velocities, distributing physical load more efficiently, or reduce effort to maintain pace.²⁶ These training sessions do not focus primarily on improving drafting techniques themselves but rather use drafting to enhance overall training efficiency and performance. Additionally, training often prioritizes broader performance goals, leaving little time for targeted drafting practice. Drafting also depends on the behaviour of others, making it partly outside the athlete's control. This social component, as riding behind competitors can also push athletes to perform harder.¹⁴ In addition, some athletes believe their drafting skills are already sufficient, while coaches tend to focus on overall performance rather than isolated techniques.

Future research

The findings suggest a clear gap between awareness of drafting's benefits and its practical application in training, which warrants further investigation. Despite the advantages of drafting, more focus is placed on enabling efficient overall training rather than specifically refining drafting techniques. Therefore, athletes and coaches should communicate more about drafting and integrate drafting skill training into regular training programmes. By doing so, athletes can improve their ability to optimise energy efficiency, adapt to race dynamics, and enhance performance in both team-based events and pack-style races. One key factor that could facilitate this is the development of a practical method to measure and evaluate drafting performance. Although wind tunnels have provided great insight into the benefits of drafting, and its underlying mechanisms, they are not available for most practitioners or appropriate for use in daily training. This practical measurement tool should quantify the factors deemed needed for optimal drafting as indicated by athletes and coaches, including aerodynamic posture, timing, rhythm control and tactical positioning. A reliable and practical measurement tool would allow for an exploration of the most effective methods for training drafting skills, ensuring feasibility and efficiency in practice.

Conclusion

Athletes and coaches identified six key themes as essential for effective drafting, reflecting a shared understanding of drafting as a complex, dynamic skill that requires both physical and mental preparedness as well as adaptation to environmental conditions. Differences between sports were also observed, with cyclists demonstrating the highest awareness of drafting's benefits and reporting the most frequent use during competitions. Age and experience generally had little impact, although younger coaches indicated more frequent use of drafting in competition. Despite general awareness of drafting's advantages, the relationship between this knowledge and actual practice during training was only moderate, revealing a clear gap between belief and application. To address this gap, the development of a practical measurement tool could facilitate the assessment of drafting skills and inform targeted training strategies.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-spo-10.1177_17479541251386161 - Supplemental material for Do athletes and coaches do what they know? A mixed-method survey on beliefs and attitudes on drafting in endurance sports

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-spo-10.1177_17479541251386161 for Do athletes and coaches do what they know? A mixed-method survey on beliefs and attitudes on drafting in endurance sports by Floor AP van den Brandt, Stein GP Menting, Barbara CH Huijgen, Florentina J Hettinga and Marije T Elferink-Gemser in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank all the respondents who volunteered to participate in the study. Special thanks to A.J. Roete for valuable assistance with data visualization.

ORCID iDs

Floor AP van den Brandt

Barbara CH Huijgen

Ethical considerations

Consent to participate

Respondents gave written consent. It is in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data availability statement

The datasets generated during the current study are available in DataverseNL.

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Edwards

Byrnes

. Aerodynamic characteristics as determinants of the drafting effect in cycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007; 39: 170–176.

van Ingen Schenau

. The influence of air friction in speed skating. J Biomech 1982; 15: 449–458.

Kyle

. Reduction of wind resistance and power output of racing cyclists and runners traveling in groups. Ergonomics 1979; 22: 387–397.

Pugh

. The influence of wind resistance in running and walking and the mechanical efficiency of work against horizontal or vertical forces. J Physiol 1971; 213: 255–276.

van den Brandt

FAP

Khudair

Hettinga

, et al. Be aware of the benefits of drafting in sports and take your advantage: a meta-analysis. Transl Sports Med 2023; 2023: 3254847.

Millet

Geslan

Ferrier

, et al. Effects of drafting on energy expenditure in in-line skating. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2003; 43: 285–290.

Elfmark

Bardal

Oggiano

, et al. Aerodynamic interaction between two speed skaters measured in a closed wind tunnel. World Acad Sci Eng Technol Int J Sport Health Sci 2019; 13: 191–201.

Ichinose

Miyagawa

Ito

, et al. Winning by hiding behind others: an analysis of speed skating data. PLoS One 2020; 15: e0237470.

Hettinga

Konings

Pepping

. The science of racing against opponents: affordance competition and the regulation of exercise intensity in head-to-head competition. Front Physiol 2017; 8: 118.

10.

Menting

SGP

Edwards

Hettinga

, et al. Pacing behaviour development and acquisition: a systematic review. Sports Med Open 2022; 8: 143.

11.

Menting

Huijgen

Konings

, et al. Pacing behavior development of youth short-track speed skaters: a longitudinal study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2020; 52: 1099–1108.

12.

Menting

SGP

Post

Nijenhuis

, et al. Pacing behavior development in adolescent swimmers: a large-scale longitudinal data analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2023; 55: 700–709.

13.

Menting

SGP

Khudair

Elferink-Gemser

, et al. Pacing behavior development: the role of task experience and the presence of competitors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2025; 57: 154–162.

14.

Menting

SGP

Hendry

Schiphof-Godart

, et al. Optimal development of youth athletes toward elite athletic performance: how to coach their motivation, plan exercise training, and pace the race. Front Sports Act Living 2019; 1: 14.

15.

Menting

SGP

Khudair

Elferink-Gemser

, et al. Unraveling the role of (meta-) cognitive functions in pacing behavior development during adolescence: planning, monitoring, and adaptation. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2023; 55: 1894.

16.

Sakalidis

Menting

Elferink-Gemser

, et al. The role of the social environment in pacing and sports performance: a narrative review from a self-regulatory perspective. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022; 19: 16131.

17.

Van den Brandt

FAP

Menting

SGP

Huijgen

BCH

, et al. Out of the wind: training for drafting improves performance! [internet]. SportknowhowXL; 2021 Feb 2 [cited 2025 Jul 14]. Available from: https://www.sportknowhowxl.nl/achtergronden/sportgerichte-wetenschap/item/125396/uit-de-wind-trainen-op-drafting-verbetert-prestaties-

18.

Joshi

Kale

Chandel

, et al. Likert scale: explored and explained. Br J Appl Sci Technol 2015; 7: 396–403.

19.

Braun

Clarke

. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006; 3: 77–101.

20.

Cohen

. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.

21.

McKay

AKA

Stellingwerff

Smith

, et al. Defining training and performance caliber: a participant classification framework. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2022; 17: 317–331.

22.

Washif

Farooq

Krug

, et al. Training during the COVID-19 lockdown: knowledge, beliefs, and practices of 12,526 athletes from 142 countries and six continents. Sports Med 2022; 52: 933–948.

23.

Heimans

Dijkshoorn

Hoozemans

, et al. Optimizing the team for required power during track-cycling team pursuit. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2017; 12: 1385–1391.

24.

Blocken

Defraeye

Koninckx

, et al. CFD Simulations of the aerodynamic drag of two drafting cyclists. Comput Fluids 2013; 71: 435–445.

25.

Beaumont

Murer

Bogard

, et al. Aerodynamic drafting in mass-start non-motorized sports: a systematic review. J Biomech 2025; 184: 112641.

26.

Schickhofer

Hanson

. Aerodynamic effects and performance improvements of running in drafting formations. J Biomech 2021; 122: 110457.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB