Caffeine, but not bicarbonate, improves 6 min maximal performance in elite rowers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the ergogenic effects in a 6 min maximal performance test (PT) on 12 elite rowers: 6 open-weight (mean ± SD; 25 ± 1 years, and 92 ± 3 kg) and 6 light-weight (25 ± 3 years, and 73 ± 6 kg), following supplementation with caffeine (CAF), sodium bicarbonate (SB), and the combination of both, in a double-blind randomized placebo (PLA) controlled design. PT was executed on 4 occasions, on separate days within a week, and in a non-fasted state, with standardized training being performed the day before PT. Protocols were as follows: (i) CAF, 3 mg/kg, 45 min prior to PT + calcium as SB-PLA; (ii) SB, 0.3 g/kg, 75 min prior to PT + dextrose as CAF-PLA; (iii) CAF + SB; and (iv) PLA; CAF-PLA + SB-PLA. The total distance in the CAF (1878 ± 97 m) and CAF + SB (1877 ± 97 m) was longer than in the PLA (1865 ± 104 m; P < 0.05) and SB (1860 ± 96 m; P < 0.01). The mean power in CAF (400 ± 58 W) and CAF + SB (400 ± 58 W) was higher than the PLA (393 ± 61 W; P < 0.05) and SB (389 ± 57 W; P < 0.01). In CAF and CAF + SB, power was higher (P < 0.05) relative to PLA in the last half (4-6 min) of PT. Trials with CAF were more effective in light-weight rowers (1.0% ± 0.8% improvement in distance; P < 0.05) than in open-weight rowers (0.3% ± 0.8%; P > 0.05). No difference between interventions was observed for readiness and stomach comfort before PT and perceived exertion during PT. This study demonstrates that caffeine ingestion does improve performance in elite rowing. In contrast sodium bicarbonate does not appear to be ergogenic, but it does not abolish the ergogenic effect of caffeine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".