Skip to content

Cycling time to failure is better maintained by cold than contrast or thermoneutral lower-body water immersion in normothermia.

PMID 24097171 (2013): cold water immersion, recovery — Recovery speed (study note for endurance athletes).

Last updated/Feb 23, 2026, 10:34 PM

Study note • PMID 24097171

Cycling time to failure is better maintained by cold than contrast or thermoneutral lower-body water immersion in normothermia.

European journal of applied physiology2013 • DOI 10.1007/s00421-013-2737-1
Evidence B71/100
Action 1: Default

Low risk + high feasibility for most athletes.

ELI5

In plain language

To examine the effects of four commonly used recovery treatments applied between two bouts of intense endurance cycling on the performance of the second bout in normothermia (~21 degrees C). (randomized trial; trained participants).

The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Recovery speed under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: To examine the effects of four commonly used recovery treatments applied between two bouts of intense endurance cycling on the performance of the second bout in normothermia (~21 degrees C).
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Recovery speed under the tested conditions.
  • Population: trained participants.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 5 min • 30 min • 2.5 min • 15 min.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: cold water immersion, recovery (vs comparison group).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 5 min • 30 min • 2.5 min • 15 min.
  • Outcomes: Recovery speed.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it helps, and who should skip it

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (trained participants) working on recovery.
  • Athletes who can measure Recovery speed with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should skip

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: randomized trial.
  • Population: trained participants.
  • Comparator: comparison group.
  • Outcomes measured: Recovery speed.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 5 min • 30 min • 2.5 min • 15 min.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 24097171 (2013) — European journal of applied physiology.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

Exercise performance, cardiovascular and metabolic responses during Ex1 were similar among all trials.

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations & bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Coaching beta

Get a plan that adapts to your life.

Join the 26weeks.ai TestFlight beta for adaptive coaching, recovery-aware adjustments, and race-week reminders.

Keep going

Sources