Author(s): FERRO, M., GIORGI, A., MARTINEZ-GONZALEZ, B., COLOMBO, A., BERTOLLO, M., SARTOR, F., Institution: UNIVERSITY OF STUDIES D'ANNUNZIO CHIETI-PESCARA, Country: ITALY, Abstract-ID: 1628

INTRODUCTION:
The Giro NextGen is one of the most important international stage races for under‑23 cyclists. The 2025 edition consisted of eight consecutive stages covering a total distance of 1,029.4 km. Therefore, athlete’s ability to effectively balance stress-recovery is essential for maximizing performance (Kellmann et al., 2018). Previous studies have shown that it is particularly critical during multi‑stage cycling competitions (Filho et al., 2013; Lombardi et al., 2013). The current study aimed to assess stress-recovery balance induced by Giro NextGen using REST-Q Sport 36 questionnaire (Kallus & Kellmann, 2016).
METHODS:
Fourteen male cyclists (20.5 ± 1.1 years; 64.9 ± 4.1 kg; 179.8 ± 4.1 cm; BMI 20.1 ± 1.0 kg/m²), fulfilled the REST-Q 36 Sport questionnaire at the first and the final stage of the race. Changes across time and subscales were examined using a repeated measures MANOVA, followed by univariate paired ANOVAs for each subscale. Additionally, Pearson correlation analyses were conducted to explore associations between REST Q scores, Hooper index scale, and final ranking.
RESULTS:
The multivariate analysis did not reveal a significant main effect of time, although a trend toward overall change between T0 and T1 emerged (Χ2(1) = 2.95, p = .086). The main effect of the Second-order dimensions (i.e. general stress - GS, sport specific stress - SSS, general recovery - GR, sport specific recovery - SSR) was significant (Χ2(3) = 14.37, p = .002), and the TIME × dimension interaction showed a trend (Χ2(3) = 12.27, p = .007). Univariate analyses showed significant increases in GS (t = 3.75, p = .002, d = 1.00) and SSS (t = 3.51, p = .004, d = 0.94), while both recovery dimensions displayed non‑significant decreasing trend. Among the 12 REST‑Q subscales, significant increase was observed in Fatigue, Emotional Exhaustion, Injury, Disturbed Breaks, and General Stress (p < .05), alongside significant reductions in Being in Shape and Self‑Efficacy (p < .05). Significant correlations indicated that poorer final ranking was associated with greater increases in muscle fatigue (T0-T1 Δmuscle fatigue, r = –.72, p = .029) and reduced readiness (T0-T1 Δmood, r = –.80, p = .009). T0-T1 ΔSport Stress was also strongly correlated to muscle fatigue in T1 (r = .70, p = .012).
CONCLUSION:
Overall, the results indicate increased perceived stress and fatigue alongside reductions in specific recovery components. Significant associations showed that greater muscle fatigue and reduced readiness are related to poorer final ranking, highlighting the influence of psychophysiological status on competitive outcomes. The combined pattern of subjective and objective indicators suggests a state of underrecovery (Podlog et al. 2023), emphasizing the need for an integrated monitoring in endurance athletes.