![]() ![]() However, as numerous retrospective reports have shown conflicting results, the question regarding which TID represents the “best-practice” model for inducing performance gains-while avoiding overtraining-remains open to debate. We concluded that the polarized TID resulted in the greatest improvements in the majority of key endurance performance variables assessed, and THR or HVLIT did not lead to further improvements in performance. polarized) provided the greatest response on key components of endurance performance among well-trained athletes ( Stöggl and Sperlich, 2014). Since nearly all studies dealing with TID were based on retrospective analysis, we recently employed a randomized controlled design to investigate which TID (HVLIT vs. In contrast, the traditional TID used in the bulk of previous investigations has been composed of a “ pyramidal” structure ( Holmberg, 1996), in which the majority of training time is spent in HVLIT (“zone 1”), and a decreasing proportion of training time in zones 2 and 3. Some investigators have separated the TID into five zones ( Tonnessen et al., 2014). The polarized TID comprises significant % HVLIT time (i.e., “zone 1”) and HIT time (i.e., “zone 3”) compared to a low % THR time (“zone 2”). Based on training analysis in elite rowers and cross-country skiers, a so called “ polarized” TID has been proposed ( Fiskerstrand and Seiler, 2004 Seiler and Kjerland, 2006). Athletes may principally choose from one to four TIDs to induce endurance-related adaptations: (1) high-volume, low-intensity exercise (HVLIT), usually performed below the first ventilatory threshold (VT 1) or at stable lactate concentrations of ≤ 2 mM and referred to as “zone 1” intensity (2) “threshold” training (THR) performed at or near the lactate threshold (LT ~4 mM) or second ventilatory threshold (VT 2) and designated as “zone 2” intensity (3) HIT in “zone 3” (≥4 mM) ( Seiler, 2010) or (4) a combination of the aforementioned concepts. The percentage time spent in zones based on physiological benchmarks, the session goal approach, and the session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) method have been applied to quantify the TID among endurance athletes ( Seiler and Kjerland, 2006). The aims of the present review are to: (1) summarize the main responses of retrospective and prospective studies exploring TID (2) provide a systematic overview on TIDs during preparation, pre-competition, and competition phases in different endurance disciplines and performance levels (3) address whether one TID has demonstrated greater efficacy than another and (4) highlight research gaps in an effort to direct future scientific studies. However, emerging prospective randomized controlled studies have demonstrated superior responses of variables related to endurance when applying a polarized TID in well-trained and recreational individuals when compared with a TID that emphasizes HVLIT or threshold training. Some world-class athletes appear to adopt a so-called “polarized” TID (i.e., significant % of HVLIT and high-intensity training) during certain phases of the season. The majority of studies present a “pyramidal” TID with a high proportion of high volume, low intensity training (HVLIT). Researchers have retrospectively analyzed the training intensity distribution (TID) of nationally and internationally competitive athletes in different endurance disciplines to determine the optimal volume and intensity for maximal adaptation. ![]() 2Integrative and Experimental Training Science, Department of Sport Science, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.1Department of Sport Science and Kinesiology, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |