The Relationship Between the Distribution of Training Intensity and Performance of Kayak and Canoe Sprinters: A Retrospective Observational Analysis of One Season of Competition

Purpose: To evaluate retrospectively the training intensity distribution (TID) among highly trained canoe sprinters during a single season and to relate TID to changes in performance.Methods: The heart rates during on-water training by 11 German sprint kayakers (7 women, 4 men) and one male canoeist were monitored during preparation periods (PP) 1 and 2, as well as during the period of competition (CP) (total monitoring period: 37 weeks). The zones of training intensity (Z) were defined as Z1 [<80% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak)], Z2 (81–87% VO2peak) and Z3 (>87% VO2peak), as determined by 4 × 1,500-m incremental testing on-water. Prior to and after each period, the time required to complete the last 1,500-m stage (all-out) of the incremental test (1,500-m time-trial), velocities associated with 2 and 4 mmol·L−1 blood lactate (v2[BLa], v4[BLa]) and VO2peak were determined.Results: During each period, the mean TID for the entire group was pyramidal (PP1: 84/12/4%, PP2: 80/12/8% and CP: 91/5/4% for Z1, Z2, Z3) and total training time on-water increased from 5.0 ± 0.9 h (PP1) to 6.1 ± 0.9 h (PP2) and 6.5 ± 1.0 h (CP). The individual ranges for Z1, Z2 and Z3 were 61–96, 2–26 and 0–19%. During PP2 VO2peak (25.5 ± 11.4%) markedly increased compared to PP1 and CP and during PP1 v2[bla] (3.6 ± 3.4%) showed greater improvement compared to PP2, but not to CP. All variables related to performance improved as the season progressed, but no other effects were observed. With respect to time-trial performance, the time spent in Z1 (r = 0.66, p = 0.01) and total time in all three zones (r = 0.66, p = 0.01) showed positive correlations, while the time spent in Z2 (r = −0.57, p = 0.04) was negatively correlated.Conclusions: This seasonal analysis of the effects of training revealed extensive inter-individual variability. Overall, TID was pyramidal during the entire period of observation, with a tendency toward improvement in VO2peak, v2[bla], v4[bla] and time-trial performance. During PP2, when the COVID-19 lockdown was in place, the proportion of time spent in Z3 doubled, while that spent in Z1 was lowered; the total time spent training on water increased; these changes may have accentuated the improvement in performance during this period. A further increase in total on-water training time during CP was made possible by reductions in the proportions of time spent in Z2 and Z3, so that more fractions of time was spent in Z1.

Download Full-text

Effect of 8 days of exercise-heat acclimation on aerobic exercise performance of men in hypobaric hypoxia

AJP Regulatory Integrative and Comparative Physiology ◽

10.1152/ajpregu.00048.2020 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 319 (1) ◽

pp. R114-R122

Author(s):

Roy M. Salgado ◽

Kirsten E. Coffman ◽

Karleigh E. Bradbury ◽

Katherine M. Mitchell ◽

Beau R. Yurkevicius ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Steady State ◽

Exercise Performance ◽

Hypobaric Hypoxia ◽

Acute Mountain Sickness ◽

Time Trial ◽

Heat Acclimation ◽

Peak Oxygen Consumption ◽

Time Trial Performance ◽

Expansion Time ◽

Trial Performance

Exercise-heat acclimation (EHA) induces adaptations that improve tolerance to heat exposure. Whether adaptations from EHA can also alter responses to hypobaric hypoxia (HH) conditions remains unclear. This study assessed whether EHA can alter time-trial performance and/or incidence of acute mountain sickness (AMS) during HH exposure. Thirteen sea-level (SL) resident men [SL peak oxygen consumption (V̇o2peak) 3.19 ± 0.43 L/min] completed steady-state exercise, followed by a 15-min cycle time trial and assessment of AMS before (HH1; 3,500 m) and after (HH2) an 8-day EHA protocol [120 min; 5 km/h; 2% incline; 40°C and 40% relative humidity (RH)]. EHA induced lower heart rate (HR) and core temperature and plasma volume expansion. Time-trial performance was not different between HH1 and HH2 after 2 h (106.3 ± 23.8 vs. 101.4 ± 23.0 kJ, P = 0.71) or 24 h (107.3 ± 23.4 vs. 106.3 ± 20.8 kJ, P > 0.9). From HH1 to HH2, HR and oxygen saturation, at the end of steady-state exercise and time-trial tests at 2 h and 24 h, were not different ( P > 0.05). Three of 13 volunteers developed AMS during HH1 but not during HH2, whereas a fourth volunteer only developed AMS during HH2. Heat shock protein 70 was not different from HH1 to HH2 at SL [1.9 ± 0.7 vs. 1.8 ± 0.6 normalized integrated intensities (NII), P = 0.97] or after 23 h (1.8 ± 0.4 vs. 1.7 ± 0.5 NII, P = 0.78) at HH. Our results indicate that this EHA protocol had little to no effect—neither beneficial nor detrimental—on exercise performance in HH. EHA may reduce AMS in those who initially developed AMS; however, studies at higher elevations, having higher incidence rates, are needed to confirm our findings.

Download Full-text

Effects of Heat Acclimatization, Heat Acclimation, and Intermittent Exercise Heat Training on Time-Trial Performance

Sports Health A Multidisciplinary Approach ◽

10.1177/19417381211050643 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 194173812110506

Author(s):

Yasuki Sekiguchi ◽

Courteney L. Benjamin ◽

Ciara N. Manning ◽

Jeb F. Struder ◽

Lawrence E. Armstrong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Intermittent Exercise ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Time Trial ◽

Heat Acclimation ◽

Peak Oxygen Consumption ◽

Heat Acclimatization ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Time Trial Performance ◽

Level 3 ◽

Trial Performance

Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate effects of heat acclimatization (HAz) followed by heat acclimation (HA), and intermittent heat training (IHT) on time-trial performance. Hypothesis: Time-trial performance will improve after HA and will further improve with twice a week of IHT. Study Design: Interventional study. Level of Evidence: Level 3. Methods: A total of 26 male athletes (mean ± SD; age, 35 ± 12 years; body mass, 72.8 ± 8.9 kg; peak oxygen consumption [VO2peak], 57.3 ± 6.7 mL·kg−1·min−1) completed five 4-km time trials (baseline, post-HAz, post-HA, post-IHT4, post-IHT8) in the heat (ambient temperature, 35.4°C ± 0.3°C; relative humidity, 46.7% ± 1.2%) on a motorized treadmill. After baseline time trial, participants performed HAz (109 ± 10 days) followed by post-HAz time trial. Then, participants completed 5 days of HA, which involved exercising to induce hyperthermia (38.50°C-39.75°C) for 60 minutes. Participants were then divided into 3 groups and completed IHT either twice per week (IHTMAX), once per week (IHTMIN), or not at all (IHTCON) over an 8-week period. The exercise used for the IHT matched the HA. Four-kilometer time trials were performed after 4 weeks (post-IHT4) and 8 weeks of IHT (post-IHT8). Results: Time trial was faster in post-HA (17.98 ± 2.51 minutes) compared with baseline (18.61 ± 3.06 minutes; P = 0.037) and post-HAz (18.66 ± 3.12 minutes; P = 0.023). Percentage change in time trial was faster in IHTMAX (−3.9% ± 5.2%) compared with IHTCON (11.5% ± 16.9%) ( P = 0.020) and approached statistical significance with large effect (effect size = 0.96) compared with IHTMIN (1.6% ± 6.2%; P = 0.059) at post-IHT8. Additionally, IHTMAX (−2.2% ± 4.2%) was faster than IHTCON (3.6% ± 6.9%) ( P = 0.05) at post-IHT4. Conclusion: These results indicate that HA after HAz induces additional improvement in time-trial performance. IHT twice per week shows improvement after 8 weeks, while once per week maintains performance for 8 weeks. No IHT results in a loss of adaptations after 4 weeks and even greater losses after 8 weeks. Clinical Relevance: HA after HAz improves time-trial performance, twice a week of IHT improves performance further, and once a week of IHT maintains performance for at least 8 weeks.

Download Full-text

Relationship Between Velocity Reached at VO2max and Time-Trial Performances in Elite Australian Rules Footballers

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance ◽

10.1123/ijspp.4.3.408 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 4 (3) ◽

pp. 408-411 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Christian Lorenzen ◽

Morgan D. Williams ◽

Paul S. Turk ◽

Daniel L. Meehan ◽

Daniel J. Cicioni Kolsky

Keyword(s):

Average Velocity ◽

Team Sports ◽

Time Trial ◽

Attractive Alternative ◽

Football Players ◽

Training Intensity ◽

Time Trial Performance ◽

Australian Rules Football ◽

Laboratory Measure ◽

Trial Performance

Purpose:Running velocity reached at maximal oxygen uptake (vVO2max) can be a useful measure to prescribe training intensity for aerobic conditioning. Obtaining it in the laboratory is often not practical, and average velocities from time trials are an attractive alternative. To date, the efficacies of such practices for team sport players are unknown. This study aimed to assess the relationship between vVO2max obtained in the laboratory against two time-trial estimates (1500 m and 3200 m).Methods:During the early preseason, elite Australian Rules football players (n = 23, 22.7 ± 3.4 y, 187.7 ± 8.2 cm, 75.5 ± 9.2 kg) participated in a laboratory test on a motorized treadmill and two outdoor time trials.Results:Based on average velocity the 1500-m time-trial performance (5.01 ± 0.23 m·s−1) overestimated (0.36 m·s−1, d = 1.75), whereas the 3200-m time trial (4.47 ± 0.23 m·s−1) underestimated (0.17 m·s−1, d = 0.83) the laboratory vVO2max (4.64 ± 0.18 m·s−1). Despite these differences, both 1500-m and 3200-m time-trial performances correlated with the laboratory measure (r = -0.791; r = -0.793 respectively). Both subsequent linear regressions were of good ft and predicted the laboratory measure within ± 0.12 m·s−1.Conclusion:Estimates of vVO2max should not be used interchangeably, nor should they replace the laboratory measure. When laboratory testing is not accessible for team sports players, prescription of training intensity may be more accurately estimated from linear regression based on either 1500-m or 3200-m time-trial performance than from the corresponding average velocity.

Download Full-text