Cargando…

Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth

Periodization theory has, over the past seven decades, emerged as the preeminent training planning paradigm. The philosophical underpinnings of periodization theory can be traced back to the integration of diverse shaping influences, whereby coaching beliefs and traditions were blended with historic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Kiely, John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5856877/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29189930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0823-y
_version_ 1783307360597442560
author Kiely, John
author_facet Kiely, John
author_sort Kiely, John
collection PubMed
description Periodization theory has, over the past seven decades, emerged as the preeminent training planning paradigm. The philosophical underpinnings of periodization theory can be traced back to the integration of diverse shaping influences, whereby coaching beliefs and traditions were blended with historically available scientific insights and contextualized against pervading social planning models. Since then, many dimensions of elite preparation have evolved significantly, as driven by a combination of coaching innovations and science-led advances in training theory, techniques, and technologies. These advances have been incorporated into the fabric of the pre-existing periodization planning framework, yet the philosophical assumptions underpinning periodization remain largely unchallenged and unchanged. One particularly influential academic sphere of study, the science of stress, particularly the work of Hans Selye, is repeatedly cited by theorists as a central pillar upon which periodization theory is founded. A fundamental assumption emanating from the early stress research is that physical stress is primarily a biologically mediated phenomenon: a presumption translated to athletic performance contexts as evidence that mechanical training stress directly regulates the magnitude of subsequent ‘fitness’ adaptations. Interestingly, however, since periodization theory first emerged, the science of stress has evolved extensively from its historical roots. This raises a fundamental question: if the original scientific platform upon which periodization theory was founded has disintegrated, should we critically re-evaluate conventional perspectives through an updated conceptual lens? Realigning periodization philosophy with contemporary stress theory thus presents us with an opportunity to recalibrate training planning models with both contemporary scientific insight and progressive coaching practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5856877
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58568772018-03-21 Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth Kiely, John Sports Med Current Opinion Periodization theory has, over the past seven decades, emerged as the preeminent training planning paradigm. The philosophical underpinnings of periodization theory can be traced back to the integration of diverse shaping influences, whereby coaching beliefs and traditions were blended with historically available scientific insights and contextualized against pervading social planning models. Since then, many dimensions of elite preparation have evolved significantly, as driven by a combination of coaching innovations and science-led advances in training theory, techniques, and technologies. These advances have been incorporated into the fabric of the pre-existing periodization planning framework, yet the philosophical assumptions underpinning periodization remain largely unchallenged and unchanged. One particularly influential academic sphere of study, the science of stress, particularly the work of Hans Selye, is repeatedly cited by theorists as a central pillar upon which periodization theory is founded. A fundamental assumption emanating from the early stress research is that physical stress is primarily a biologically mediated phenomenon: a presumption translated to athletic performance contexts as evidence that mechanical training stress directly regulates the magnitude of subsequent ‘fitness’ adaptations. Interestingly, however, since periodization theory first emerged, the science of stress has evolved extensively from its historical roots. This raises a fundamental question: if the original scientific platform upon which periodization theory was founded has disintegrated, should we critically re-evaluate conventional perspectives through an updated conceptual lens? Realigning periodization philosophy with contemporary stress theory thus presents us with an opportunity to recalibrate training planning models with both contemporary scientific insight and progressive coaching practice. Springer International Publishing 2017-11-30 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5856877/ /pubmed/29189930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0823-y Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Current Opinion
Kiely, John
Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth
title Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth
title_full Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth
title_fullStr Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth
title_full_unstemmed Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth
title_short Periodization Theory: Confronting an Inconvenient Truth
title_sort periodization theory: confronting an inconvenient truth
topic Current Opinion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5856877/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29189930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0823-y
work_keys_str_mv AT kielyjohn periodizationtheoryconfrontinganinconvenienttruth