Cargando…

Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods

The purpose of this study was to quantify training loads (TL) of high intensity sessions through original methods (TRIMP; session-RPE; Work-Endurance-Recovery) and their updated alternatives (TRIMP(cumulative); RPE(alone); New-WER). Ten endurance athletes were requested to perform five sessions unti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Desgorces, François-Denis, Hourcade, Jean-Christophe, Dubois, Romain, Toussaint, Jean-François, Noirez, Philippe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7398532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32745112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237027
_version_ 1783565977769738240
author Desgorces, François-Denis
Hourcade, Jean-Christophe
Dubois, Romain
Toussaint, Jean-François
Noirez, Philippe
author_facet Desgorces, François-Denis
Hourcade, Jean-Christophe
Dubois, Romain
Toussaint, Jean-François
Noirez, Philippe
author_sort Desgorces, François-Denis
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this study was to quantify training loads (TL) of high intensity sessions through original methods (TRIMP; session-RPE; Work-Endurance-Recovery) and their updated alternatives (TRIMP(cumulative); RPE(alone); New-WER). Ten endurance athletes were requested to perform five sessions until exhaustion. Session 1 composed by a 800m maximal performance and four intermittent sessions performed at the 800m velocity, three sessions with 400m of interval length and work:recovery ratios of 2:1, 1:1 and 1:2 and one with 200m intervals and 1:1. Total TL were quantified from the sessions’ beginning to the cool-down period and an intermediate TL (TL(800)) was calculated when 800m running was accumulated within the sessions. At the end of the sessions high and similar RPE were reported (effect size, η(2) = 0.12), while, at the intermediate 800m distance, the higher interval distances and work:recovery ratios the higher the RPE (η(2) = 0.88). Our results show marked differences in sessions’ total TL between original (e.g., lowest TL for the 800m and highest for the 200m-1:1 sessions) and alternative methods (RPE(alone) and New-WER; similar TL for each session). Differences appear in TL(800) notably between TRIMP and other methods which are negatively correlated. All TL report light to moderate correlations between original methods and their alternatives, original methods are strongly correlated together, as observed for alternative methods. Differences in TL quantification between original and alternative methods underline that they are not interchangeable. Because of high exercise volume influence, original methods markedly enhance TL of sessions with higher exercise volumes although these presented the easiest interval distances and work-recovery ratios. Alternative methods based on exhaustion level (New-WER) and exertion (RPE(alone)) provided a new and promising point of view of TL quantification where exhaustion determines the highest TL whatever the exercise. This remains to be tested with more extended populations submitted to wider ranges of exercises.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7398532
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73985322020-08-14 Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods Desgorces, François-Denis Hourcade, Jean-Christophe Dubois, Romain Toussaint, Jean-François Noirez, Philippe PLoS One Research Article The purpose of this study was to quantify training loads (TL) of high intensity sessions through original methods (TRIMP; session-RPE; Work-Endurance-Recovery) and their updated alternatives (TRIMP(cumulative); RPE(alone); New-WER). Ten endurance athletes were requested to perform five sessions until exhaustion. Session 1 composed by a 800m maximal performance and four intermittent sessions performed at the 800m velocity, three sessions with 400m of interval length and work:recovery ratios of 2:1, 1:1 and 1:2 and one with 200m intervals and 1:1. Total TL were quantified from the sessions’ beginning to the cool-down period and an intermediate TL (TL(800)) was calculated when 800m running was accumulated within the sessions. At the end of the sessions high and similar RPE were reported (effect size, η(2) = 0.12), while, at the intermediate 800m distance, the higher interval distances and work:recovery ratios the higher the RPE (η(2) = 0.88). Our results show marked differences in sessions’ total TL between original (e.g., lowest TL for the 800m and highest for the 200m-1:1 sessions) and alternative methods (RPE(alone) and New-WER; similar TL for each session). Differences appear in TL(800) notably between TRIMP and other methods which are negatively correlated. All TL report light to moderate correlations between original methods and their alternatives, original methods are strongly correlated together, as observed for alternative methods. Differences in TL quantification between original and alternative methods underline that they are not interchangeable. Because of high exercise volume influence, original methods markedly enhance TL of sessions with higher exercise volumes although these presented the easiest interval distances and work-recovery ratios. Alternative methods based on exhaustion level (New-WER) and exertion (RPE(alone)) provided a new and promising point of view of TL quantification where exhaustion determines the highest TL whatever the exercise. This remains to be tested with more extended populations submitted to wider ranges of exercises. Public Library of Science 2020-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7398532/ /pubmed/32745112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237027 Text en © 2020 Desgorces et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Desgorces, François-Denis
Hourcade, Jean-Christophe
Dubois, Romain
Toussaint, Jean-François
Noirez, Philippe
Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods
title Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods
title_full Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods
title_fullStr Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods
title_full_unstemmed Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods
title_short Training load quantification of high intensity exercises: Discrepancies between original and alternative methods
title_sort training load quantification of high intensity exercises: discrepancies between original and alternative methods
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7398532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32745112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237027
work_keys_str_mv AT desgorcesfrancoisdenis trainingloadquantificationofhighintensityexercisesdiscrepanciesbetweenoriginalandalternativemethods
AT hourcadejeanchristophe trainingloadquantificationofhighintensityexercisesdiscrepanciesbetweenoriginalandalternativemethods
AT duboisromain trainingloadquantificationofhighintensityexercisesdiscrepanciesbetweenoriginalandalternativemethods
AT toussaintjeanfrancois trainingloadquantificationofhighintensityexercisesdiscrepanciesbetweenoriginalandalternativemethods
AT noirezphilippe trainingloadquantificationofhighintensityexercisesdiscrepanciesbetweenoriginalandalternativemethods