Cargando…

Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners

Purpose: To compare the impact of two different training intensity distributions in terms of conditional and performance parameters and spent time to training in recreational athletes. Methods: Two different training intensity distribution model were performed for 8 weeks by 38 recreational runners....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Festa, Luca, Tarperi, Cantor, Skroce, Kristina, La Torre, Antonio, Schena, Federico
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7739641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33344993
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2019.00070
_version_ 1783623365531009024
author Festa, Luca
Tarperi, Cantor
Skroce, Kristina
La Torre, Antonio
Schena, Federico
author_facet Festa, Luca
Tarperi, Cantor
Skroce, Kristina
La Torre, Antonio
Schena, Federico
author_sort Festa, Luca
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To compare the impact of two different training intensity distributions in terms of conditional and performance parameters and spent time to training in recreational athletes. Methods: Two different training intensity distribution model were performed for 8 weeks by 38 recreational runners. Runners recruited were randomly assigned to 2 different training models based on HR intensity detected with maximal test. The percentage distribution splitted in zone 1, 2, and 3 were by 77/3/20 and 40/50/10 in polarized endurance training group (PET) and focused endurance training (FOC) group, respectively. Programs were balanced for total training impulse (TRIMP). To evaluate effects of training, before and after treatment were performed a maximal exercise test to determine Maximal Oxygen Uptake (V'O(2max)), Ventilatory Threshold (VT), respiratory-compensation point (RCT) Running Economy (RE), and 2 Km performance. To investigate the effects of training on muscular performance were performed one repetition maximum (1 RM), squat jump (SJ), and counter movement jump (CMJ). Results: Both groups significantly improved their velocity at V'O(2max) (3.2 and 4.0%), at VT (4.0 and 3.2%), RCT (5.7 and 3.4%), the average velocity in 2 Km performance (3.5 and 3.0%) and RE (−5.3 and −8.7%) for PET and FOC, respectively for each variable. No differences were found between the groups on any parameter investigated except about the total training time (PET = 29.9 ± 3.1 h and FOC = 24.8 ± 2.0 h). Conclusion: Focused Endurance Training obtains similar improvements than Polarized Endurance Training saving 17% of training time in recreational runners.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7739641
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77396412020-12-17 Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners Festa, Luca Tarperi, Cantor Skroce, Kristina La Torre, Antonio Schena, Federico Front Sports Act Living Sports and Active Living Purpose: To compare the impact of two different training intensity distributions in terms of conditional and performance parameters and spent time to training in recreational athletes. Methods: Two different training intensity distribution model were performed for 8 weeks by 38 recreational runners. Runners recruited were randomly assigned to 2 different training models based on HR intensity detected with maximal test. The percentage distribution splitted in zone 1, 2, and 3 were by 77/3/20 and 40/50/10 in polarized endurance training group (PET) and focused endurance training (FOC) group, respectively. Programs were balanced for total training impulse (TRIMP). To evaluate effects of training, before and after treatment were performed a maximal exercise test to determine Maximal Oxygen Uptake (V'O(2max)), Ventilatory Threshold (VT), respiratory-compensation point (RCT) Running Economy (RE), and 2 Km performance. To investigate the effects of training on muscular performance were performed one repetition maximum (1 RM), squat jump (SJ), and counter movement jump (CMJ). Results: Both groups significantly improved their velocity at V'O(2max) (3.2 and 4.0%), at VT (4.0 and 3.2%), RCT (5.7 and 3.4%), the average velocity in 2 Km performance (3.5 and 3.0%) and RE (−5.3 and −8.7%) for PET and FOC, respectively for each variable. No differences were found between the groups on any parameter investigated except about the total training time (PET = 29.9 ± 3.1 h and FOC = 24.8 ± 2.0 h). Conclusion: Focused Endurance Training obtains similar improvements than Polarized Endurance Training saving 17% of training time in recreational runners. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7739641/ /pubmed/33344993 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2019.00070 Text en Copyright © 2020 Festa, Tarperi, Skroce, La Torre and Schena. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Sports and Active Living
Festa, Luca
Tarperi, Cantor
Skroce, Kristina
La Torre, Antonio
Schena, Federico
Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners
title Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners
title_full Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners
title_fullStr Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners
title_full_unstemmed Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners
title_short Effects of Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners
title_sort effects of different training intensity distribution in recreational runners
topic Sports and Active Living
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7739641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33344993
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2019.00070
work_keys_str_mv AT festaluca effectsofdifferenttrainingintensitydistributioninrecreationalrunners
AT tarpericantor effectsofdifferenttrainingintensitydistributioninrecreationalrunners
AT skrocekristina effectsofdifferenttrainingintensitydistributioninrecreationalrunners
AT latorreantonio effectsofdifferenttrainingintensitydistributioninrecreationalrunners
AT schenafederico effectsofdifferenttrainingintensitydistributioninrecreationalrunners