Cargando…

Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists

This study compared the effectiveness of a block training program and a polarized training program in developing aerobic capacity in twenty trained mountain bike cyclists. The cyclists were divided into two groups: the block training program group (BT) and the polarized training program group (PT)....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hebisz, Paulina, Hebisz, Rafał, Drelak, Maja
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8393863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34444612
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168865
_version_ 1783743820845809664
author Hebisz, Paulina
Hebisz, Rafał
Drelak, Maja
author_facet Hebisz, Paulina
Hebisz, Rafał
Drelak, Maja
author_sort Hebisz, Paulina
collection PubMed
description This study compared the effectiveness of a block training program and a polarized training program in developing aerobic capacity in twenty trained mountain bike cyclists. The cyclists were divided into two groups: the block training program group (BT) and the polarized training program group (PT). The experiment lasted 8 weeks. During the experiment, the BT group alternated between 17-day blocks consisting of dominant low-intensity training (LIT) and 11-day blocks consisting of sprint interval training (SIT), and high-intensity interval training (HIIT), while the PT group performed SIT, HIIT, and LIT simultaneously. Before and after the experiment, the cyclists performed incremental tests during which maximal oxygen uptake (VO(2)max), maximal aerobic power (Pmax), power achieved at the first ventilatory threshold (P(VT1)), and at the second ventilatory threshold (P(VT2)) were measured. VO(2)max increased in BT group (from 3.75 ± 0.67 to 4.00 ± 0.75 L∙min(−1)) and PT group (from 3.66 ± 0.73 to 4.20 ± 0.89 L∙min(−1)). In addition, Pmax, P(VT1), and P(VT2) increased in both groups to a similar extent. In conclusion, the polarized training program was more effective in developing the VO(2)max compared to the block program. In terms of developing other parameters characterizing the cyclists’ aerobic capacity, the block and polarized program induced similar results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8393863
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83938632021-08-28 Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists Hebisz, Paulina Hebisz, Rafał Drelak, Maja Int J Environ Res Public Health Article This study compared the effectiveness of a block training program and a polarized training program in developing aerobic capacity in twenty trained mountain bike cyclists. The cyclists were divided into two groups: the block training program group (BT) and the polarized training program group (PT). The experiment lasted 8 weeks. During the experiment, the BT group alternated between 17-day blocks consisting of dominant low-intensity training (LIT) and 11-day blocks consisting of sprint interval training (SIT), and high-intensity interval training (HIIT), while the PT group performed SIT, HIIT, and LIT simultaneously. Before and after the experiment, the cyclists performed incremental tests during which maximal oxygen uptake (VO(2)max), maximal aerobic power (Pmax), power achieved at the first ventilatory threshold (P(VT1)), and at the second ventilatory threshold (P(VT2)) were measured. VO(2)max increased in BT group (from 3.75 ± 0.67 to 4.00 ± 0.75 L∙min(−1)) and PT group (from 3.66 ± 0.73 to 4.20 ± 0.89 L∙min(−1)). In addition, Pmax, P(VT1), and P(VT2) increased in both groups to a similar extent. In conclusion, the polarized training program was more effective in developing the VO(2)max compared to the block program. In terms of developing other parameters characterizing the cyclists’ aerobic capacity, the block and polarized program induced similar results. MDPI 2021-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8393863/ /pubmed/34444612 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168865 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Hebisz, Paulina
Hebisz, Rafał
Drelak, Maja
Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists
title Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists
title_full Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists
title_fullStr Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists
title_short Comparison of Aerobic Capacity Changes as a Result of a Polarized or Block Training Program among Trained Mountain Bike Cyclists
title_sort comparison of aerobic capacity changes as a result of a polarized or block training program among trained mountain bike cyclists
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8393863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34444612
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168865
work_keys_str_mv AT hebiszpaulina comparisonofaerobiccapacitychangesasaresultofapolarizedorblocktrainingprogramamongtrainedmountainbikecyclists
AT hebiszrafał comparisonofaerobiccapacitychangesasaresultofapolarizedorblocktrainingprogramamongtrainedmountainbikecyclists
AT drelakmaja comparisonofaerobiccapacitychangesasaresultofapolarizedorblocktrainingprogramamongtrainedmountainbikecyclists