See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/14508019

Athletic performance in relation to training load

Article  in  Wisconsin Medical Journal · July 1996

Source: PubMed

CITATIONS

264READS

7,724

5 authors, including:

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Post-activation potentiation in endurance runners View project

Exercise Evaluation and Prescription-2nd Edition View project

Carl Foster

University of Wisconsin - La Crosse

627 PUBLICATIONS   20,502 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Ann C. Snyder

University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee

104 PUBLICATIONS   2,900 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Ralph S Welsh

Clemson University

31 PUBLICATIONS   1,447 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Carl Foster on 29 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/14508019_Athletic_performance_in_relation_to_training_load?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_2&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/14508019_Athletic_performance_in_relation_to_training_load?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_3&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/project/Post-activation-potentiation-in-endurance-runners?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_9&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/project/Exercise-Evaluation-and-Prescription-2nd-Edition?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_9&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_1&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carl-Foster-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_4&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carl-Foster-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_5&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/institution/University_of_Wisconsin-La_Crosse?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_6&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carl-Foster-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_7&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ann-Snyder-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_4&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ann-Snyder-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_5&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/institution/University-of-Wisconsin-Milwaukee?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_6&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ann-Snyder-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_7&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ralph-Welsh-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_4&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ralph-Welsh-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_5&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/institution/Clemson-University?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_6&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ralph-Welsh-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_7&_esc=publicationCoverPdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carl-Foster-2?enrichId=rgreq-d1843527e1a157abfc05bf6c1b3cf6e8-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzE0NTA4MDE5O0FTOjM0NTAxNzUwOTAwNzM2MUAxNDU5MjY5OTkyNDU0&el=1_x_10&_esc=publicationCoverPdf

*~

',I" ,Athletic performance in relation to training load ',}~t

"~~,;Carl Foster, PhD, Erin Daines, MS, Lisa Hector, MS, Ann C. Snyder, PhD, and Ralph Welsh, BS, Milwaukee ~:

{':~;Abstract (TIME, r=-0.031, RPE, r=-0.039, how to mimic competitions in the c?t~;,.c"Athletic performance generally is LOAD, r=0.29, INTEN, :r=0.025.) laboratory allow us to make com- ;'irifJ

thought to improve with increases Data suggest that improved perfor- petitively relevant measures of ex- ,~}in training load. However, few data mance in events of 7-20 minutes ercise capacity in the controlled ,11exist showing the quantitative re- duration in response to intensified environment}O,11 Thus, this study's :; ,{olationship between training load training is primarily dependent intent was to present controlled ,{ 'iand performance. We followed 56 upon increases in total load and observations of athletic perfor- ;,athletes (16 runners; 40 cyclists/ overall RPE during training and; mance in relation to training load :;speed skaters) during 12 weeks of that a 10-fold increase in training changes in athletes. . ~"training. We recorded index perfor- load may be associated with an ,,~ ,mances (3.2 km time trial or 5 or -10% improvement in perfor- Methods ,~I10 km bicycle ergometry) after 6 mance. These data suggestthepos- Subjects: The subjects for this ,.weeks of baseline training and 6 sibility of understanding the train- study were 56 competitive ath- 'Iweeks of a s~lf~selected training in- ~g ~spo~s of athletes on a quan- l~tes. ~eir I:>erformance ~apabili- :1creases. Trammg load was quan- titative basIs. ties vaned WIdely from senous rec- ~!~titated as ~e produc~ of inteno:ity K~ywords: sports.p~rformance, reational level competitors to

l~ (global rating of perceIved exertion runrung, cycling, trammg. members of U.S. National Teams

(RPE» and the duration (time) of (n=14) to members of U.S. Olym- teach training session. Load was ex- Introduction pic Teams (n=5). All, however, .. ~pressed as the weekly average over Few understandings are more uni- viewed themselves as serious 'the 6 weeks preceding each index versal to coaches and athletes than competitiors and trained system-performance. the concept that performance im- atically for competitions. All pro-

We also recorded the duration proves with training. Indeed, the vided informed consent and par-of high intensity training (RPE>5, legend of the young farmer who ticipated on a voluntary basis.hard) (inten). From 6 to 12 weeks, lifted a growing bullock on a daily Thirty three of the subjects wereperformance improved 12.95.1:3.83 basis until he became one of the male, 23 were female. Their ageto 12.66.1:3.00 min (p

.~

Training Time Training RPE

; ... 400 p=NS 5 p

Time Trial Performance vs Training Load Continued from previous page-.f 20 Researchers did question sub-E . KHF 10 km . t . bili' ty ' . t al tr . .- "9 . Jec vana mm erv ammg- I 0 Erik 10 km . d . t S,~ . Pat 10 km SeSSIOn urabon repor s. orne~ 1 8 [] Rala 1 Okm subjects preferred to report only~ .. Arlen 10 km the time for high intensity seg-,g 17 .6 Scott 10 km ments while excluding recovery

~ 16 [] time between exercises or sets. ~c~ [] Others preferred to record the to- ~:;Q 15 tal training session duration. We ~~i:: were unable to impose a consistent :1"" .£ 14 pattern across subjects. However, ; ;E 13 for an individual subject. the re- . ; ~i= 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 cording strategy was consIstent. ;

. ., All training was recorded and !Training Load (units/week) . 1 d d . th 1 . dlmc u e m e ana YSlS regar ess

. . of whether it was specific trainingMean Performance vs Training Load or cross-training. Speed skaters, es-

:? 20 pecially, had a tendency to use sev-E eral exercise modes. However, we-- 1 9 feel our quantitating training sys-,~ 18 tern corrects for this problem more~ effectively than a method based on,g 17 entirely physiologic measures, ~I- such as heart rate or blood lactate. '!E 16 In any case, the choice of training: 15 activities was based on what the

0 - athlete felt would contribute totIJ .. ~ ,f 14 improving their performance.

: ~ Lastly, in a few subjects (speed~I'" -; " ,g 13 skaters) we were able to track train-

I- 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 . d rf 1. mg an pe ormance over a onger" LOAD (units/week) period of time. Training load and

- . . performance (lOkm cycle timeModel of Relative Performance vs Training Load trial) were recorded at convenient

N 100 (although non-standard) intervals.'; A rolling 6- week load average was,g used as the criterion measure.I-

~ 95 Statistical Approach: We com-; pared mean values for interest vari-E abIes after baseline and after in-0 creased trainin6 using ANOV A.~ 90 Performance changes were related /0.. . .- to training changes using correla-

,~ tion statistics. In the subjects fol--; lowed over a longer period of time,~ 85 the n was too low to treat with con-

0 . 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 ventional statistical techniques.LOAD (units/week) However, we plotted the.relation-

ship of the various training indiciesFig 2: (A) Individual plots of time trial performance in relation to training LOAD in 6 to performanc~. ~rom this wespeed skaters who were followed over an extended period of time and through several made some preliminary attemptsvariations in training; (B) the averaged results for these subjects; and (C) the relationship to model the relationship betweenof training LOAD to the mean data, normalized to a 100% performance with a training training load and performance.LOAD of 500 units/week.

372 Wisconsin Medical Joumal. June 1996

;a,:"J.~,~:J!$~

Results Comparison of Training Model to LiteratureThere was no significant difference in the average weekly training time ~ 1 00from baseline to second evaluation Q(345:t38 to 355:t36 minutes/week). ,~However, there was a signi#cant I- 95

increase in the average training in- ~tensity as reflected by the global ;

c RPE (3.8:t0.1 to 4.0:t0.1)(p

! ai i

-1 Continued from previous page ability (training monotony) is sig- formance. J Appl Physiol1991; 71(6): ~

nificantly associated with the 2?44 2049.and that other strategies for in- liklihood of developing minor 7. ~ltz-ClarkeJ~,.~orton~,Ban-creasing the training load might be training illnesses or injuries. The 1Sf ter EW. Opb timizinfl mg athletic perJ-

I ff . A th h th . f .. ormance Y uence curves.~ore or ess e ective. . t es~e ~~no~ony ypo eSlS 0 trammg Appl Physiol1991; 71(4): 1151-1158.time, the pattern of IncreasIng InJurIes has been supported by 8 F ter C Hector 11 Welsh Rtraining load in many of the sub- work in other laboratories}5 Sig- . s~~ager'M, Green MA, Snyde;

jects was dictated by professional nificantly, similiar methods of re- AC. Effects of specific versus cross-coaches. Thus, we feel that the self- cording training sufficient to calcu- training on nmning performance.selected increase in training used late training load, may also be used Eur J Appl PhysioI1995;70(3):367-in this study probably represents to calculate monotony} Thus, we 372.nearly our best contemporary un- may be able to provide guidance 9. Morton RH, Fitz-Clarke JR, Banis- ,derstandingofhow to prepare ath- to an individual athlete based on ter EW..Mode~g human perf~r-letes for competition. analysis of training records. mance m runnmg. J Appl Physlol

The duration of this study's cri- In summary, the results of this 1990; 69(4): 1171-1177.. . ) . 10. Foster C Green MA Snyder AC

tenon performances (7-20mmutes study demonstrate that althletic Th ' NN Ph '. 1 . al 'I . b d d . ompson. YSIO OgIC re-undoubtedly p aces a preffilum on performance can e un erstoo ~ S onses during simulated compe-a certain combination of training terms of training variables, and ~on. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1993;intensity and duration. With sig- that training outcomes can be 25(5):877-882nificantly shorter or longer crite- mapped from simple records that 11. Foster C, Thompson NN, Snyderrion performances, different com- the athlete can maintain. These AC. Ergometric studies with speedbinations might best describe the data imply that guidance to the skaters: Evolution of laboratoryrelationship between training load athlete can be provided on a ratio- methods. J Str Cond Res 1993; 7(3):and performance. This is clearly nal basis, and that difficulties with 193-200..evident in the comparison of our training may be understood and 12. Foste~C,~amelsyr, Y~b~ughRA.

! training model to a longitudinal corrected. PhysIological and tr~g corre-l' .' . th lates of marathon runnmg perfor-, - study With mara on runners pre- A t S t Med1977.9(3). c.. mance. us or s ,." Vlously conducted m our labora- References . 58-61. J P

tory (Fig 3). 1. Foster C, Lehmann M. Overtram- 13 H RD S .th MG G ttm -.. dr T- R ' I .' . agan ,ffil ,e an

As alread y noted by BUSSO,6 mg syn ome. ill: unnmg nJurtes LR M th f .(G GN di ) Phil d 1 hi . ara on per ormance m re-Fitz-Clarke7 and Morton,13 changes uten, e tor, a e p a, lation to maximal aerobic power

in training load also may have a W.B. Saunders, mc, (ill Press). and trainin indices. Med Sci S rts. . f 2. Lehmann M Foster C Kenl J. g po

negative Impact on per ormance A ..' . d ' th Exerc 1981;13(2): 185-189.. . vertrallling m en urance a-.(at least m the short term) m rela- 1 b . f . M dS .S rt 14 Jeukendrup AK. Hesselink MKC,etes: a ne reVIew. e Cl po s S d AC K . H K .

HAtion to fatigue associated with Exerc 1993; 25(6): 854-862. ny ~r '. Ulpers , e~er .heavier-than-usual trainin g . The 3 F C VO2max d tr .. . - PhYSIologIcal changes m male. oster. an ammg m . . 1. t ft tPresent data are not adequate to di d t . ts f ti.- competitive cyc IS s a er woces as e ermman 0 compe ks f . t ifi. d tr .. I t Jfull ddre thi . . f JS wee 0 mens e ammg. n

y a ~s. s response ~o~po- tiv.e runnmg per ormance. ports Sports Med 1992;13(5): 534-541.nent to trammg load varIations, Scl1983; 1(1):13-22. 15 S S R dellK T_.. dill -.. 4 S. d. B S d nh J A Ii d . nouse, ,un .ilquryanalthough it remams an Important. }O m , ve e ag. pp e f lit h rttr ck. . ness occurrence or e e s 0 afactor Particularly at high load lev- physIology of marathon runnmg. d kat P 3 d laC Wi ld, spee s ers. roc r orels. Animal model studies show Sports Med 1985;2(2): 83-99. C S t S . 19961 . . . al d f . ongress on por Clences, .that lack of daily training load varl- 5. ~ OVlC P. Empmc s~ Y 0 tram- 16. Daniels yr, Yarbrough RA, Foster

. .. . mg and performance m the mara-ab~l1~y contributes to. negatI~e thon.Res Quart 1977;48(7):769-777: C: Changes m V02m~x an~~-trammg responses consIStent With 6 B T C C La J-R Ad- nmg performance wIth tralnlng.

overtrainin g Syndrome (cf'1) . usso " f arassto , truCOUftur .. th Eur J Appl Physio11978;39 (4): 249-. . equacyoasys elnss c em e

Recent laboratory studiesl have modeling of training effects on per- 254."suggested ~t lack of training varl-

,

374 Wisconsin Medical Journal. June 1996 "

View publication statsView publication stats

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/14508019