Effects of Manipulating Volume and Intensity Training in Masters Swimmers

in International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

Click name to view affiliation

Lorenzo Pugliese
Search for other papers by Lorenzo Pugliese in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Simone Porcelli
Search for other papers by Simone Porcelli in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Matteo Bonato
Search for other papers by Matteo Bonato in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Gaspare Pavei
Search for other papers by Gaspare Pavei in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Antonio La Torre
Search for other papers by Antonio La Torre in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Martina A. Maggioni
Search for other papers by Martina A. Maggioni in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Giuseppe Bellistri
Search for other papers by Giuseppe Bellistri in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Mauro Marzorati
Search for other papers by Mauro Marzorati in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Purpose:

Recently, some studies have suggested that overall training intensity may be more important than training volume for improving swimming performance. However, those studies focused on very young subjects, and/or the difference between high-volume and high-intensity training was blurred. The aim of this study was to investigate in masters swimmers the effects of manipulation of training volume and intensity on performance and physiological variables.

Methods:

A group of 10 male masters swimmers (age 32.3 ± 5.1 y) performed 2 different 6-wk training periods followed by 1 wk of tapering. The first period was characterized by high training volume performed at low intensity (HvLi), whereas the second period was characterized by low training volume performed at high intensity (LvHi). Peak oxygen consumption (V̇O2peak) during incremental arm exercise, individual anaerobic threshold (IAT), and 100-m, 400-m, and 2000-m-freestyle time were evaluated before and at the end of both training periods.

Results:

HvLi training significant increased V̇O2peak (11.9% ± 4.9% [mean change ± 90%CL], P = .002) and performance in the 400-m (–2.8% ± 1.8%, P = .002) and 2000-m (–3.4% ± 2.9%, P = .025), with a likely change in IAT (4.9% ± 4.7%, P > .05). After LvHi training, speed at IAT (12.4% ± 5.3%, P = .004) and 100-m performance (–1.2% ± 0.8%, P = .001) also improved, without any significant changes in V̇O2peak, 2000-m, and 400-m.

Conclusions:

These findings indicate that in masters swimmers an increase of training volume may lead to an improvement of V̇O2peak and middle- to long-distance performance. However, a subsequent period of LvHi training maintains previous adjustments and positively affects anaerobic threshold and short-distance performance.

Pugliese is with the Dept of Biomedical Sciences for Health, and Pavei, the Dept of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. Porcelli, Bonato, La Torre, Maggioni, Bellistri, and Marzorati are with the Inst of Bioimaging and Molecular Physiology, CNR, Segrate, Italy.

Address author correspondence to Simone Porcelli at simone.porcelli@ibfm.cnr.it.
  • Collapse
  • Expand