We are updating our website on Thursday, December 2 from 9 AM – 5 PM EST. During this time, users may experience some disruptions while using the site. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Effects of Increased Load of Low- Versus High-Intensity Endurance Training on Performance and Physiological Adaptations in Endurance Athletes

in International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $114.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $152.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $217.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $289.00

Purpose: To compare the effects of increased load of low- versus high-intensity endurance training on performance and physiological adaptations in well-trained endurance athletes. Methods: Following an 8-week preintervention period, 51 (36 men and 15 women) junior cross-country skiers and biathletes were randomly allocated into a low-intensity (LIG, n = 26) or high-intensity training group (HIG, n = 25) for an 8-week intervention period, load balanced using the overall training impulse score. Both groups performed an uphill running time trial and were assessed for laboratory performance and physiological profiling in treadmill running and roller-ski skating preintervention and postintervention. Results: Preintervention to postintervention changes in running time trial did not differ between groups (P = .44), with significant improvements in HIG (−2.3% [3.2%], P = .01) but not in LIG (−1.5% [2.9%], P = .20). There were no differences between groups in peak speed changes when incremental running and roller-ski skating to exhaustion (P = .30 and P = .20, respectively), with both modes being significantly improved in HIG (2.2% [3.1%] and 2.5% [3.4%], both P < .01) and in roller-ski skating for LIG (1.5% [2.4%], P < .01). There was a between-group difference in running maximal oxygen uptake changes (P = .04), tending to improve in HIG (3.0% [6.4%], P = .09) but not in LIG (−0.7% [4.6%], P = .25). Changes in roller-ski skating peak oxygen uptake differed between groups (P = .02), with significant improvements in HIG (3.6% [5.4%], P = .01) but not in LIG (−0.1% [0.17%], P = .62). Conclusion: There was no significant difference in performance adaptations between increased load of low- versus high-intensity training in well-trained endurance athletes, although both methods improved performance. However, increased load of high-intensity training elicited better maximal oxygen uptake adaptations compared to increased load of low-intensity training.

Talsnes is with Meråker High School, Trøndelag County Council, Steinkjer, Norway. Talsnes and van den Tillaar are with the Dept of Sports Science and Physical Education, Nord University, Bodø, Norway. Sandbakk is with the Center for Elite Sports Research, Dept of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Talsnes (rune.k.talsnes@nord.no) is corresponding author.
  • 1.

    Seiler S. What is best practice for training intensity and duration distribution in endurance athletes? Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2010;5(3):276291. PubMed ID: 20861519 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Stöggl TL, Sperlich B. The training intensity distribution among well-trained and elite endurance athletes. Front Physiol. 2015;6:295. PubMed ID: 26578968 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Seiler S, Tønnessen E. Intervals, thresholds, and long slow distance: the role of intensity and duration in endurance training. Sport Sci. 2009;13:3253.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Sandbakk O, Haugen T, Ettema G. The influence of exercise modality on training load management. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2021;16(4):605608. PubMed ID: 33639611 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Laursen PB. Training for intense exercise performance: high-intensity or high-volume training? Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2010;20(suppl 2):110. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Hughes DC, Ellefsen S, Baar K. Adaptations to endurance and strength training. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2018;8(6):a029769. PubMed ID: 28490537 doi:

  • 7.

    Helgerud J, Høydal K, Wang E, et al. Aerobic high-intensity intervals improve VO2max more than moderate training. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(4):665671. PubMed ID: 17414804 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Daussin FN, Ponsot E, Dufour SP, et al. Improvement of VO2max by cardiac output and oxygen extraction adaptation during intermittent versus continuous endurance training. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2007;101(3):377383. PubMed ID: 17661072 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Wisløff U, Støylen A, Loennechen JP, et al. Superior cardiovascular effect of aerobic interval training versus moderate continuous training in heart failure patients: a randomized study. Circulation. 2007;115(24):30863094. PubMed ID: 17548726 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Seiler S, Haugen O, Kuffel E. Autonomic recovery after exercise in trained athletes: intensity and duration effects. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(8):13661373. PubMed ID: 17762370 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Stöggl T, Sperlich B. Polarized training has greater impact on key endurance variables than threshold, high intensity, or high volume training. Front Physiol. 2014;5:33. PubMed ID: 24550842 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Laursen PB, Jenkins DG. The scientific basis for high-intensity interval training: optimising training programmes and maximising performance in highly trained endurance athletes. Sports Med. 2002;32(1):5373. doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Foster C, Florhaug JA, Franklin J, et al. A new approach to monitoring exercise training. J Strength Cond Res. 2001;15(1):109115. PubMed ID: 11708692

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Solli GS, Tonnessen E, Sandbakk O. Block vs. traditional periodization of hit: two different paths to success for the world’s best cross-country skier. Front Physiol. 2019;10:375. PubMed ID: 31024338 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Sylta O, Tonnessen E, Seiler S. From heart-rate data to training quantification: a comparison of 3 methods of training-intensity analysis. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014;9(1):100107. PubMed ID: 24408353 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Seiler KS, Kjerland GO. Quantifying training intensity distribution in elite endurance athletes: is there evidence for an “optimal” distribution? Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2006;16(1):4956. PubMed ID: 16430681 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Sandbakk O, Holmberg HC, Leirdal S, Ettema G. The physiology of world-class sprint skiers. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011;21(6):e9e16. PubMed ID: 20500558 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Sandbakk O, Holmberg HC, Leirdal S, Ettema G. Metabolic rate and gross efficiency at high work rates in world class and national level sprint skiers. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010;109(3):473481. PubMed ID: 20151149 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Sylta Ø, Tønnessen E, Sandbakk Ø, et al. Effects of high-intensity training on physiological and hormonal adaptions in well-trained cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017;49(6):11371146. PubMed ID: 28121800 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Zinner C, Schäfer Olstad D, Sperlich B. Mesocycles with different training intensity distribution in recreational runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018;50(8):16411648. PubMed ID: 29509644 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Morris SB. Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Sage J. 2008;11(2):364386. doi:

  • 22.

    Muñoz I, Seiler S, Bautista J, España J, Larumbe E, Esteve-Lanao J. Does polarized training improve performance in recreational runners? Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014;9(2):265272. PubMed ID: 23752040 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Esteve-Lanao J, Foster C, Seiler S, Lucia A. Impact of training intensity distribution on performance in endurance athletes. J Strength Cond Res. 2007;21(3):943949. PubMed ID: 17685689

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Vesterinen V, Häkkinen K, Laine T, Hynynen E, Mikkola J, Nummela A. Predictors of individual adaptation to high-volume or high-intensity endurance training in recreational endurance runners. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016;26(8):885893. PubMed ID: 26247789 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Ingham SA, Carter H, Whyte GP, Doust JH. Physiological and performance effects of low- versus mixed-intensity rowing training. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(3):579584. PubMed ID: 18379224 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Nuuttila O-P, Nummela A, Häkkinen K, Seipäjärvi S, Kyröläinen H. Monitoring training and recovery during a period of increased intensity or volume in recreational endurance athletes. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(5):2401. PubMed ID: 33804541 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Sylta Ø, Tønnessen E, Hammarström D, et al. The Effect of different high-intensity periodization models on endurance adaptations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48(11):21652174. PubMed ID: 27300278 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Rønnestad BR, Hansen J, Thyli V, Bakken TA, Sandbakk Ø. 5-Week block periodization increases aerobic power in elite cross-country skiers. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016;26(2):140146. PubMed ID: 25648345 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Rønnestad BR, Hansen J, Ellefsen S. Block periodization of high-intensity aerobic intervals provides superior training effects in trained cyclists. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2014;24(1):3442. PubMed ID: 22646668 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Mann TN, Lamberts RP, Lambert MI. High responders and low responders: factors associated with individual variation in response to standardized training. Sports Med. 2014;44(8):11131124. doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1512 1512 257
Full Text Views 55 55 15
PDF Downloads 95 95 20