Browse

Background: Altitude training is often regarded as an indispensable tool for the success of elite endurance athletes. Historically, altitude training emerged as a key strategy to prepare for the 1968 Olympics, held at 2300 m in Mexico City, and was limited to the “Live High-Train High” method for endurance athletes aiming for performance gains through improved oxygen transport. This “classical” intervention was modified in 1997 by the “Live High-Train Low” (LHTL) model wherein athletes supplemented acclimatization to chronic hypoxia with high-intensity training at low altitude. Purpose: This review discusses important considerations for successful implementation of LHTL camps in elite athletes based on experiences, both published and unpublished, of the authors. Approach : The originality of our approach is to discuss 10 key “lessons learned,” since the seminal work by Levine and Stray-Gundersen was published in 1997, and focusing on (1) optimal dose, (2) individual responses, (3) iron status, (4) training-load monitoring, (5) wellness and well-being monitoring, (6) timing of the intervention, (7) use of natural versus simulated hypoxia, (8) robustness of adaptative mechanisms versus performance benefits, (9) application for a broad range of athletes, and (10) combination of methods. Successful LHTL strategies implemented by Team USA athletes for podium performance at Olympic Games and/or World Championships are presented. Conclusions : The evolution of the LHTL model represents an essential framework for sport science, in which field-driven questions about performance led to critical scientific investigation and subsequent practical implementation of a unique approach to altitude training.

Purpose: The concept of training quality reflects that the effect of training is dependent on more than the mere product of training load (eg, duration, intensity, frequency). The aims of this commentary are to (1) propose a practice-oriented framework to describe training quality and its general and context-dependent characteristics and (2) discuss how athletes and coaches can work to improve training quality. Conclusions: Training quality can be viewed from different perspectives. The holistic dimension includes the entire training process (goal setting, gap analysis, application of training principles and methods, etc), while a narrower dimension encompasses the specific training sessions and how they are executed in relation to the intended purpose. To capture the varying contexts, we define training quality as the degree of excellence related to how the training process or training sessions are executed to optimize adaptations and, thereby, improve overall performance. Although training quality is challenging to quantify, we argue that identification and assessment of quality indicators will increase our scientific understanding and consequently help coaches and athletes to improve training quality. We propose that the physical, technical, and psychological factors of training quality can be improved through an individualized learning process of systematic planning, execution, and debriefing. However, assessment tools should be identified and scientifically validated across different training sessions and sports. We encourage further interventions to improve training quality.

Background: Compared with other major global team sports such as football or basketball, ice hockey has received considerably less attention in sport-science research. However, the research focus on ice hockey performance is growing rapidly. Unfortunately, despite the growing interest in ice hockey, among the little research that has been conducted there are inconsistencies in terminology and methodology in the study of physiology and performance during games. The need for systematic and standardized reporting of study methodology is vital, as a lack of methodological detail or methodological inconsistencies make it impossible to replicate published studies, and alterations in the methodologies used can influence the measured demands imposed on players. Accordingly, this prohibits the ability of coaches to generate game-replicating training programs, decreasing the application of research findings to practice. In addition, a lack of methodological detail or methodological inconsistencies can result in incorrect conclusions being made from research. Purpose: In this invited commentary, we aim to increase awareness regarding the current standard of methodological reporting in ice hockey game-analysis research. In addition, we have developed a framework for the standardization of game analysis in ice hockey in order to allow for greater replication in future research and to increase the application of published findings to practice. Conclusions: We implore researchers in the field to consult the Ice Hockey Game Analysis Research Methodological Reporting Checklist in order to adopt a detailed reporting standard of methodologies in future work to help improve the applicability of research outcomes.

Scientific interest in pacing goes back >100 years. Contemporary interest, both as a feature of athletic competition and as a window into understanding fatigue, goes back >30 years. Pacing represents the pattern of energy use designed to produce a competitive result while managing fatigue of different origins. Pacing has been studied both against the clock and during head-to-head competition. Several models have been used to explain pacing, including the teleoanticipation model, the central governor model, the anticipatory-feedback-rating of perceived exertion model, the concept of a learned template, the affordance concept, the integrative governor theory, and as an explanation for “falling behind.” Early studies, mostly using time-trial exercise, focused on the need to manage homeostatic disturbance. More recent studies, based on head-to-head competition, have focused on an improved understanding of how psychophysiology, beyond the gestalt concept of rating of perceived exertion, can be understood as a mediator of pacing and as an explanation for falling behind. More recent approaches to pacing have focused on the elements of decision making during sport and have expanded the role of psychophysiological responses including sensory-discriminatory, affective-motivational, and cognitive-evaluative dimensions. These approaches have expanded the understanding of variations in pacing, particularly during head-to-head competition.