Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for :

  • "loading factors" x
  • Physical Education and Coaching x
  • All content x
Clear All
Restricted access

Øyvind Sandbakk, Thomas Haugen, and Gertjan Ettema

Purpose: To provide novel insight regarding the influence of exercise modality on training load management by (1) providing a theoretical framework for the impact of physiological and biomechanical mechanisms associated with different exercise modalities on training load management in endurance exercise and (2) comparing effort-matched low-intensity training sessions performed by top-level athletes in endurance sports with similar energy demands. Practical Applications and Conclusions: The ability to perform endurance training with manageable muscular loads and low injury risks in different exercise modalities is influenced both by mechanical factors and by muscular state and coordination, which interrelate in optimizing power production while reducing friction and/or drag. Consequently, the choice of exercise modality in endurance training influences effort beyond commonly used external and internal load measurements and should be considered alongside duration, frequency, and intensity when managing training load. By comparing effort-matched low- to moderate-intensity sessions performed by top-level athletes in endurance sports, this study exemplifies how endurance exercise with varying modalities leads to different tolerable volumes. For example, the weight-bearing exercise and high-impact forces in long-distance running put high loads on muscles and tendons, leading to relatively low training volume tolerance. In speed skating, the flexed knee and hip position required for effective speed skating leads to occlusion of thighs and low volume tolerance. In contrast, the non-weight-bearing, low-contraction exercises in cycling or swimming allow for large volumes in the specific exercise modalities. Overall, these differences have major implications on training load management in sports.

Restricted access

Richard Johnston, Roisin Cahalan, Laura Bonnett, Matthew Maguire, Alan Nevill, Philip Glasgow, Kieran O’Sullivan, and Thomas Comyns

). 22 TL factors (Table  2 ) were calculated using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp, Redmond, WA) Table 2 Training-Load-Factor Definitions and Calculations Training-load factor Definition Calculation Session training load (sRPE) 15 , 19 Measure of session internal and external training load sRPE

Restricted access

Olfa Turki, Wissem Dhahbi, Sabri Gueid, Sami Hmaied, Marouen Souaifi, and Riadh Khalifa

2 = 0.49 [small]) and time ( P  < .001, η p 2 = 0.64 [moderate]) factors with a significant interaction between time and load factors ( P  = .004, η p 2 = 0.16 [trivial]) (Table  3 ). Discussion The present study aimed to (a) explore the effect of 4 different warm-up strategies: weighted vest

Restricted access

Timothy J.H. Lathlean, Paul B. Gastin, Stuart V. Newstead, and Caroline F. Finch

structure was then used for each of the main effects models for individual load factors. Table  3 presents a matrix of parameter estimates from the final-fitted GEE models, the standard error of the parameter estimate, the OR derived from the parameter, the 95% CIs for the OR, the statistical significance

Restricted access

Laurent Schmitt, Stéphane Bouthiaux, and Grégoire P. Millet

content. 7 However, to our knowledge, there is no study reporting training characteristics and HRV data over a long period (>10 y) in athletes of this performance level. So, the aim of this study was to describe the overall training, as well as the relationship between the development of key load factors

Restricted access

Timothy J.H. Lathlean, Paul B. Gastin, Stuart V. Newstead, and Caroline F. Finch

eccentric torque, as well as centrally mediated factors including cognitive load. 10 The evidence linking fatigue with injury builds on the breadth of literature that identifies key associations between load and fatigue. 9 , 10 A recent systematic review outlined particular load factors, such as internal