Literature DB >> 18212712

Block periodization versus traditional training theory: a review.

V Issurin1.   

Abstract

The basis of contemporary training theory were founded a few decades ago when knowledge was far from complete and workload levels, athletic results and demands were much lower than now. Traditional training periodization, i.e. the division of the seasonal program into smaller periods and training cycles, was proposed at that time and became a universal and monopolistic approach to training planning and analysis. Further sport progress emphasized the limitations and drawbacks of traditional periodization with regard to the preparation of contemporary top-level athletes and their demands. Major contradictions between traditional theory and practice needs appeared as 1) an inability to provide multi peak performances during the season; 2) the drawbacks of long lasting mixed training programs; 3) negative interactions of non-compatible workloads that induced conflicting training responses; and 4) insufficient training stimuli to help highly qualified athletes to progress, as a result of mixed training. The trials and successful experiences of prominent coaches and researchers led to alternative training concepts and, ultimately, to a reformed training approach that was called block periodization (BP). Its general idea suggests the use and sequencing of specialized mesocycle-blocks, where highly concentrated training workloads are focused on a minimal number of motor and technical abilities. Unlike traditional periodization, which usually tries to develop many abilities simultaneously, the block concept suggests consecutive training stimulation of carefully selected fitness components. The rational sequencing of specialized mesocycle-blocks presupposes the exploitation and superimposition of residual training effects, an idea that has recently been conceptualized and studied. It is hypothesized that different types of mesocycle-blocks are suitable to various modes of biological adaptation, i.e. homeostatic regulation or a mechanism of general adaptation.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18212712

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Med Phys Fitness        ISSN: 0022-4707            Impact factor:   1.637


  29 in total

1.  Block training periodization in alpine skiing: effects of 11-day HIT on VO2max and performance.

Authors:  Fabio A Breil; Simone N Weber; Stefan Koller; Hans Hoppeler; Michael Vogt
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2010-04-04       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 2.  Benefits and Limitations of Block Periodized Training Approaches to Athletes' Preparation: A Review.

Authors:  Vladimir B Issurin
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 3.  High-intensity interval training, solutions to the programming puzzle. Part II: anaerobic energy, neuromuscular load and practical applications.

Authors:  Martin Buchheit; Paul B Laursen
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  Training at the optimum power zone produces similar performance improvements to traditional strength training.

Authors:  Irineu Loturco; Carlos Ugrinowitsch; Hamilton Roschel; Valmor Tricoli; Juan José González-Badillo
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

Review 5.  Strategies to optimize concurrent training of strength and aerobic fitness for rowing and canoeing.

Authors:  Jesús García-Pallarés; Mikel Izquierdo
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 6.  New horizons for the methodology and physiology of training periodization.

Authors:  Vladimir B Issurin
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 7.  Periodization: Variation in the Definition and Discrepancies in Study Design.

Authors:  Ryo Kataoka; Ecaterina Vasenina; Jeremy Loenneke; Samuel L Buckner
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 8.  Comparison of Periodized and Non-Periodized Resistance Training on Maximal Strength: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tyler D Williams; Danilo V Tolusso; Michael V Fedewa; Michael R Esco
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 9.  The development, retention and decay rates of strength and power in elite rugby union, rugby league and American football: a systematic review.

Authors:  Daniel Travis McMaster; Nicholas Gill; John Cronin; Michael McGuigan
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 11.136

10.  Effects and sustainability of a 13-day high-intensity shock microcycle in soccer.

Authors:  Patrick Wahl; Matthias Güldner; Joachim Mester
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 2.988

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.