Literature DB >> 28253038

Monitoring Training Loads: The Past, the Present, and the Future.

Carl Foster, Jose A Rodriguez-Marroyo, Jos J de Koning.   

Abstract

Training monitoring is about keeping track of what athletes accomplish in training, for the purpose of improving the interaction between coach and athlete. Over history there have been several basic schemes of training monitoring. In the earliest days training monitoring was about observing the athlete during standard workouts. However, difficulty in standardizing the conditions of training made this process unreliable. With the advent of interval training, monitoring became more systematic. However, imprecision in the measurement of heart rate (HR) evolved interval training toward index workouts, where the main monitored parameter was average time required to complete index workouts. These measures of training load focused on the external training load, what the athlete could actually do. With the advent of interest from the scientific community, the development of the concept of metabolic thresholds and the possibility of trackside measurement of HR, lactate, VO2, and power output, there was greater interest in the internal training load, allowing better titration of training loads in athletes of differing ability. These methods show much promise but often require laboratory testing for calibration and tend to produce too much information, in too slow a time frame, to be optimally useful to coaches. The advent of the TRIMP concept by Banister suggested a strategy to combine intensity and duration elements of training into a single index concept, training load. Although the original TRIMP concept was mathematically complex, the development of the session RPE and similar low-tech methods has demonstrated a way to evaluate training load, along with derived variables, in a simple, responsive way. Recently, there has been interest in using wearable sensors to provide high-resolution data of the external training load. These methods are promising, but problems relative to information overload and turnaround time to coaches remain to be solved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  evaluation; external training load; internal training load

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28253038     DOI: 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0388

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Sports Physiol Perform        ISSN: 1555-0265            Impact factor:   4.010


  34 in total

1.  Increased rate of force development during periodized maximum strength and power training is highly individual.

Authors:  Heikki Peltonen; Simon Walker; Anthony C Hackney; Janne Avela; Keijo Häkkinen
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 3.078

2.  Low External Workloads Are Related to Higher Injury Risk in Professional Male Basketball Games.

Authors:  Toni Caparrós; Martí Casals; Álvaro Solana; Javier Peña
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 2.988

3.  Recommendations for determining the validity of consumer wearable heart rate devices: expert statement and checklist of the INTERLIVE Network.

Authors:  Jan M Mühlen; Julie Stang; Esben Lykke Skovgaard; Pedro B Judice; Pablo Molina-Garcia; William Johnston; Luís B Sardinha; Francisco B Ortega; Brian Caulfield; Wilhelm Bloch; Sulin Cheng; Ulf Ekelund; Jan Christian Brønd; Anders Grøntved; Moritz Schumann
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 13.800

4.  The Case for Adopting a Multivariate Approach to Optimize Training Load Quantification in Team Sports.

Authors:  Dan Weaving; Ben Jones; Kevin Till; Grant Abt; Clive Beggs
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2017-12-12       Impact factor: 4.566

5.  Age-Predicted Maximal Heart Rate in Recreational Marathon Runners: A Cross-Sectional Study on Fox's and Tanaka's Equations.

Authors:  Pantelis T Nikolaidis; Thomas Rosemann; Beat Knechtle
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 4.566

6.  A Wearable System for Real-Time Continuous Monitoring of Physical Activity.

Authors:  Fabrizio Taffoni; Diego Rivera; Angelica La Camera; Andrea Nicolò; Juan Ramón Velasco; Carlo Massaroni
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2018-03-20       Impact factor: 2.682

7.  Comparisons of Perceived Training Doses in Champion Collegiate-Level Male and Female Cross-country Runners and Coaches over the Course of a Competitive Season.

Authors:  Kyle R Barnes
Journal:  Sports Med Open       Date:  2017-10-17

8.  Lacrosse Athletes Load and Recovery Monitoring: Comparison between Objective and Subjective Methods.

Authors:  Richard Hauer; Antonio Tessitore; Reinhard Knaus; Harald Tschan
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 9.  How to Construct, Conduct and Analyze an Exercise Training Study?

Authors:  Anne Hecksteden; Oliver Faude; Tim Meyer; Lars Donath
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 4.566

10.  Description of training loads using whole-body exercise during high-intensity interval training.

Authors:  Alexandre F Machado; Alexandre L Evangelista; João Marcelo Q Miranda; Cauê V La Scala Teixeira; Roberta Luksevicius Rica; Charles R Lopes; Aylton Figueira-Júnior; Julien S Baker; Danilo S Bocalini
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 2.365

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.