School of Health, Medical, and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.
Human Exercise and Training Laboratory, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Nov;32(11):3177-3185. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002291.
Berkelmans, DM, Dalbo, VJ, Fox, JL, Stanton, R, Kean, CO, Giamarelos, KE, Teramoto, M, and Scanlan, AT. Influence of different methods to determine maximum heart rate on training load outcomes in basketball players. J Strength Cond Res 32(11): 3177-3185, 2018-The summated-heart-rate-zones (SHRZ) approach uses heart rate (HR) responses relative to maximum HR (HRmax) to calculate the internal training load (TL). Age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based approaches have all been used to determine HRmax in team sports. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of using age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based HRmax responses on SHRZ TL in basketball players. Semiprofessional, male basketball players (N = 6) were analyzed during the preparatory training phase. Six age-based approaches were used to predict HRmax including Fox (220 - age); Hossack (206 - [0.567 × age]); Tanaka (208 - [0.7 × age]); Nikolaidis (223 - [1.44 × age]); Nes (211 - [0.64 × age]); and Faff (209.9 - [0.73 × age]). Test-derived HRmax was taken as the highest HR during the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (Yo-Yo IRT), whereas session-based HRmax was taken as the higher HR seen during the Yo-Yo IRT or training sessions. Comparisons in SHRZ TL were made at group and individual levels. No significant group differences were evident between SHRZ approaches. Effect size analyses revealed moderate (d = 0.60-0.79) differences between age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based methods across the group and individually in 2 players. The moderate differences between approaches suggest age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based methods to determine HRmax are not interchangeable when calculating SHRZ. Basketball practitioners are encouraged to use individualized HRmax directly measured during field-based tests supplemented with higher HR responses evident during training sessions and games when calculating the SHRZ TL to ensure greatest accuracy.
贝尔克曼斯、DM、达尔博、VJ、福克斯、JL、斯坦顿、R、基恩、CO、贾马雷洛斯、KE、寺本、M 和斯坎兰、AT。不同方法测定最大心率对篮球运动员训练负荷结果的影响。《力量与体能研究杂志》32(11):3177-3185,2018 年-总和心率区间(SHRZ)方法使用与最大心率(HRmax)相关的心率(HR)反应来计算内部训练负荷(TL)。在团队运动中,已经使用了年龄预测、测试衍生和基于会话的方法来确定 HRmax。本研究的目的是确定使用年龄预测、测试衍生和基于会话的 HRmax 反应对篮球运动员 SHRZ TL 的影响。半职业男性篮球运动员(N=6)在预备训练阶段进行了分析。使用了六种基于年龄的方法来预测 HRmax,包括福克斯(220-年龄);霍萨克(206-([0.567×年龄]);田中(208-([0.7×年龄]);尼古拉迪斯(223-([1.44×年龄]);内斯(211-([0.64×年龄]);和法夫(209.9-([0.73×年龄])。测试衍生的 HRmax 被视为 Yo-Yo 间歇性恢复测试(Yoyo IRT)期间的最高 HR,而基于会话的 HRmax 则被视为 Yo-Yo IRT 或训练期间看到的较高 HR。在组和个体水平上比较了 SHRZ TL。在 SHRZ 方法之间没有观察到组间的显著差异。效应大小分析显示,在 2 名运动员中,群体和个体之间,年龄预测、测试衍生和基于会话的方法之间存在中等差异(d=0.60-0.79)。方法之间的中等差异表明,在计算 SHRZ 时,预测年龄、测试衍生和基于会话的方法不能互换。鼓励篮球从业者在计算 SHRZ TL 时,直接使用基于现场测试测量的个体 HRmax,并辅以训练期间和比赛中出现的较高 HR 反应,以确保最大的准确性。