Bellinger Phillip
Griffith Sports Physiology and Performance, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
Sports Med. 2020 Jun;50(6):1059-1073. doi: 10.1007/s40279-020-01269-w.
There are variable responses to short-term periods of increased training load in endurance athletes, whereby some athletes improve without deleterious effects on performance, while others show diminished exercise performance for a period of days to months. The time course of the decrement in performance and subsequent restoration, or super compensation, has been used to distinguish between the different stages of the fitness-fatigue adaptive continuum termed functional overreaching (FOR), non-functional overreaching (NFOR) or overtraining syndrome. The short-term transient training-induced decrements in performance elicited by increases in training load (i.e. FOR) are thought be a sufficient and necessary component of a training program and are often deliberately induced in training to promote meaningful physiological adaptations and performance super-compensation. Despite the supposition that deliberately inducing FOR in athletes may be necessary to achieve performance super-compensation, FOR has been associated with various negative cardiovascular, hormonal and metabolic consequences. Furthermore, recent studies have demonstrated dampened training and performance adaptations in FOR athletes compared to non-overreached athletes who completed the same training program or the same relative increase in training load. However, this is not always the case and a number of studies have also demonstrated substantial performance super-compensation in athletes who were classified as being FOR. It is possible that there are a number of contextual factors that may influence the metabolic consequences associated with FOR and classifying this training-induced state of fatigue based purely on a decrement in performance may be an oversimplification. Here, the most recent research on FOR in endurance athletes will be critically evaluated to determine (1) if there is sufficient evidence to indicate that inducing a state of FOR is necessary and required to induce a performance super-compensation; (2) the metabolic consequences that are associated with FOR; (3) strategies that may prevent the negative consequences of overreaching.
耐力运动员对短期训练负荷增加的反应各不相同，有些运动员成绩提高且对表现无有害影响，而另一些运动员在数天至数月内运动表现会下降。成绩下降及随后恢复（即超量恢复）的时间过程，已被用于区分体能 - 疲劳适应性连续体的不同阶段，即功能性过度训练（FOR）、非功能性过度训练（NFOR）或过度训练综合征。训练负荷增加引起的短期短暂训练诱导的成绩下降（即FOR）被认为是训练计划的一个充分必要组成部分，并且在训练中经常被有意诱导以促进有意义的生理适应和成绩超量恢复。尽管推测在运动员中有意诱导FOR可能是实现成绩超量恢复所必需的，但FOR已与各种负面的心血管、激素和代谢后果相关联。此外，最近的研究表明，与完成相同训练计划或相同相对训练负荷增加的非过度训练运动员相比，FOR运动员的训练和成绩适应受到抑制。然而，情况并非总是如此，一些研究也表明被归类为FOR的运动员有显著的成绩超量恢复。可能有许多背景因素会影响与FOR相关的代谢后果，单纯基于成绩下降来分类这种训练诱导的疲劳状态可能过于简单化。在此，将对耐力运动员FOR的最新研究进行批判性评估，以确定：（1）是否有足够证据表明诱导FOR状态是诱导成绩超量恢复所必需的；（2）与FOR相关的代谢后果；（3）可能预防过度训练负面后果的策略。
