Faculty of Sports Physical Activity Sciences, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Leioa, Spain.
Faculty of Health Sciences, Isabel I University, Burgos, Spain.
Eur J Sport Sci. 2021 Jun;21(6):819-826. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2020.1773934. Epub 2020 Jun 20.
This study aimed to analyse the training intensity distribution (TID) of a group of 7 world-class middle- and long-distance runners over 50 weeks using two different approaches to organise TID zones: (1) based on individual specific race pace and; (2) based on physiological parameters. Analysed training data included training volume, intensity and frequency. The average weekly volume for the group was 135.4 ± 29.4 km·week. Training volumes for Z1, Z2 and Z3 were 88.5 ± 1.1%, 7.4 ± 0.8% and 4.1 ± 0.7% respectively for race-pace based approach, and 87.2 ± 1.2%, 6.1 ± 0.7% and 6.6 ± 0.9% respectively for the physiological approach. Differences were found between the approaches in Z2 (large effect, ES = 1.20) and Z3 (moderate effect, ES = 0.93). The approach based on race-pace zones produced pyramidal distributions in both middle- and long-distance runners across all phases of the season. The physiological approach produced polarised and pyramidal distributions depending of the phase of the season in the middle-distance runners, and pyramidal type TID across all phases of the season in the long-distance runners. The results of this study demonstrate that the training analysis in a world-class group of runners shows different TID when assessed relative to race pace to physiological zones. This highlights a potential deficiency in training analysis and prescription methods which do not make reference to specific performance. An approach which makes reference to both physiological and performance measures may allow for a more consistent and logical analysis.
本研究旨在分析一组 7 名世界级中长跑运动员的训练强度分布（TID），使用两种不同的方法来组织 TID 区：（1）基于个体特定比赛速度；（2）基于生理参数。分析的训练数据包括训练量、强度和频率。该组的平均每周量为 135.4 ± 29.4 km·week。基于比赛速度的方法中，Z1、Z2 和 Z3 的训练量分别为 88.5 ± 1.1%、7.4 ± 0.8%和 4.1 ± 0.7%，而基于生理参数的方法中，Z1、Z2 和 Z3 的训练量分别为 87.2 ± 1.2%、6.1 ± 0.7%和 6.6 ± 0.9%。两种方法在 Z2（大效应，ES = 1.20）和 Z3（中效应，ES = 0.93）之间存在差异。基于比赛速度的方法在赛季的所有阶段都产生了中长跑运动员的金字塔式分布。生理方法根据中长跑运动员赛季的不同阶段产生了两极化和金字塔式分布，而在赛季的所有阶段都产生了金字塔式的 TID。本研究的结果表明，世界级跑步运动员群体的训练分析相对于比赛速度到生理区的评估显示出不同的 TID。这突出了训练分析和处方方法的潜在缺陷，这些方法没有参考特定的表现。一种参考生理和表现措施的方法可能允许更一致和逻辑的分析。
