Aerobic high-intensity intervals are superior to improve V̇O compared with sprint intervals in well-trained men.

Maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O ) may be the single most important factor for long-distance running performance. Interval training, enabling high intensity, is forwarded as the format that yields the largest increase in V̇O . However, it is uncertain if an optimal outcome on V̇O , anaerobic capacity, and running performance is provided by training with a high aerobic intensity or high overall intensity. Thus, we randomized 48 aerobically well-trained men (23 ± 3 years) to three commonly applied interval protocols, one with high aerobic intensity (HIIT) and two with high absolute intensity (sprint interval training; SIT), 3× week for 8 weeks: (1) HIIT: 4 × 4 min at ~95% maximal aerobic speed (MAS) with 3 min active breaks. (2) SIT: 8 × 20 s at ~150% MAS with 10 s passive breaks. (3) SIT: 10 × 30 s at ~175% MAS with 3.5 min active breaks. V̇O increased more (p < 0.001) following HIIT, 4 × 4 min (6.5 ± 2.4%, p < 0.001) than SIT, 8 × 20 s (3.3 ± 2.4%, p < 0.001) and SIT, 10 × 30 s (n.s.). This was accompanied by a larger (p < 0.05) increase in stroke volume (O -pulse) following HIIT, 4 × 4 min (8.1 ± 4.1%, p < 0.001) compared with SIT, 8 × 20 s (3.8 ± 4.2%, p < 0.01) and SIT, 10 × 30 (n.s.). Anaerobic capacity (maximal accumulated oxygen deficit) increased following SIT, 8 × 20 s (p < 0.05), but not after HIIT, 4 × 4 min, nor SIT, 10 × 30 s. Long-distance (3000-m) endurance performance increased (p < 0.05-p < 0.001) in all groups (HIIT, 4 × 4 min: 5.9 ± 3.2%; SIT, 8 × 20 s: 4.1 ± 3.7%; SIT, 10 × 30 s: 2.2 ± 2.2%), with HIIT increasing more than SIT, 10 × 30 s (p < 0.05). Sprint (300-m) performance exhibited within-group increases in SIT, 8 × 20 s (4.4 ± 2.0%) and SIT, 10 × 30 s (3.3 ± 2.8%). In conclusion, HIIT improves V̇O more than SIT. Given the importance of V̇O for most endurance performance scenarios, HIIT should typically be the chosen interval format.