Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent,Belgium.
Center of Sports Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent,Belgium.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2023 Jan 30;18(3):284-292. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2022-0157. Print 2023 Mar 1.
To examine the differences in training load (TL) metrics when quantifying training sessions differing in intensity and duration. The relationship between the TL metrics and the acute performance decrement measured immediately after the sessions was also assessed.
Eleven male recreational cyclists performed 4 training sessions in a random order, immediately followed by a 3-km time trial (TT). Before this period, participants performed the time TT in order to obtain a baseline performance. The difference in the average power output for the TTs following the training sessions was then expressed relative to the best baseline performance. The training sessions were quantified using 7 different TL metrics, 4 using heart rate as input, 2 using power output, and 1 using the rating of perceived exertion.
The load of the sessions was estimated differently depending on the TL metrics used. Also, within the metrics using the same input (heart rate and power), differences were found. TL using the rating of perceived exertion was the only metric showing a response that was consistent with the acute performance decrements found for the different training sessions. The Training Stress Score and the individualized training impulse demonstrated similar patterns but overexpressed the intensity of the training sessions. The total work done resulted in an overrepresentation of the duration of training.
TL metrics provide dissimilar results as to which training sessions have higher loads. The load based on TL using the rating of perceived exertion was the only one in line with the acute performance decrements found in this study.
研究在量化强度和持续时间不同的训练课时，训练负荷（TL）指标的差异。还评估了 TL 指标与训练课后立即测量的急性表现下降之间的关系。
11 名男性休闲自行车手以随机顺序进行了 4 次训练，随后立即进行了 3 公里计时赛（TT）。在此之前，参与者进行了 TT，以获得基线表现。然后，将训练课后 TT 的平均功率输出差异表示为相对于最佳基线表现的差异。使用 7 种不同的 TL 指标对训练课时进行量化，其中 4 种使用心率作为输入，2 种使用功率输出，1 种使用感知用力等级。
根据使用的 TL 指标，课时的负荷估计不同。此外，在使用相同输入（心率和功率）的指标中，也发现了差异。使用感知用力等级的 TL 是唯一一种表现出与不同训练课时发现的急性表现下降一致的反应的指标。训练应激评分和个体化训练冲动表现出相似的模式，但过度表达了训练课时的强度。总工作量导致对训练持续时间的过度表示。
TL 指标提供了不同的结果，表明哪些训练课时具有更高的负荷。基于使用感知用力等级的 TL 的负荷是唯一与本研究中发现的急性表现下降相符的负荷。
