Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Document Type
- Journal article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Keywords
- exercise intensity (2) (remove)
Institute
The present review examines retrospective analyses of training intensity distribution (TID), i.e., the proportion of training at moderate (Zone 1, Z1), heavy (Z2) and severe (Z3) intensity by elite-to-world-class endurance athletes during different phases of the season. In addition, we discuss potential implications of our findings for research in this field, as well as for training by these athletes. Altogether, we included 175 TIDs, of which 120 quantified exercise intensity on the basis of heart rate and measured time-in-zone or employed variations of the session goal approach, with demarcation of zones of exercise intensity based on physiological parameters. Notably, 49% of the TIDs were single-case studies, predominantly concerning cross-country skiing and/or the biathlon. Eighty-nine TIDs were pyramidal (Z1 > Z2 > Z3), 65 polarized (Z1 > Z3 > Z2) and 8 “threshold” (Z2 > Z1 = Z3). However, these relative numbers varied between sports and the particular phases of the season. In 91% (n = 160) of the TIDs >60% of the endurance exercise was of low intensity. Regardless of the approach to quantification or phase of the season, cyclists and swimmers were found to perform a lower proportion of exercise in Z1 (<72%) and higher proportion in Z2 (>16%) than athletes involved in the triathlon, speed skating, rowing, running, cross-country skiing or biathlon (>80% in Z1 and <12% in Z2 in all these cases). For most of the athletes their proportion of heavy-to-severe exercise was higher during the period of competition than during the preparatory phase, although with considerable variability between sports. In conclusion, the existing literature in this area does not allow general conclusions to be drawn. The methods utilized for quantification vary widely and, moreover, contextual information concerning the mode of exercise, environmental conditions, and biomechanical aspects of the exercise is often lacking. Therefore, we recommend a more comprehensive approach in connection with future investigations on the TIDs of athletes involved in different endurance sports.
The rating of perceived exertion (RPE) is a subjective load marker and may assist in individualizing training prescription, particularly by adjusting running intensity. Unfortunately, RPE has shortcomings (e.g., underreporting) and cannot be monitored continuously and automatically throughout a training sessions. In this pilot study, we aimed to predict two classes of RPE (≤15 “Somewhat hard to hard” on Borg’s 6–20 scale vs. RPE >15 in runners by analyzing data recorded by a commercially-available smartwatch with machine learning algorithms. Twelve trained and untrained runners performed long-continuous runs at a constant self-selected pace to volitional exhaustion. Untrained runners reported their RPE each kilometer, whereas trained runners reported every five kilometers. The kinetics of heart rate, step cadence, and running velocity were recorded continuously ( 1 Hz ) with a commercially-available smartwatch (Polar V800). We trained different machine learning algorithms to estimate the two classes of RPE based on the time series sensor data derived from the smartwatch. Predictions were analyzed in different settings: accuracy overall and per runner type; i.e., accuracy for trained and untrained runners independently. We achieved top accuracies of 84.8 % for the whole dataset, 81.8 % for the trained runners, and 86.1 % for the untrained runners. We predict two classes of RPE with high accuracy using machine learning and smartwatch data. This approach might aid in individualizing training prescriptions.