Stimulated by the debate among endurance athletes and coaches of whether an optimal training intensity distribution (TID) exists, we recently reviewed the literature of studies dealing with TID in various sports (Stöggl and Sperlich, 2015; Stöggl, 2018). Our research identified numerous intensity zone models for quantifying TID. Among all TID models, a three zone-based TID seems widely applied among the literature. Within this model "Zone 1" represents low-intensity exercise below first lactate or ventilatory threshold. "Zone 2" exhibits accumulated levels of blood lactate between the first and second lactate or ventilatory threshold. "Zone 3" represents high-intensity exercise above the second lactate or ventilatory threshold. Based on our (Stöggl and Sperlich, 2015) and other findings (e.g., Billat et al., 2001; Seiler and Kjerland, 2006; Sandbakk et al., 2011; Tonnessen et al., 2014) various TID exist including a socalled polarized (Zone1 > Zone3 > Zone 2) (Fiskerstrand and Seiler, 2004; Seiler and Kjerland, 2006) or pyramidal TID (Zone1 > Zone 2 > Zone 3) (Stöggl and Sperlich, 2015), depending on the discipline. Since controlled and prospective training experiments are time consuming, complex, requiring both the coaches and athletes to adhere to scientific rules and methods we were motivated to stimulate this research topic to gain broader and deeper insights in TIDs during preparation, precompetition, and competition phases in different endurance disciplines and performance levels. Ultimately, we wanted to identify TIDs demonstrating greater efficacy than others and highlight research gaps in an effort to direct future scientific investigations.
© Copyright 2019 Training intensity, volume and recovery distribution among elite and recreational endurance athletes. Veröffentlicht von Frontiers Media SA. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.