managing training load for sport performance [le meur madrid 2014]
DESCRIPTION
ggTRANSCRIPT
MANAGING TRAINING LOAD FOR HIGH LEVEL PERFORMANCE
Yann LE MEUR1
1 French Institute of Sport, Paris, France
Consejo Superior de Deportes
CAR Madrid, 13th October 2014
@YLMSportScience
Per week
5x Swimming
7x Cycling
7x Running
2x S&C
By Malcolm Brown
Leeds Metropolitan University
… but how hard ?
TRAINING RECOVERY
COACH
THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF FATIGUE
❺ NON FUNCTIONAL
OVERREACHING
❻ OVERTRAINING
SYNDROME
❷ MODERATE FATIGUE
❶ NO FATIGUE
❸ ACUTE FATIGUE
❹ FUNCTIONAL
OVERREACHING
Meeusen et al. MSSE 2013
Train hard or go home!
ACUTE FATIGUE
High perceived fatigue
No performance decrement after a 24/36h rest
period,
Performance supercompensation
24/36h
performance baseline
THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF FATIGUE
Train hard
or go home!
Very high perceived fatigue
Short-term performance decrement,
Performance restoration takes from several days
to several weeks,
Performance supercompensation
FUNCTIONAL OVERREACHING
Several days to several weeks
performance baseline
THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF FATIGUE
Train hard or go home!
Very intense perceived fatigue
Short-term decrement in performance capacity (< 1 month),
Performance restoration…
… with no performance supercompensation
NON FUNCTIONAL
OVERREACHING
Several weeks
performance baseline
THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF FATIGUE
Train hard or go home!
… Very intense perceived fatigue
Long-term performance decrement (> 1 month)
THE OVERTRAINING
SYNDROME
> One month
performance baseline
THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF FATIGUE
WHICH STRATEGY TO CHOOSE?
❸ ACUTE FATIGUE
❹ FUNCTIONAL
OVERREACHING
❺ NON FUNCTIONAL
OVERREACHING
❻ OVERTRAINING
SYNDROME
Meeusen et al. MSSE 2013
❷ MODERATE FATIGUE
❶ NO FATIGUE
F-OR: THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY?
F-OR: THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY?
F-OR: THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY?
F-OR: THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY?
Multistage fitness test
F-OR: THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY?
1. To examine whether the
development of a functional
overreaching state leads to
greater performance
supercompensation in
comparison to acute fatigue
strategy
?
OBJECTIVES
2. To better understand the potential
factors associated with the functional
overreaching development, including:
the physiological & psychological
responses,
behavioral response,
and health.
OBJECTIVES
PROTOCOL
Phase III
(3 weeks)
TR
AIN
ING
LO
AD
(%
ha
bit
ual lo
ad
)
100%
60%
130%
Control
group (n = 12)
Phase II
(1 week)
Simulated Taper
(4 weeks)
Pre
Phase I
(3 weeks)
Post
T1
T2
T3
T4
Overloading
100%
60%
130%
Phase I
(3 weeks) Phase II
(1week)
Overload
training group
(n = 28)
Simulated Taper
(4 weeks)
Post
T1
T2
T3
T4
Pre
STUDY DESIGN
Phase III
(3 weeks)
Aubry et al. MSSE 2014
Pu
issan
ce (
W)
100W
+25W par 2min
36h rest period before each test
Same day, same hour
Controlled diet during the last 48h
Hydration guidelines
EXERCISE TEST
7 subjects did not follow the
prescribed training due to
injury or personal obligations
Control group: n = 10
Overload group: n = 23
ADHERENCE TO THE TRAINING
PROTOCOL
TRA
ININ
G L
OA
D (
% h
abit
ual
load
)
Overloading
100%
60%
130%
Phase I (3 weeks)
Phase II (1 week)
Phase III (3 weeks)
Overload training group
(n = 23)
Simulated Taper (4 weeks)
Post
T1
T2
T3
T4
Pre
STUDY DESIGN
• HIGH PERCEIVED FATIGUE
• PRESERVED & ENHANCED
PERFORMANCE
• VERY HIGH PERCEIVED FATIGUE
• DECREASED PERFORMANCE
ACUTE FATIGUE
n = 12
FUNCTIONAL
OVERREACHING
n = 11
THE OVERLOAD GROUP
Control group
n = 12
Overload
group
n = 28
Control group
n = 10
Acute Fatigue
n = 12
F-OR group
n = 11
2 out
5 out
THREE GROUPS
†††
†††
##
†# ††
†
* vs. Pre # vs. CTL † vs. F-OR
THE PERFORMANCE REBOUND
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
Pre Post T1 T2 T3 T4
Perf
orm
an
ce c
han
ge (
% P
re)
Control
Acute Fatigue
Functional overreaching
Aubry et al. MSSE 2014
* vs. Pre # vs. CTL † vs. F-OR
10 ± 7W 18 ± 8W 9 ± 4W
THE PERFORMANCE REBOUND
Train hard or go home!
Acute fatigue
Functional overreaching
Control
∆?
PEAKING PERFORMANCE
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Post T1 T2 T3 T4
Oc
cu
rre
nc
e o
f p
ea
k
pe
rfo
rma
nc
e
(n
b/w
ee
k)
Control
Acute Fatigue
F-Overreaching
Ø
75% of peak
performances within
the two first weeks
PEAKING PERFORMANCE
Aubry et al. MSSE 2014
Age Height
(cm)
Weight
(kg)
MAP
(W)
VO2max
(mLO2/
min/kg)
Weekly training characteristics Endurance
sports
experience
(years) Volume
(h)
Distribution
of intensity in
Z1, 2 and 3
(%)
Nb of swim/
cycle/ run
sessions
Control 37 183 75 355 58 12 62/30/8 3/3/3 13
Acute
Fatigue 33 179 74 354 59 13 65/26/9 3/3/3 15
Functional
Overreaching 36 180 73 369 61 14 64/30/7 3/5/3 12
No significant difference between groups at baseline
SUBJECTS &TRAINING
CHARACTERISTICS
SO LET’S GO
A LITTLE BIT
FURTHER!
Oxygen uptake
Ventilatory parameters
Cardiac output
Blood lactate
concentration
Plasmatic
catecholamines
concentration
Arterial blood
pressures
PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE
Le Meur et al. JAP 2014
* Different from Pre, p < 0.05
4100
4200
4300
4400
4500
4600
4700
Control Acute Fatigue F - Overreaching
Ma
xim
al o
xyg
en
up
tak
e
(ml/
min
/kg
)
Pre
Post
T2
*
MAXIMAL OXYGEN UPTAKE
Le Meur et al. JAP 2014
Different from Pre, p < 0.05; † Different from Post, p < 0.05
AN ALTERED CARDIAC RESPONSE
Le Meur et al. JAP 2014
AN ALTERED CARDIAC RESPONSE
Different from Pre, p < 0.05; † Different from Post, p < 0.05
Different from Pre, p < 0.05
† Different from Post, p < 0.05
CATECHOLAMINES RESPONSE
Le Meur et al. JAP 2014
QUESTIONNAIRES
Health
monitoring
questionnaire
(URTI & GI
infections
symptoms)
Hausswirth et al. MSSE 2014
Phase Baseline Overload Taper
TOTAL Week
number I II III IV V VI VII VIII
CTL 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
AF 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2
F-OR 0 1 0 4 0 1 2 0 8
INFECTIONS
Hausswirth et al. MSSE 2014
No significant change in the AF
and CTL groups.
F-OR group: decrease in actual
sleep duration, immobile time and
sleep efficiency;
These alterations disappeared
during the taper phase.
* Different from Pre, p < 0.05
SLEEP
Training overload leading to functional
overreaching may induce higher risk of
training maladaptations, including:
o increased infection risks,
o sleep disturbances,
o symptoms of cardiac fatigue at exercise.
CONCLUSION #1
CONCLUSION #1
This study showed that:
greater gains in performance and VO2max
occur when the habitual training load increases
before the taper…
peak performance is not necessarily
delayed during the taper when heavy training
loads are completed immediately prior.
… but not if there is functional overreaching;
Further studies are needed to
confirm these findings using
longitudinal monitoring of elite
athletes.
PERSPECTIVES
Inigo MUJIKA
~100 international publications
5 books
World-recognized expert on training periodization
Past experiences: Athletic Bilbao, Euskatel cycling
team, USA Swimming Federation, Spanish
Swimming Federation, coach of Eneko Llanos
(2nd place, Hawaii Triathlon in 2008)
FOCUS ON A CASE STUDY
Ainhoa MURUA
2nd European Championships in 2012
7th Olympics in London 2012
FOCUS ON A CASE STUDY
Mujika et al. IJSPP 2014
… but how hard ?
HOW DO YOU MANAGE TRAINING LOAD?
Mujika et al. IJSPP 2014
• The content of each training session is determined
according to a pre-planned program,
• Each training session is thought in accordance with
the actual shape of the athlete,
• I do never program a training session, which I think
is impossible for the athlete to complete at this period
of the season,
• I anticipate the athlete should perceive the training
session, how easy or hard it should be to complete,
• If the session goes well, I continue as planned,
• If the athlete doesn’t succeed to complete the
session and feels tired, a morning/afternoon or a full
day off is programmed to promote recovery.
DO IT
SIMPLE… BUT
DO IT WELL!
MONITOR PERFORMANCE
& QUANTIFY TRAINING LOAD
DEMONSTRATE EMPATHY
& ACCEPT TO REGULATE
+
CONCLUSION #2
TR
AIN
ING
LO
AD
(%
ha
bit
ual lo
ad
)
100%
60%
130%
Control
group (n = 8)
Pre
Phase III
(3 weeks) Phase II
(1 week)
Phase I
(3 weeks)
Post
100%
60%
130%
Overload
training group
(n = 16) Post Pre
OTHER MARKERS TO DIAGNOSE EXCESSIVE FATIGUE?
Overloading
Phase I
(3 weeks) Phase II
(1week)
Phase III
(3 weeks)
Le Meur et al. JAP 2013
Phase II
(1 week)
Phase II
(1 week)
T1
T1
Psychological parameters
Physiological parameters
Cognitive performance
Kinetic & Kinematic parameters
Le Meur et al. JAP 2013
Measured parameters at exercise
Measured parameters
Le Meur et al. JAP 2013
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Dis
cri
min
an
t F
un
cti
on
2
Discriminant Function1
BENEFITS OF A MULTIFACTORIAL ANALYSIS
Le Meur et al. JAP 2013
Control group
Overreached group
↘ HR at submax intensities ↘ HRmax ↘ [lactate] at submax intensities ↘ Peak [lactate] ↗ RPE at submax intensities
HEART RATE AT EXERCISE
Le Meur et al. MSSE 2013
HR monitoring may help
to diagnose functional
overreaching
> 3 weeks
performance baseline
…
> One month
performance baseline
Matos et al. MSSE 2011
TRAINING LOAD IS NOT THE ONLY FACTOR OF STRESS
Matos et al. MSSE 2011
OTHER MARKERS TO DIAGNOSE EXCESSIVE FATIGUE?
Matos et al. MSSE 2011
OTHER FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH TRAINING
MALADAPTATIONS
Matos et al. MSSE 2011
OTHER FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH TRAINING
MALADAPTATIONS
TAKE HOME MESSAGES
Overload periods are essential for performance
enhancement;
Tapering is critical for the supercompensation
process,
Training periodisation should be continuoulsy
adapted, based on:
o performance responses after a short rest
period using regular testing training sessions,
o athletes’ feedback (perceived fatigue,
well-being, motivation, etc.).
Anaël AUBRY
PhD student
INSEP
Julien LOUIS, PhD
Sport scientist
INSEP
Christophe HAUSSWIRTH, PhD
Head of Research Department
INSEP
Consejo Superior
de Deportes
@YLMSportScience
THANKS FOR YOUR
ATTENTION