Differences in execution and perception of training sessions as experienced by (semi‐) professional cyclists and their coach

Voet, Jens G.; Lamberts, Robert P.; Koning, Jos J. de; Jong, Jelle de; Foster, Carl; Erp, Teun van

doi:10.1080/17461391.2021.1979102

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(64 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are no differences in RPE and duration between the coach and the athlete per session including all training modalities. This was also found in a study among elite cyclists [ 19 ]; however, a study of young soccer players showed that the athletes trained at a higher RPE than intended [ 20 ]. On the other hand, our study shows that the skater’s RPE for speed skating sessions is 0.6 lower than what the coach intended.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

“…Some studies comparing intended and perceived training load did not report a discrepancy in the number of training sessions [ 14 , 15 , 20 ] or showed a very small discrepancy [ 17 , 19 ]. If no discrepancy was shown, it was due to the design, which would only include matched sessions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies that showed a very small discrepancy included athletes that probably reported their training load comprehensively because it is their profession [ 19 ], and because most training sessions were performed under the supervision of the coach [ 17 ]. During our study, the junior speed skaters had to do the majority of training sessions on their own initiative such as cycling and other sessions, which leaves more room for absence if they were, e.g., otherwise occupied, or simply not in the mood for training.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the RPE CR10 scale [ 12 ], easy, moderate, and hard were classified as an RPE < 3, 3–5, and >5, respectively [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. However, studies using the 6 to 20 Borg scale [ 18 ] have defined two different classifications for easy, moderate, and hard, i.e., RPE < 11, 11–14, and >14, respectively [ 19 ], and RPE < 13, 13–14, and >14, respectively [ 20 ]. These differences in classifications lead to differences in interpretation of the results, which makes it hard to compare different studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For cyclists [ 15 ] and male cross-country runners [ 17 ], there were no differences for intended hard sessions. Using the Borg scale, it was shown that semi-professional cyclists perceived both intended easy sessions and hard sessions as easier [ 19 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Perceived Training of Junior Speed Skaters versus the Coach’s Intention: Does a Mismatch Relate to Perceived Stress and Recovery?

Otter

Bakker

Zwaard

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this observational study was to examine the differences between training variables as intended by coaches and perceived by junior speed skaters and to explore how these relate to changes in stress and recovery. During a 4-week preparatory period, intended and perceived training intensity (RPE) and duration (min) were monitored for 2 coaches and their 23 speed skaters, respectively. The training load was calculated by multiplying RPE by duration. Changes in perceived stress and recovery were measured using RESTQ-sport questionnaires before and after 4 weeks. Results included 438 intended training sessions and 378 executed sessions of 14 speed skaters. A moderately higher intended (52:37 h) versus perceived duration (45:16 h) was found, as skaters performed fewer training sessions than anticipated (four sessions). Perceived training load was lower than intended for speed skating sessions (−532 ± 545 AU) and strength sessions (−1276 ± 530 AU) due to lower RPE scores for skating (−0.6 ± 0.7) or shorter and fewer training sessions for strength (−04:13 ± 02:06 hh:mm). All training and RESTQ-sport parameters showed large inter-individual variations. Differences between intended–perceived training variables showed large positive correlations with changes in RESTQ-sport, i.e., for the subscale’s success (r = 0.568), physical recovery (r = 0.575), self-regulation (r = 0.598), and personal accomplishment (r = 0.589). To conclude, speed skaters that approach or exceed the coach’s intended training variables demonstrated an increased perception of success, physical recovery, self-regulation, and personal accomplishment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Perceived Training of Junior Speed Skaters versus the Coach’s Intention: Does a Mismatch Relate to Perceived Stress and Recovery?

Otter

Bakker

Zwaard

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Training Quality—What Is It and How Can We Improve It?

Sandbakk

Walther

Solli

et al. 2023

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The concept of training quality reflects that the effect of training is dependent on more than the mere product of training load (eg, duration, intensity, frequency). The aims of this commentary are to (1) propose a practice-oriented framework to describe training quality and its general and context-dependent characteristics and (2) discuss how athletes and coaches can work to improve training quality. Conclusions: Training quality can be viewed from different perspectives. The holistic dimension includes the entire training process (goal setting, gap analysis, application of training principles and methods, etc), while a narrower dimension encompasses the specific training sessions and how they are executed in relation to the intended purpose. To capture the varying contexts, we define training quality as the degree of excellence related to how the training process or training sessions are executed to optimize adaptations and, thereby, improve overall performance. Although training quality is challenging to quantify, we argue that identification and assessment of quality indicators will increase our scientific understanding and consequently help coaches and athletes to improve training quality. We propose that the physical, technical, and psychological factors of training quality can be improved through an individualized learning process of systematic planning, execution, and debriefing. However, assessment tools should be identified and scientifically validated across different training sessions and sports. We encourage further interventions to improve training quality.

show abstract

Internal Training Load Perceived by Athletes and Planned by Coaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and session RPE (sRPE) has been widely used to verify the internal load in athletes. Understanding the agreement between the training load prescribed by coaches and that perceived by athletes is a topic of great interest in sport science. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate differences between the training/competition load perceived by athletes and prescribed/intended/observed by coaches. Methods A literature search (September 2020 and updated in November 2021) was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and SPORTDiscus databases. The protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework (osf.io/wna4x). Studies should include athletes and coaches of any sex, age, or level of experience. The studies should present outcomes related to the RPE or sRPE for any scale considering overall training/competition sessions (physical, strength, tactical, technical, games) and/or classified into three effort categories: easy, moderate, and hard. Results Twenty-seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. No difference was found between coaches and athletes for overall RPE (SMD = 0.19, P = 0.10) and overall sRPE (SMD = 0.05, P = 0.75). There was a difference for easy RPE (SMD = − 0.44, small effect size, P = 0.04) and easy sRPE (SMD = − 0.54, moderate effect size, P = 0.04). No differences were found for moderate RPE (SMD = 0.05, P = 0.74) and hard RPE (SMD = 0.41, P = 0.18). No difference was found for moderate (SMD = -0.15, P = 0.56) and hard (SMD = 0.20, P = 0.43) sRPE. Conclusion There is an agreement between coaches and athletes about overall RPE and sRPE, and RPE and sRPE into two effort categories (moderate and hard). However, there were disagreements in RPE and sRPE for easy effort category. Thus, despite a small disagreement, the use of these tools seems to be adequate for training monitoring.

show abstract

Differences in execution and perception of training sessions as experienced by (semi‐) professional cyclists and their coach

Abstract: Differences in execution and perception of training sessions as experienced by (semi-) professional cyclists and their coach.

Cited by 3 publications

References 45 publications

Perceived Training of Junior Speed Skaters versus the Coach’s Intention: Does a Mismatch Relate to Perceived Stress and Recovery?

Perceived Training of Junior Speed Skaters versus the Coach’s Intention: Does a Mismatch Relate to Perceived Stress and Recovery?

Training Quality—What Is It and How Can We Improve It?

Internal Training Load Perceived by Athletes and Planned by Coaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About