Quantification of Training and Competition Loads in Endurance Sports: Methods and Applications

Abstract

Training quantification is basic to evaluate an endurance athlete's responses to training loads, ensure adequate stress/recovery balance, and determine the relationship between training and performance. Quantifying both external and internal workload is important, because external workload does not measure the biological stress imposed by the exercise sessions. Generally used quantification methods include retrospective questionnaires, diaries, direct observation, and physiological monitoring, often based on the measurement of oxygen uptake, heart rate, and blood lactate concentration. Other methods in use in endurance sports include speed measurement and the measurement of power output, made possible by recent technological advances such as power meters in cycling and triathlon. Among subjective methods of quantification, rating of perceived exertion stands out because of its wide use. Concurrent assessments of the various quantification methods allow researchers and practitioners to evaluate stress/ recovery balance, adjust individual training programs, and determine the relationships between external load, internal load, and athletes' performance. This brief review summarizes the most relevant external-and internal-workload-quantification methods in endurance sports and provides practical examples of their implementation to adjust the training programs of elite athletes in accordance with their individualized stress/recovery balance. Keywords: external load, internal load, intensity, monitoring, training adaptationTraining is a process whereby athletes are exposed to systematic and repetitive exercise stimuli with the goal of inducing adaptations matched to a desirable function, such as delaying the onset of fatigue, increasing power output, refining motor coordination, or reducing the risk of injury. Coaches and trainers generally consider that the outcome of the training process depends on the type and amount of the stimulus, and understanding this cause-and-effect relationship between training dose and response is crucial to prescribe exercise training accordingly. 1 Nevertheless, to analyze and establish causal relationships between the training performed and the resultant physiological and performance adaptations, accurate and reliable quantification of the training load undertaken by the athlete is a sine qua non. It is simply not possible to identify the effects of training without a precise quantification of the training load. 2 This is the reason why several sport-science experts have previously underlined the importance of proper training quantification. For instance, Pollock 3 highlighted that many investigators reported their results without quantifying their training procedures, and with no mention of energy cost, heartrate intensity, miles covered, and so on. Along the same lines, Hopkins 4 indicated that with the links between training and outcomes such as performance and injury being so strong, it is surprising that the methodology of measurement of training has not been a focus of attention i...

Monitoring Athlete Training Loads: Consensus Statement

“…Nevertheless, to date no single measure has been identified that can accurately quantify the fitness and fatigue responses to training or predict performance. 1,10,11 While agreement may exist relating to the principal findings and recommendations in this paper, we acknowledge that the decision on which monitoring tools or techniques to use should remain with the professionals working in sport. This will allow …”

“…Key features of such systems should include ease of use and intuitive design, efficient result reporting, ability to be used remotely, translatability of data into simple outcomes, flexibility and adaptability for different sports, ability to simply and efficiently identify meaningful change, an assessment of cognitive function, and capability of providing both individual and group responses. 1,10 …”

“…Concurrent assessment of specific load measures (external and internal) allows an assessment of combined physiological and psychological stress and also allows applied researchers and practitioners to evaluate fatigue/recovery status, adjust individual training prescription, and determine relationships between these loads and performance. 10 Furthermore, such metrics allow the categorization of training stimulus into relative zones of intensity (low, moderate, high).…”

Training-Intensity Distribution in Road Cyclists: Objective Versus Subjective Measures

“…1 Significantly different from total time spent in intensity zone quantified using PO 2 Sigificantly different from total time spent in intensity zone quantified using HR "Training intensity distribution in road cyclists: objective versus subjective measures" by Sanders D, Myers T, Akubat I. Abbreviations: sRPE, session rating of perceived exertion; HR, heart rate; PO, power output.…”

“…1 To have an impact on performance, coaches must have an idea of the nature of the relationship between the training dose (or training load) and the training outcome or response. 2 Ultimately, it is the internal training load that will determine the training outcome. 3 In a training plan, the training load will be manipulated and this is most frequently done by adjusting the distribution of training intensity throughout the training plan.…”