Tapering practices of elite CrossFit athletes

Pritchard, Hayden J; Keogh, Justin W L; Winwood, Paul

doi:10.1177/1747954120934924

Cited by 8 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(83 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The evidence for tapering and peaking maximal strength primarily consists of observational ( Bazyler et al, 2017 , 2018 ; Travis et al, 2020b ) and qualitative research ( Pritchard et al, 2016 , 2020 ; Grgic and Mikulic, 2017 ; Winwood et al, 2018 ). To date, only two studies have experimentally compared tapering strategies aimed at improving maximal strength: (a) +5% vs. −10% intensity manipulation with a ∼70% volume-load reduction using a step taper ( Pritchard et al, 2019 ), and (b) a step vs. an exponential taper with a ∼54% volume-load reduction while maintaining intensity ( Seppänen and Häkkinen, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skeletal Muscle Adaptations and Performance Outcomes Following a Step and Exponential Taper in Strength Athletes

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Before major athletic events, a taper is often prescribed to facilitate recovery and enhance performance. However, it is unknown which taper model is most effective for peaking maximal strength and positively augmenting skeletal muscle. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare performance outcomes and skeletal muscle adaptations following a step vs. an exponential taper in strength athletes. Sixteen powerlifters (24.0 ± 4.0 years, 174.4 ± 8.2 cm, 89.8 ± 21.4 kg) participated in a 6-week training program aimed at peaking maximal strength on back squat [initial 1-repetition-maximum (1RM): 174.7 ± 33.4 kg], bench press (118.5 ± 29.9 kg), and deadlift (189.9 ± 41.2 kg). Powerlifters were matched based on relative maximal strength, and randomly assigned to either (a) 1-week overreach and 1-week step taper or (b) 1-week overreach and 3-week exponential taper. Athletes were tested pre- and post-training on measures of body composition, jumping performance, isometric squat, and 1RM. Whole muscle size was assessed at the proximal, middle, and distal vastus lateralis using ultrasonography and microbiopsies at the middle vastus lateralis site. Muscle samples (n = 15) were analyzed for fiber size, fiber type [myosin-heavy chain (MHC)-I, -IIA, -IIX, hybrid-I/IIA] using whole muscle immunohistochemistry and single fiber dot blots, gene expression, and microRNA abundance. There were significant main time effects for 1RM squat (p < 0.001), bench press (p < 0.001), and deadlift, (p = 0.024), powerlifting total (p < 0.001), Wilks Score (p < 0.001), squat jump peak-power scaled to body mass (p = 0.001), body mass (p = 0.005), fat mass (p = 0.002), and fat mass index (p = 0.002). There were significant main time effects for medial whole muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) (p = 0.006) and averaged sites (p < 0.001). There was also a significant interaction for MHC-IIA fiber cross-sectional area (fCSA) (p = 0.014) with post hoc comparisons revealing increases following the step-taper only (p = 0.002). There were significant main time effects for single-fiber MHC-I% (p = 0.015) and MHC-IIA% (p = 0.033), as well as for MyoD (p = 0.002), MyoG (p = 0.037), and miR-499a (p = 0.033). Overall, increases in whole mCSA, fCSA, MHC-IIA fCSA, and MHC transitions appeared to favor the step taper group. An overreach followed by a step taper appears to produce a myocellular environment that enhances skeletal muscle adaptations, whereas an exponential taper may favor neuromuscular performance.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skeletal Muscle Adaptations and Performance Outcomes Following a Step and Exponential Taper in Strength Athletes

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different movement speeds were selected since they differently represent strength imbalances and injury risk ( Kabacinski et al, 2018 ; Rosene, Fogarty & Mahaffey, 2001 ). In addition, the speeds were selected considering the high velocity shoulder movements that CrossFit participants typically perform during training and competition ( Claudino et al, 2018 ; Mangine et al, 2020 ; Pritchard, Keogh & Winwood, 2020 ). Moreover, torque and power were measured across movements and speeds, since both torque and power are considered independent markers of the training level of athletes ( Toskić et al, 2020 ), with such data perhaps being useful to discriminate between different competitive levels of athletes within the same sport.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…one repetition maximal barbell lifting) to longer-duration, lower-intensity efforts ( e.g . endurance-dominant events), with some events offering information on the nature of competition only a few moments prior to participation ( Pritchard, Keogh & Winwood, 2020 ). CrossFit training usually involves several high-intensity functional movements, including mono-structural ( e.g ., cardiovascular activities such as running and rowing), body-weight ( e.g ., push-ups; derived from gymnastics) and weightlifting derivatives ( e.g ., snatch, shoulder press, deadlift), executed quickly, repetitively, and with little or no recovery time between sets ( Claudino et al, 2018 ; Feito et al, 2018 ; Schlegel, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CrossFit training usually involves several high-intensity functional movements, including mono-structural ( e.g ., cardiovascular activities such as running and rowing), body-weight ( e.g ., push-ups; derived from gymnastics) and weightlifting derivatives ( e.g ., snatch, shoulder press, deadlift), executed quickly, repetitively, and with little or no recovery time between sets ( Claudino et al, 2018 ; Feito et al, 2018 ; Schlegel, 2020 ). Competitors engaged in CrossFit may train ~11 h per week ( Pritchard, Keogh & Winwood, 2020 ), with greater volumes of activity being observed in higher level participants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Isokinetic force-power profile of the shoulder joint in males participating in CrossFit training and competing at different levels

Torres-Banduc

Jerez‐Mayorga

Moran

et al. 2021

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background As participants who engage in CrossFit training and competition perform a large volume of high intensity overhead activities, injuries to the shoulder are one of the most common in this sport. Previous research in other sports has indicated that the isokinetic force power profile of the shoulder joint (IPSJ) rotator muscles may assist in the prediction of shoulder injury. Aim Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the IPSJ in males engaged in CrossFit training at different competitive levels. Methods In a cross-sectional study design, participants (age, 24.1 ± 2.7 years) classified as ‘beginner’ (n = 6), ‘intermediate’ (n = 7) or ‘advanced’ (n = 9) provided informed consent to participate in this study. The IPSJ assessment involved rotational and diagonal movements, including internal and external shoulder rotator muscles, at both 180°.s−1 and 300°.s−1. The variables analysed were peak torque/body mass (%), mean power (W) and the external/internal peak torque/body mass ratio (%). A Kruskal–Wallis test was used to compare the IPSJ of the three groups, with Dunn’s test used for post-hoc analysis. The alpha level was set at p < 0.05. Results The IPSJ showed greater torque and power values in those who competed at the advanced level as compared to those at a lower competitive level (i.e. intermediate, beginner). This was observed mainly for the internal rotation and internal diagonal movements at both 180°.s−1 and 300°.s−1. However, such differences between competitive levels were, in general, absent for the external rotation and external diagonal movements. Moreover, the participants from the advanced competitive level exhibited an imbalance of peak torque between the muscles responsible for the external–internal rotational and external-internal diagonal movements of the shoulder (i.e. peak torque external/internal ratio <66%), particularly in the dominant shoulder. Conclusion These findings suggest greater development of the shoulder internal rotators and a higher probability of shoulder injury in CrossFit athletes at the advanced competitive level. Based on these results, participants engaged in CrossFit training and competition may wish to increase the volume of training for the shoulder external rotator muscles to complement the large increases in shoulder internal rotator strength that occur as a part of their regular training regimes.

show abstract

“…Whilst deloading is likely to occur at the end of each training mesocycle (18,24,29), tapering occurs specifically in the days/ weeks prior to competition (2) and is common practice in strength sports (26,(33)(34)(35)(36)(37). The aim of the taper is to facilitate "peaking", where the athlete achieves optimal physiological performance prior to competition due to a reduction in fatigue and an increase in preparedness (35,38).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“You can't shoot another bullet until you've reloaded the gun”: Coaches' perceptions, practices and experiences of deloading in strength and physique sports

Bell

Nolan

Immonen

et al. 2022

Front. Sports Act. Living

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deloading refers to a purposeful reduction in training demand with the intention of enhancing preparedness for successive training cycles. Whilst deloading is a common training practice in strength and physique sports, little is known about how the necessary reduction in training demand should be accomplished. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to determine current deloading practices in competitive strength and physique sports. Eighteen strength and physique coaches from a range of sports (weightlifting, powerlifting, and bodybuilding) participated in semi-structured interviews to discuss their experiences of deloading. The mean duration of coaching experience at ≥ national standard was 10.9 (SD = 3.9) years. Qualitative content analysis identified Three categories: definitions, rationale, and application. Participants conceptualised deloading as a periodic, intentional cycle of reduced training demand designed to facilitate fatigue management, improve recovery, and assist in overall training progression and readiness. There was no single method of deloading; instead, a reduction in training volume (achieved through a reduction in repetitions per set and number of sets per training session) and intensity of effort (increased proximity to failure and/or reduction in relative load) were the most adapted training variables, along with alterations in exercise selection and configuration. Deloading was typically prescribed for a duration of 5 to 7 days and programmed every 4 to 6 weeks, although periodicity was highly variable. Additional findings highlight the underrepresentation of deloading in the published literature, including a lack of a clear operational definition.

show abstract

Tapering practices of elite CrossFit athletes

Cited by 8 publications

References 21 publications

Skeletal Muscle Adaptations and Performance Outcomes Following a Step and Exponential Taper in Strength Athletes

Skeletal Muscle Adaptations and Performance Outcomes Following a Step and Exponential Taper in Strength Athletes

Isokinetic force-power profile of the shoulder joint in males participating in CrossFit training and competing at different levels

“You can't shoot another bullet until you've reloaded the gun”: Coaches' perceptions, practices and experiences of deloading in strength and physique sports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About