Demarcation of Intensity From 3 to 5 Zones Aids in Understanding Physiological Performance Progression in Highly Trained Under-23 Rowing Athletes

Abstract

Watts, SP, Binnie, MJ, Goods, PSR, Hewlett, J, Fahey-Gilmour, J, and Peeling, P. Demarcation of intensity from 3 to 5 zones aids in understanding physiological performance progression in highly trained under-23 rowing athletes. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2023—The purpose of this investigation was to compare 2 training intensity distribution models (3 and 5 zone) in 15 highly trained rowing athletes (n = 8 male; n = 7 female; 19.4 ± 1.1 years) to determine the impact on primary (2,000-m single-scull race) and secondary (2,000-m ergometer time trial, peak oxygen consumption [V̇O2peak], lactate threshold 2 [LT2 power]) performance variables. Performance was assessed before and after 4 months training, which was monitored through a smart watch (Garmin Ltd, Olathe, KS) and chest-strap heart rate (HR) monitor (Wahoo Fitness, Atlanta, GA). Two training intensity distribution models were quantified and compared: a 3-zone model (Z1: between 50% V̇O2peak and lactate threshold 1 (LT1); Z2: between LT1 and 95% LT2; Z3: >95% LT2) and a 5-zone model (T1–T5), where Z1 and Z3 were split into 2 additional zones. There was significant improvement in LT2 power for both male (4.08% ± 1.83, p < 0.01) and female (3.52% ± 3.38, p = 0.02) athletes, with male athletes also demonstrating significant improvement in 2,000-m ergometer time trial (2.3% ± 1.92, p = 0.01). Changes in V̇O2peak significantly correlated with high-quality aerobic training (percent time in T2 zone; r = 0.602, p = 0.02), whereas changes in LT2 power significantly correlated with “threshold” training (percent time in T4 zone; r = 0.529, p = 0.04). These correlations were not evident when examining intensity distribution through the 3-zone model. Accordingly, a 5-zone intensity model may aid in understanding the progression of secondary performance metrics in rowing athletes; however, primary (on-water) performance remains complex to quantify.

Exploring the depths of on‐water training in highly‐trained rowing athletes

“…The importance of being able to clearly decipher between training zones was evident in a study by Watts and colleagues (Watts et al, 2023). This investigation suggested highly demarcated physio- training can be somewhat variable between athletes (Vogler et al, 2010), albeit this method of training zone determination has been successfully used to quantify rowing training in applied research (Watts et al, 2023).…”

“…The importance of being able to clearly decipher between training zones was evident in a study by Watts and colleagues (Watts et al, 2023). This investigation suggested highly demarcated physio- training can be somewhat variable between athletes (Vogler et al, 2010), albeit this method of training zone determination has been successfully used to quantify rowing training in applied research (Watts et al, 2023). Consequently, due to the noise associated with SR, velocity and HR during on-water rowing, the desired training stimulus and resultant training adaptation for athletes may be impacted if these variables are being used in isolation to prescribe training.…”

“…A five-zone training intensity model was determined using LT1 and LT2 as physiological landmarks for the associated HR and by anchoring the lowest and highest intensities to the HR corresponding to 50% and 100% V ̇O2peak, respectively. Descriptors for HR training zones were as follows: T1, the intensity between 50% V ̇O2peak and the midway point between of 50% V ̇O2peak and LT1; T2, the intensity between the top of T1 and LT1; T3, the intensity between LT1 and 95% of LT2; T4, the intensity between 95% and 102% of LT2 and T5, the intensity between 102% of LT2 and 100% V ̇O2peak (Seiler et al, 2009;Watts et al, 2023).…”