Effects of 6 Weeks of Different High-Intensity Interval and Moderate Continuous Training on Aerobic and Anaerobic Performance

Abstract

Cavar, M, Marsic, T, Corluka, M, Culjak, Z, Cerkez Zovko, I, Müller, A, Tschakert, G, and Hofmann, P. Effects of 6 weeks of different high-intensity interval and moderate continuous training on aerobic and anaerobic performance. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2018-To provide practical data, we compared the training effects of 3 different programs, using a shuttle run stimulus, on aerobic and anaerobic performance, measured using the 20-m maximal shuttle run (Beep) test and 300-yd shuttle run, respectively. Forty-five physically trained men, with a mean age of 21.1 ± 1.8 years, participated. The 6-week, 12-session training programs included 2 high-intensity interval training (HIIT) protocols, with either a short (SH) or long (LH) shuttle run interval, and a continuous shuttle run (CON), which was used as a control. The training intensity was based on the maximal shuttle run speed (MASS), measured on the Beep test, to elicit the relevant values of the time to exhaustion (TTE). Short (SH) training was performed at 115-120%(MASS), with a 10-second work to 10-second rest scheme, and the number of repetitions to be completed set to 70% of each participant's maximum (∼15 repetitions). LH training was performed at an intensity of 90-95%(MASS), with the duration set to 70%(TTE) (∼4 minutes). For both SH and LH, 3 sets were completed at each session, with a 2-3 minutes of rest between sets. CON training consisted of continuous shuttle running for 35 minutes at an intensity of 70%(MASS). Both SH and LH yielded a large training effect (p < 0.01), with SH preferentially improving anaerobic performance and LH preferentially improving aerobic performance. No effect of CON training was identified. Our findings indicate that these different training protocols cannot be used interchangeably and that the Beep test is useful in prescribing the intensity and duration of HIIT.

Relationship Between the 20-m Multistage Fitness Test and 2.4-km Run in Law Enforcement Recruits

“…Cavar et al (5) found that 20MSFT could be improved to a greater extent in college-aged men by long high-intensity (~3 x 3 min work: rest ratios at 90-95% maximal shuttle-run speed…”

“…It could be expected that sprint interval training methods similar to that presented by Helgerud et al (16) and Cavar et al (5) would be more beneficial to enhancing 20MSFT performance. If recruits did not complete this type of training prior to academy, this could mean that while they may be aerobically conditioned, the capacity to sustain high-intensity efforts is less optimal (5,40). Indeed, this would have impacted the estimated V O2max derived from the 20MSFT, which was much lower than that for the 2.4-km run.…”

“…These types of actions require lower-body strength, and the ability to tolerate high braking forces during the direction change, followed by the efficient generation of propulsive forces to accelerate (13,39) This should involve high-intensity running and sprint interval training (5,16), and movement technique coaching and strength training to allow for efficient direction changes (13,39).…”

2.4-km Run and 20-m Multistage Fitness Test Relationships in Law Enforcement Recruits After Academy Training

“…Improving the ability to change direction could impact not just the 20MSFT, but job performance in tasks such as a foot pursuit as well (2). Highintensity running is also stressed in the 20MSFT, and this quality needs to be specifically trained (3). Developing high-intensity running would be beneficial for recruits given many of their job tasks demand high-intensity, externally-paced activity (16).…”

Efectos de un protocolo combinado de entrenamiento interválico de altaintensidad (HIIT) y Small-Sided Games (SSG) en jugadores de semi-élite de baloncesto

“…Programar correctamente estas sesiones de entrenamientos interválicos será muy importante si se quiere que el estímulo producido en los deportistas sea efectivo. En la actualidad existen dos métodos muy comunes en la programación de la intensidad en los entrenamientos de HIIT: % FCmáx o una velocidad de referencia (Buchheit y Laursen, 2013a y b; Cavar et al, 2019;Impellizzeri et al, 2006;McMillan, Helgerud, Macdonald y Hoff, 2005;Rabbani y Buchheit, 2015). Sin embargo, no son los dos métodos igual de fiables.…”