Effects of plyometric training on different 8‐week training intensity distributions in well‐trained endurance runners

Abstract

The aim of this four‐armed parallel group randomized‐controlled trial was to evaluate if plyometric training could have different effects on running performance and physiological adaptations depending on the training intensity distribution (TID) in an 8‐week intervention in endurance athletes. Sixty well‐trained male runners (age: 34 ± 6 years, relative ⩒O2peak: 69 ± 3 ml kg−1 min−1) were recruited and allocated to a pyramidal (PYR), pyramidal + plyometric training (PYR + PLY), polarized (POL), and polarized + plyometric training (POL + PLY) periodization. The periodization patterns were isolated manipulations of TID, while training load was kept constant. Participants were tested pre‐ and post‐intervention for body mass, velocity at 2 and 4 mmol·L−1 of blood lactate concentration (vBLa2, vBLa4), absolute and relative ⩒O2peak and 5‐km running time trial performance, counter movement jump and squat jump. There were significant group × time interactions for vBla4 (p = 0.0235), CMJ (p = 0.0234), SJ (p = 0.0168), and 5‐km running time trial performance (p = 0.0035). Specifically, vBla4 and 5‐km running time trial performance showed the largest post‐intervention improvements in PYR + PLY (2.4% and 1.6%) and POL + PLY (2.1% and 1.8%), respectively. No significant interactions were observed for body mass, absolute and relative ⩒O2peak, peak heart rate, lactate peak and rating of perceived exertion. In conclusion, an 8‐week training periodization seems to be effective in improving performance of well‐trained endurance runners. Including plyometric training once a week appeared to be more efficacious in maximizing running performance improvements, independently from the TID adopted.

Combination of plyometric and ladder drill: Its impact on improving speed, agility, and leg muscle power in badminton

“…The Manova test results showed significant differences between the three groups' increasing speed, agility, and leg muscle power in badminton players (p<0.05). However, the results of the post hoc test showed that there was a significant difference between the group given the combination treatment of plyometric and ladder drill exercises (Group TR and SH) and Fernandez-Fernandez et al, 2016;Filipas et al, 2023;Guo et al, 2021;Lu et al, 2022;Ozbar et al, 2014), as well as the ladder drill training program. The results of this study which stated that there were no significant differences in the TR (tuck jumpdouble leg run) and SH (squat jump-double leg hop) groups, were in line with several previous studies, even though the plyometric tuck jump and squat jump exercises were both can improve the performance of the physical condition of leg muscle power, but there is no known significant difference between the two (Ashari et al, 2019;Falah & Pranatahadi, 2019;Ratno & Darmawan, 2019).…”

Predicting physical performance after training: insights from machine learning using small samples

“…Training adaptations following the same training intervention deviate substantially in different individuals [12][13][14][15], a nding that persists in monozygotic twins possessing the same genotype [14]. On average, increases in knee extensor muscle strength and VȮ 2max were observed following 3 months of strength training and endurance training respectively, but with large inter-individual differences [14].…”

“…Recently, it was shown that combining polarised endurance training with plyometric strength training resulted in the highest performance gains in elite runners compared to pyramidal endurance training, where 80% of the time was spent in the low-to-moderate intensity domain and the nal 20% was spent primarily at heavy intensities (i.e. between the rst and second lactate/ventilatory thresholds) [12]. Given that individual training responses differ considerably, even following the same training and in individuals with the same genotype, coaches and athletes could bene t from individual predictions of anticipated changes in performance.…”

“…these studies focus solely on endurance training, we investigated effects of concurrent strength and endurance training and for this reason assessed a 4-km time trial, which requires a signi cant anaerobic energy contribution compared to longer time trials[69]. Concurrent plyometric and polarised training resulted in + 1.8% increase in 5-km running time-trial performance in well-trained runners after 8 weeks of training[12], which is comparable to the + 2.3% increase in our concurrent eccentric /plyometric and polarised training group.…”