Purpose: Despite decades of innovation in training theory, the traditional periodization (TP) model continues to dominate highperformance endurance sport. This persistence raises a compelling question: Why does TP remain the go-to framework for coaches and athletes, even as alternatives like block and flexible periodization gain traction? Conclusions and Practical Applications: Historically, TP has been deeply embedded in coaching education and sport science literature shaping generations of practitioners. It is often the first model introduced in formal training, creating a cognitive anchor that influences future decision making. Coaches frequently report favoring TP for its predictability, structured progression, and compatibility with the physiological demands of endurance training. While newer models (eg, block or flexible periodization) offer promising short-term adaptations in specific contexts, TP's broad applicability and intuitive structure continue to appeal to those managing long-term athlete development. TP's ongoing value lies not in rigidity but in adaptability when implemented with high-quality execution and individualized context. Its simplicity and predictability make it a reliable tool in environments where long-term planning and clear communication are critical. Rather than dismiss TP as outdated, this commentary offers a nuanced perspective on its role. The dominance of TP may not reflect resistance to innovation (nor ignorance of principles from alternative models), but rather a strategic choice grounded in experience, sport-specific context, and the practical realities of coaching. Future discourse should focus less on replacing TP and more on integrating its strengths with emerging paradigms to support adaptable, athlete-centered training systems.
Dynamic warm-ups (DWs) are being increasingly used before athletic performance because of their perceived potential to promote readiness to play, enhance performance, and reduce injury across the recreational and elite athlete populations. There has been widespread adoption of warm-ups before athletic activity and evolving literature suggesting best practices including the role of static versus dynamic stretching and combination of pre-performance activities. DWs have gained traction as a preferred warm-up approach over static stretching because of the increased potential to improve athletic performance and reduce injury by enhancing the musculoskeletal, neurologic, cardiovascular, and psychological systems before performance. In this article, we aim to discuss the physiological and potential athletic performance benefits of DWs, key differences compared with prior widely adopted pre-activity static stretching, injury reduction benefits, and recommendations for implementing DWs into pre–athletic performance activities including crucial components of a multifaceted sport-specific approach. Level of Evidence Level V, expert opinion.
This essay summarizes and integrates my experiences and observations-starting in the middle 1970s-as an athlete, scientist interested in human performance, biomedical researcher, and "expert," who sometimes advises athletes, coaches, and sports policy-makers. In this context, my focus has been primarily on endurance sports and five concepts underpin what I have learned over the last 50 years. (1) The "competitive significance principle" whereby athletes, coaches, and policy-makers are frequently interested in performance improvements of 1% or less. This is especially true at the elite level. (2) Science frequently explains what coaches and athletes have already discovered in the field. (3) Many science-based performance improvements have reduced the energy cost of moving a given speed. (4) Varied and eclectic training programs have been used by elite athletes with similar performance outcomes. (5) A few things that are actionable matter. Coaches, athletes, and administrators should focus their efforts on what is actionable.
The warm-up is considered beneficial for increasing body temperature, stimulating the neuromuscular system and overall preparing the athletes for the demands of training sessions and competitions. Even when warm-up–derived benefits are slight and transient, they may still benefit preparedness for subsequent efforts. However, sports training and competition performance are highly affected by contextual factors (e.g., how is the opponent acting?), and it is not always clear what should be the preferred warm-up modalities, structure and load for each athlete and context. Further, we propose that the warm-up can also be used as a pedagogical and training moment. The warm-up may serve several different (albeit complementary) goals (e.g., rising body temperature, neuromuscular activation, attentional focus) and be performed under a plethora of different structures, modalities, and loads. The current commentary highlights the warm-up period as an opportunity to teach or improve certain skills or physical capacities, and not only as a preparation for the subsequent efforts. Moreover, the (justified) call for individualized warm-ups would benefit from educating athletes about exploring different warm-up tasks and loads, providing a broad foundation for future individualization of the warm-up and for more active, engaged, and well-informed participation of the athletes in deciding their own warm-up practices.
Purpose of Review This study aimed to provide an overview of some of the medical concerns surrounding the care of the pediatric endurance athletes and add to the limited literature specific to the pediatric endurance athlete. Recent Findings Endurance athletes are at risk for overtraining, relative energy deficiency in sport (RED-S), overuse injuries, nutritional deficiencies, and sleep dysfunction. Youth runners and female endurance athletes are particularly high-risk populations for RED-S; nutritional deficiencies and their care should involve thoughtful mitigation of modifiable risk factors. The growing endurance athlete may experience slightly different cardiac adaptations than the adult endurance athlete with the long-term implications of these changes still unclear. Summary Endurance sports are common among youth athletes. Multidisciplinary care that includes screening and early intervention for high-risk areas is critical to optimize their care and promote, safe lifelong sport participation.
BACKGROUND:Exercise with blood-flow restriction (BFR) is being increasingly used by practitioners working with athletic and clinical populations alike. Most early research combined BFR with low-load resistance training and consistently reported increased muscle size and strength without requiring the heavier loads that are traditionally used for unrestricted resistance training. However, this field has evolved with several different active and passive BFR methods emerging in recent research. PURPOSE:This commentary aims to synthesize the evolving BFR methods for cohorts ranging from healthy athletes to clinical or load-compromised populations. In addition, real-world considerations for practitioners are highlighted, along with areas requiring further research. CONCLUSIONS:The BFR literature now incorporates several active and passive methods, reflecting a growing implementation of BFR in sport and allied health fields. In addition to low-load resistance training, BFR is being combined with high-load resistance exercise, aerobic and anaerobic energy systems training of varying intensities, and sport-specific activities. BFR is also being applied passively in the absence of physical activity during periods of muscle disuse or rehabilitation or prior to exercise as a preconditioning or performance-enhancement technique. These various methods have been reported to improve muscular development; cardiorespiratory fitness; functional capacities; tendon, bone, and vascular adaptations; and physical and sport-specific performance and to reduce pain sensations. However, in emerging BFR fields, many unanswered questions remain to refine best practice.
PURPOSE:Monitoring is a fundamental part of the training process to guarantee that the programmed training loads are executed by athletes and result in the intended adaptations and enhanced performance. A number of monitoring tools have emerged during the last century in sport. These tools capture different facets (eg, psychophysiological, physical, biomechanical) of acute training bouts and chronic adaptations while presenting specific advantages and limitations. Therefore, there is a need to identify what tools are more efficient in each sport context for better monitoring of training process.METHODS AND RESULTS:We present and discuss the fine-tuning approach for training monitoring, which consists of identifying and combining the best monitoring tools with experts' knowledge in different sport settings, designed to improve (1) the control of actual training loads and (2) understanding of athletes' training adaptations. Instead of using single-tool approaches or merely subjective decision making, the identification of the best combination of monitoring tools to assist experts' decisions in each specific context (ie, triangulation) is necessary to better understand the link between acute and chronic adaptations and their impact on health and performance. Future studies should elaborate on the identification of the best combination of monitoring tools for each specific sport setting.CONCLUSION:The fine-tuning monitoring approach requires the simultaneous use of several valid and practical tools, instead of a single tool, to improve the effectiveness of monitoring practices when added to experts' knowledge.
BACKGROUND:Elite sport is continuously evolving. World records keep falling and athletes from a longer list of countries are involved.PURPOSE:This commentary was designed to provide insights into present and future trends associated with world-class endurance training based on the perspectives, experience, and knowledge of an expert panel of 25 applied sport scientists.RESULTS:The key drivers of development observed in the past 10-15 years were related to (1) more accessible scientific knowledge for coaches and athletes combined with (2) better integration of practical and scientific exchange across multidisciplinary perspectives within professionalized elite athlete support structures, as well as (3) utilization of new technological advances. Based on these perspectives, we discerned and exemplified the main trends in the practice of endurance sports into the following categories: better understanding of sport-specific demands; improved competition execution; larger, more specific, and more precise training loads; improved training quality; and a more professional and healthier lifestyle. The main areas expected to drive future improvements were associated with more extensive use of advanced technology for monitoring and prescribing training and recovery, more precise use of environmental and nutritional interventions, better understanding of athlete-equipment interactions, and greater emphasis on preventing injuries and illnesses.CONCLUSIONS:These expert insights can serve as a platform and inspiration to develop new hypotheses and ideas, encourage future collaboration between researchers and sport practitioners, and, perhaps most important, stimulate curiosity and further collaborative studies about the training, physiology, and performance of endurance athletes.
ABSTRACT The choice of the resistance used in a workout and its sequence in a training program is a crucial decision for program design. Although the choice in many ways looks simplistic, its interactions with other factors make it a bit more complex when designing a training program. Basic scientific principles help to give context for many aspects of such decisions. Interactions with other acute program variables will also be crucial in how that resistance load in an exercise is manifested in a workout stimulus. Understanding training program sequences using periodization models also affect how one applies the choice of resistances over time. Finally, age and training experience will influence resistance load progressions. Having a handle on these fundamental factors will help give the strength and conditioning professional better insights into the choices made in the resistance used in an exercise.
Lack of time is among the more commonly reported barriers for abstention from exercise programs. The aim of this review was to determine how strength training can be most effectively carried out in a time-efficient manner by critically evaluating research on acute training variables, advanced training techniques, and the need for warm-up and stretching. When programming strength training for optimum time-efficiency we recommend prioritizing bilateral, multi-joint exercises that include full dynamic movements (i.e. both eccentric and concentric muscle actions), and to perform a minimum of one leg pressing exercise (e.g. squats), one upper-body pulling exercise (e.g. pull-up) and one upper-body pushing exercise (e.g. bench press). Exercises can be performed with machines and/or free weights based on training goals, availability, and personal preferences. Weekly training volume is more important than training frequency and we recommend performing a minimum of 4 weekly sets per muscle group using a 6–15 RM loading range (15–40 repetitions can be used if training is performed to volitional failure). Advanced training techniques, such as supersets, drop sets and rest-pause training roughly halves training time compared to traditional training, while maintaining training volume. However, these methods are probably better at inducing hypertrophy than muscular strength, and more research is needed on longitudinal training effects. Finally, we advise restricting the warm-up to exercise-specific warm-ups, and only prioritize stretching if the goal of training is to increase flexibility. This review shows how acute training variables can be manipulated, and how specific training techniques can be used to optimize the training response: time ratio in regard to improvements in strength and hypertrophy. Graphic Abstract
Background: Altitude training is often regarded as an indispensable tool for the success of elite endurance athletes. Historically, altitude training emerged as a key strategy to prepare for the 1968 Olympics, held at 2300 m in Mexico City, and was limited to the "Live High-Train High" method for endurance athletes aiming for performance gains through improved oxygen transport. This "classical" intervention was modified in 1997 by the "Live High-Train Low" (LHTL) model wherein athletes supplemented acclimatization to chronic hypoxia with high-intensity training at low altitude. Purpose: This review discusses important considerations for successful implementation of LHTL camps in elite athletes based on experiences, both published and unpublished, of the authors. Approach: The originality of our approach is to discuss 10 key "lessons learned," since the seminal work by Levine and Stray-Gundersen was published in 1997, and focusing on (1) optimal dose, (2) individual responses, (3) iron status, (4) training-load monitoring, (5) wellness and well-being monitoring, (6) timing of the intervention, (7) use of natural versus simulated hypoxia, (8) robustness of adaptative mechanisms versus performance benefits, (9) application for a broad range of athletes, and (10) combination of methods. Successful LHTL strategies implemented by Team USA athletes for podium performance at Olympic Games and/or World Championships are presented. Conclusions: The evolution of the LHTL model represents an essential framework for sport science, in which field-driven questions about performance led to critical scientific investigation and subsequent practical implementation of a unique approach to altitude training.
在竞技体育中,运动员的成功离不开体能、技术、战术和心理等方面的全面发展.过去十多年的大量研究不断完善体能测试,用于评估不同项目运动员的体能水平.然而,目前在体能测试的设计、分析和评估等方面仍存在局限性.本文基于相关文献和作者15年从事体能测试的工作经验,分析目前竞技体育中体能测试面临的挑战,并提出解决方案.
运用视频观察、数理统计等研究方法,对2022年北京冬奥会单板滑雪男子坡面障碍技巧运动员的表现与成绩进行分析.发现:单板滑雪男子坡面障碍技巧项目欧洲运动员实力较强,北美洲和亚洲运动员迅速崛起,竞争愈加激烈;我国选手苏翊鸣获得银牌,实现我国雪上项目的重大突破,但其道具区表现欠佳,且我国获得参赛资格的运动员少,不利于项目的可持续发展.据此提出发展建议:保证动作完成度,探索有个人风格的高难动作,注重核心控制与心理抗压训练,提高道具区与跳台区综合技术能力,完善运动员梯队建设等.
力量素质与速度素质是衡量运动员竞技水平的重要标准,也是运动员运动能力的两大组成部分.通过对大量实验数据与案例进行分析,本文将力量定义为一个依附于运动速度的概念.肌肉力量的输出能力实际上取决于运动速度的快慢.在不同运动项目和不同速度状态下,同一名运动员的力量输出能力表现出很大的差异化和个性化特征.掌握这一特点有利于教练员转变单一的训练思维,全局把握运动员的总体水平,促进运动员日常训练的个体化、科学化发展,有利于青少年运动员的长期身体发育.
分析运动员科学选材的理论基础,重点解析运动员有氧耐力基因的重要作用,介绍与有氧耐力素质相关的单基因,探讨单基因对运动员有氧耐力素质的影响,分析单基因用于运动员选材的可能性,为提高运动选材的科学性与准确性提供理论依据与方法.
运用文献资料法、专家访谈法、试验法及数理统计法,分析软梯训练对女子排球运动员下肢专项身体素质的影响.结果表明,软梯训练对提高女子排球运动员下肢的爆发力和协调性有良好作用,能提高运动员的弹跳能力和爆发力,检验运动员助跑起跳的有效性,对提高运动员的位移速度及变向能力作用明显.
为探讨"FIFA 11 +"热身程序在青少年运动损伤预防中的实效性,将青少年校园足球52个队伍分为2组,对照组使用传统的热身程序,干预组每周至少使用3次"FIFA 11+"热身程序,对796个队员在训练、比赛过程中的伤病数据进行分析.结果表明:与对照组相比,干预组总体损伤发生率降低43.8个百分点,损伤负担(每1 000h的停训天数)降低47.3个百分点,下肢损伤发生率降低53.6个百分点;对足球运动最易受伤的部位膝盖和脚踝具有更加明显的保护作用,损伤发生率分别降低63.7个百分点和65.2个百分点;随着依从性的增加,有效性也依次提高.结论:严格按照正确的"FIFA 11 +"热身程序循序渐进练习才能取得明显的损伤预防效果;长期的"FIFA 11 +"热身程序练习可以改善机体的功能性缺陷,显著减少受伤风险;"FIFA 11 +"热身程序可以增强青少年运动表现,支持青少年运动员的长期发展.
篮球教练员是球队文化的建设者、践行者和维护者,其主要职责之一就是培育和建设球队文化,须具备凝练和培育球队文化的意识和能力,充分发挥球队文化熏陶人、影响人的独特育人作用.根据文化结构"四层次说",从文化载体的角度对篮球教练员文化领导力的建构要素进行分析,发现其由物质文化建设、行为文化建设、制度文化建设和精神文化建设构成.围绕"为何重要""如何提升"阐述篮球教练员文化领导力的提升路径.
抗阻训练按照不同的动作范围可分为最大动作范围训练和局部动作范围训练,梳理2种不同动作范围抗阻训练在提升肌肉力量方面的效果,发现:局部动作范围训练对增强力量有一定作用,尤其在最大动作范围的末段和重复次数较多时;最大动作范围训练造成的力量提升能迁移到更广的动作范围.因此,对于一般群体,最大动作范围训练是最佳选择,而对于运动员等特殊群体而言,局部动作范围训练或2种动作范围混合训练则更为合适.
