Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 7, 2025
A Rapidly Incremented Tethered-Swimming Maximal Protocol for Cardiorespiratory Assessment of Swimmers
Published on: January 28, 2020
Retrospective Analysis of Training Intensity Distribution Based on Race Pace Versus Physiological Benchmarks in
Manuel Matzka1, Robert Leppich2, Billy Sperlich3
1Integrative and Experimental Exercise Science and Training, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Background:
Research results on the training intensity distribution (TID) in endurance athletes are equivocal. This non-uniformity appears to be partially founded in the different quantification methods that are implemented. So far, TID research has solely focused on sports involving the lower-body muscles as prime movers (e.g. running). Sprint kayaking imposes high demands on the upper-body endurance capacity of the athlete. As there are structural and physiological differences between upper- and lower-body musculature, TID in kayaking should be different to lower-body dominant sports. Therefore, we aimed to compare the training intensity distribution during an 8-wk macrocycle in a group of highly trained sprint kayakers employing three different methods of training intensity quantification.
Methods:
Heart rate (HR) and velocity during on-water training of nine highly trained German sprint kayakers were recorded during the final 8 weeks of a competition period leading to the national championships. The fractional analysis of TID was based on three zones (Z) derived from either HR (TIDBla-HR) or velocity (TIDBla-V) based on blood lactate (Bla) concentrations (Z1 ≤ 2.5 mmol L-1 Bla, Z2 = 2.5-4.0 mmol L-1 Bla, Z3 ≥ 4.0 mmol L-1 Bla) of an incremental test or the 1000-m race pace (TIDRace): Z1 ≤ 85% of race pace, Z2 = 86-95% and Z3 ≥ 95%.
Results:
TIDBla-V (Z1: 68%, Z2: 14%, Z3: 18%) differed from TIDBla-HR (Z1: 91%, Z2: 6%, Z3: 3%) in each zone (all p < 0.01). TIDRace (Z1: 73%, Z2: 20%, Z3: 7%) differed to Z3 in TIDBla-V (p < 0.01) and all three TIDBla-HR zones (all p < 0.01). Individual analysis revealed ranges of Z1, Z2, Z3 fractions for TIDBla-HR of 85-98%, 2-11% and 0.1-6%. For TIDBla-V, the individual ranges were 41-82% (Z1), 6-30% (Z2) and 8-30% (Z3) and for TIDRace 64-81% (Z1), 14-29% (Z2) and 4-10% (Z3).
Conclusion:
The results show that the method of training intensity quantification substantially affects the fraction of TID in well-trained sprint kayakers. TIDRace determination shows low interindividual variation compared to the physiologically based TIDBla-HR and TIDBla-V. Depending on the aim of the analysis TIDRace, TIDBla-HR and TIDBla-V have advantages as well as drawbacks and may be implemented in conjunction to maximize adaptation.
