Validity and Accuracy of Impulse-Response Models for Modeling and Predicting Training Effects on Performance of...

The aim of this study was to compare the suitability of models for practical applications in training planning.

We tested six impulse-response models, including Banister's model (Model Ba), a variable dose-response model (Model Bu), and indirect-response models differing in the way they account or not for the effect of previous training on the ability to respond effectively to a given session. Data from 11 swimmers were collected during 61 wk across two competitive seasons. Daily training load was calculated from the number of pool-kilometers and dry land workout equivalents, weighted according to intensity. Performance was determined from 50-m trials done during training sessions twice a week. Models were ranked on the base of Aikaike's information criterion along with measures of goodness of fit.

Models Ba and Bu gave the greatest Akaike weights, 0.339 ± 0.254 and 0.360 ± 0.296, respectively. Their estimates were used to determine the evolution of performance over time after a training session and the optimal characteristics of taper. The data of the first 20 wk were used to train these two models and predict performance for the after 8 wk (validation data set 1) and for the following season (validation data set 2). The mean absolute percentage error between real and predicted performance using Model Ba was 2.02% ± 0.65% and 2.69% ± 1.23% for validation data sets 1 and 2, respectively, and 2.17% ± 0.65% and 2.56% ± 0.79% with Model Bu.

The findings showed that although the two top-ranked models gave relevant approximations of the relationship between training and performance, their ability to predict future performance from past data was not satisfactory for individual training planning.