4.2 Article

Lower fatigue and faster recovery of ultra-short race pace swimming training sessions

Journal

RESEARCH IN SPORTS MEDICINE
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages 21-34

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15438627.2021.1929227

Keywords

High-intensity interval training (hiit); physical conditioning; athletic performance; endurance training; short-term potentiation; physiology

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the fatigue and recovery of swimmers between ultra-short race-pace training (USRPT) and traditional high-volume training. The results showed that USRPT resulted in lower fatigue and better recovery, making it more effective for the development of specific race technique.
Ultra-short race-pace training (USRPT) is a high-intensity training modality used in swimming for the development of specific race-technique. However, there is little information about the fatigue associated to this modality. In a crossover design, acute responses of two volume-equated sessions (1000-m) were compared on 14 national swimmers: i) USRPT: 20x50-m; ii) RPT: 10x100-m. Both protocols followed an equivalent work-recovery ratio (1:1) based on individual 200-m race-pace. The swimming times and the arm-strokes count were monitored on each set and compared by mixed-models. Blood lactate [La-] and countermovement jump-height (CMJ) were compared within and between conditions 2 and 5 min after the protocols. The last bouts in RPT were 1.5-3% slower than the target pace, entailing an arm-strokes increase of similar to 0.22 for every second increase in swimming time. USRPT produced lower [La-] ([Mean +/- standard deviation], 2 min: 8.2 +/- 2.4 [p = 0.021]; 5 min: 6.9 +/- 2.8 mM/L [p = 0.008]), than RPT (2 min: 10.9 +/- 2.3; 5 min: 9.9 +/- 2.4 mM/L). CMJ was lowered at min 2 after RPT (-11.09%) and USRPT (-5.89%), but returned to baseline in USRPT at min 5 of recovery (4.07%). In conclusion, lower fatigue and better recovery were achieved during USRPT compared to traditional high-volume set.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available