| Abstract |
Purpose: We compared the adaptive responses to supramaximal high-intensity interval training (HIIT) individualized according to anaerobic speed reserve (ASR), the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test (VIFT), and velocity associated with maximum oxygen uptake (MAS) to determine which approach facilitates more identical adaptations across athletes with different profiles.
Methods: Thirty national-level basketball players (age = 28.4 [5] y; body mass = 88.9 [6.3] kg; height = 190 [4.8] cm) were randomly assigned to 3 training groups performing 2 sets of 4, 6, 8, 6, 8, and 10-minute runs (from first to sixth week, respectively), consisting of 15-second running at Δ%20ASR (MAS + 0.2 × ASR), 95%VIFT, and 120%MAS, with 15 seconds recovery between efforts and a 3-minute relief between sets.
Results: All 3 interval interventions significantly (P < .05) enhanced maximum oxygen uptake (V˙O2max), oxygen pulse (V˙O2/HR), first and second ventilatory threshold (VT1 and VT2), cardiac output (Q˙max), stroke volume, peak and average power output, testosterone levels, and testosterone-to-cortisol ratio following the training period. Different values of interindividual variability (coefficient of variation) for the percentage changes of the measured variables were observed in response to HIITASR, HIITvIFT, and HIITMAS for V˙O2max (8.7%, 18.8%, 34.6%, respectively), V˙O2/HR (9.5%, 15.0%, 28.6%), VT1 (9.6%, 19.6%, 34.6%), VT2 (21.8%, 32.4%, 56.7%), Q˙max (8.2%, 16.9%, 28.8%), stroke volume (7.9%, 15.2%, 23.5%), peak power output (20%, 22%, 37.3%), average power output (21.1%, 21.3%, 32.5%), testosterone (52.9%, 61.6%, 59.9%), and testosterone-to-cortisol ratio (55.1%, 59.5%, 57.8%).
Conclusions: Supramaximal HIIT performed at Δ%20ASR resulted in more uniform physiological adaptations than HIIT interventions prescribed using VIFT or MAS. Although hormonal changes do not follow this approach, all the approaches induced an anabolic effect.
|
