Purpose and Methods: To compare the effects of a set of 12-30 min, maximal effort, constant load cycle bouts (HICT) to 12 short work: shorter rest (10 s: 5 s) interval sessions (INT) of similar duration and effort, performed on alternate days over 4 weeks, on performance and V.O2 l.min-1. INT sessions consisted of repeated cycles of 10 s work followed by 5 s of recovery for 30 min. Fourteen male athletes (83 kg ± 6, 24year ± 2) were randomly assigned to HICT (n = 7) or INT (n = 7) training. Pre- and post-power output (PO), V.O2 and V.O2peak, during 60s, 3 min, and ramp (RAMP) tests were collected Results: Between group comparisons showed increased mean PO, pre- to post-INT training (p = .026) over the last min of the 3-min test whereas PO post-HICT training declined. INT showed greater training effects on the 60 s test than HCIT (INT 506 ± 45 to 535 ± 55 W; p = .002, Cd = .57; HCIT 513 ± 78 to 548 ± 83 W; p = .02, Cd = 27). RAMP peak PO and V.O2peak increased within both groups (INT 341 ± 63 to 370 ± 48 W, p = .002, Cd = 0.52; HICT 332 ± 45 to 353 ± 44 W, p = .006, Cd = .53; 3.73 ± 0.68 to 4.06 ± 0.63 L·min-1, p = .001, Cd = .50; 3.75 ± 0.62 to 4.09 ± 0.52 L·mi/, p = .002, Cd = .59). Conclusion(s): These results show that utilizing this novel short work: shorter rest (10 s: 5 s) interval training paradigm will elicit better performances in moderate duration performances compared to continuous training of the same duration, effort, and frequency.
© Copyright 2020 Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD). Alle Rechte vorbehalten. / Übersetzt mit https://www.DeepL.com/Translator