The effect of training distribution, duration, and volume on VO2max and performance in trained cyclists

Training
1

The effect of training distribution, duration, and volume on VO2max and performance in trained cyclists- A systematic review, multilevel meta-analysis, and multivariate meta-regression (Cove et al).pdf (1.0 MB). This is interesting and worth discussing (I think).

1 Like
2

A rather long and technical paper. I just read the abstract, which concludes with: “Polarized and non-polarized training modalities yield comparable improvements in VO2max and time-trial performance in trained cyclists. Beyond achieving a necessary training volume, further increases do not appear to enhance performance. These findings encourage athletes and coaches to prioritize effective training distribution rather than fixating on total volume or a specific model.”

So that leaves figuring out what’s the best effective training distribution.

1 Like
3

And for time crunched individuals, what is the value or how do we calculate “neccesary training volume”

4

I wonder if, for experienced cyclists, consistency becomes more important than almost anything else, except maybe a peak period.

1 Like
5

I’d love to know this.

Joe

6

It would have helped if their graphs showed different symbols for the type of training distribution intervention. The intervention effects vary quite significantly and certainly do not sit alongside their trend line.

There’s quite a range of how long an intervention was varying from about 2.5 weeks to 26 weeks. If you take their trend line, the more intervention the less the effect.

It’s not clear how much the interventions changed the subjects weekly training hours or distributions.

Some “time trial” performance measures were 5 mins and some 40km. Quite a difference.

It’s not clear what training status the subjects were in when the interventions took place. For instance if you intervened during my base training period, I’d expect a different effect to if you intervened when I had several periods of build cycles behind me.

I think a little if this comes down to

“Take two people and give them exactly the same training and they will see different outcomes”

Which comes to their second point

“Training plans need to be individualised”.

I minded of a study that looked at “non responders”. They concluded that as you increased the volume, you reduced the number of non responders. Once they reached a certain amount of volume then everyone responded.