Short or Long High Intensity Training

Aerobic Short or Long High Intensity Interval Training - Does it Matter

To compare the effects of short and long high intensity interval training (HIT) conducted with the same total accumulated duration on physiological- and performance parameters during a 4-week training period.

Studies among elite athletes have documented the importance of large amounts of training volume in order to perform at a high level in endurance sports. It is also well documented that both low intensity training (LIT), moderate intensity training (MIT) and high intensity training (HIT) should be included in the overall training efforts. It is well documented that HIT has a positive effect on the aerobic endurance among both elite athletes and recreational athletes.

Despite the fact that there is general agreement that HIT is an important part of the overall training, it is unclear how this part of the training should be organized in order to optimize the training effects. The adaptions of endurance performance seem to depend on both the intensity and the accumulated duration of the HIT sessions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the effects of SI and LI training, including equal accumulated HIT duration, during a 4-week intervention period, conducted as 4x8-min with 2-min recovery periods, 4x(12x40/20-sec) with 2-min recovery periods and 4x(8x40/20-sec) with 2-min recovery periods, in different physiological- and performance parameters among well-trained cyclists.

Inclusion Criteria:

• male < 40 years,
• peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) > 55 ml.kg-1.min-1,
• training volume >3 sessions per week (within cycling)
• absence of disease and injuries.

Exclusion Criteria:

• disease/injuries
• frequent absence of HIT sessions during the period.