Resumen de Effects of Novel Supramaximal Interval Training Versus Continuous Training on Performance in Preconditioned Collegiate, National, and International Class Rowers

Sylvie D. Richer, Volker W. Nolte, Dan J. Bechard, Glen R. Belfry

• This investigation compared supramaximal oxygen uptake interval training with continuous training in collegiate, national, and international class rowers. It was hypothesized that 6 supramaximal intensity sessions over 11 days would increase power on selected power measures. After 8 weeks of training for a new season, 10 heavyweight and 6 lightweight rowers were randomized into 2 groups. A ramp test to limit of tolerance to determine peak aerobic power (6 females: 25 W·min-1; 10 males: 30 W·min-1) and an all-out 3-minute test to determine peak power, 60-second power, critical power, and work above critical power (W') were performed before and after training. A supramaximal training session consisted of 10 cycles of 10-second work (140% peak aerobic power):5-second recovery followed by 8 minutes of active recovery, and repeated 6 times. The continuous group performed predominantly moderate intensity (below lactate threshold) training. All training was performed on rowing ergometers. Critical power increased pre-to-post supramaximal ([DELTA]7%) and continuous training ([DELTA]9%), respectively (336 ± 59W to 360 ± 59W; 290 ± 73W to 316 ± 74W; p <= 0.05), whereas the mean power output from all performance measures increased only after supramaximal training ([DELTA]7%) (464 ± 158W to 496 ± 184W; p <= 0.05). Testing also revealed decreased W' ([DELTA]21%) and 60-second power ([DELTA]4%) pre-to-post continuous training only (p <= 0.05). No differences (p > 0.05) in peak aerobic power or peak power were observed pre-to-post training in either group. In conclusion, after an 8-week preconditioning period, supramaximal interval training preserved anaerobic capacity compared with predominantly continuous training and elicited similar increases in critical power in rowers.