In this next installment of this series I’d like to discuss some approaches to using the high intensity training to improve conditioning.

If you are interested in the first two articles in the series, please check them out here:

• High Intensity Training Part 1: “Shock Training Cycle”
• High Intensity Training Part 2: Concentrated Loading for Conditioning

In the previous article I discussed the concept of concentrated loading, basically performing a huge whack of training in a short period of time aimed at one targeted objective in order to obtain a large increase in fitness once the training stimulus is removed. How you approach this phase of training or sequence your way into it is key. A great video lecture on this concept comes from one of the top sports scientists in the world, Inigo Mujika. Below is his three part lecture from the 2011 World Congress on Science and Football. The portion most specific to this discussion begins at 7:45 in part 1. Following the lecture I’ll add some of my own comments.

My Comments

I really enjoyed this lecture and the methodical approach that was taken to using high intensity interval training. Some key things that stood out to me:

• The coaching staff recognized a problem/limitation with the athlete and the athlete was allowed to be removed from regular soccer practice 2x/week for specific conditioning. I don’t know if most team sport coaches, particularly in the US, are in a position were they feel comfortable taking a player out of practice to do specific conditioning should the player need that. It is unfortunate because I believe that most of the team sport athletes at the elite level posses a large amount of skill and knowledge of the game yet they may sometimes lack the physical qualities to go out and display this skill night after night in competition.
• Testing was used to individualize the approach for the athlete. This is a perfect case of using the test to help determine what the athlete needs. In this case they felt that aerobic power was the limitation of this athlete based on how his test results compared with those of athletes within his sport and within his position.
• A test > train > re-test approach was used and following the re-test it was determined that the athlete still had room for improvement, despite seeing improvement from the first approach, which allowed the coaches to develop a program that targeted the athletes limitations.
• Only two sessions per week of this high intensity approach were used along with regular soccer training. As I discussed in the previous articles in this series, oftentimes coaches will do a high amount of intense interval training year round or for weeks on end and, aside from this potentially leading to a fatigued athlete, it limits the novelty of that training stimuli that you may otherwise get when it is used in a more systematic manner. Interestingly, a study by Burgomaster, et al (2007) looked at the response of metabolite transport proteins to sprint interval training and de-training. During the 6-week training phase subjects performed three sessions per week (Mon/Wed/Fri) consisting of 4 sets x 30sec Wingate with 4min rest in weeks 1-2; 5 sets in weeks 3-4; and 6 sets in weeks 5-6. This was followed by a 6-week de-training phase, which consisted of no planned sprint interval training although the subjects were active individuals so they remained active during this period. Interestingly, several transport proteins (Ex., GLUT4, COX4) were increased after just one week of the interval training and even remained elevated even throughout the de-training period. Thus, a huge amount of volume is typically not needed and I have found 2-3x/week of this sort of work to be a good place to start with individuals when implementing intense interval training in a concentrated block of training (keeping in mind that as athletes develop they may require 4 or 5 sessions of this sort of work, as I discussed in Part 2 of this series).

Application & Approach

Following Mujika’s discussion of the individual athlete he then goes into a short talk on how he implemented this approach with a few soccer teams, using individualized intensities (based on physiological testing) to program the athletes with one high intensity interval training session per week. As I discussed in Part 2, I typically have one high intensity session every 7-10 days (or 4 or 5th conditioning workout) in the initial phases of training with other conditioning sessions being lower in intensity (tempo runs, aerobic interval training, 5-10min continuous intervals just below AnT, or cardiac output sessions). This would precede the concentrated loading phase I discussed in Part 2, which would then precede the phase that is most specific to the athlete’s sport (IE, performing more of the conditioning work with the ball or running drills specific to that sport). In Mujika’s example he discussed Aerobic Power work for the athletes. I have talked about Aerobic Power previously in the article on the Power-Capacity Continuum. Generally, I think of Aerobic Power as being work that is too intense to do for a long-slow duration but not so intense that you burn out in 60sec. The typical interval combinations I use are:

5x3min @ > 85% maxHR; Rest = 3min

4x4min @ > 85% maxHR; Rest = 3min

4x5min @ > 85% maxHR; Rest = 3min

Note: Of course this is a very internal way of looking at Aerobic Power. Mujika’s example is more focused on output as the intervals are based on speed rather than HR response. But that is a blog article for a different time as I have some ideas on how I look at this stuff and determine training.

As I get into the concentrated loading phase I use these Aerobic Power sessions 1x/week as well as 1-2x/week of short duration interval work (generally 2-4 series x [5 min of 20-30sec work : 20-30sec rest] Rest = 2.5min). We typically will do this for 3 weeks before unloading the athlete in week four. The concentrated loading, highest weekly volume/frequency, of the intense interval training comes in week 2 and 3. For example:

Week 1 = 1 aerobic power session & 1 short interval session

Week 2 = 1 aerobic power session & 2 short interval sessions

Week 3 = 2 aerobic power sessions & 2 short interval sessions

Week 4 = Recovery

The other sessions during this week are set up to provide the body with some restoration and are very aerobic in nature, keeping the athlete away from work that is very lactate producing.

Hopefully that provides some ideas to play with. There are a number of combinations and things to try and I haven’t even discussed resistance training or how I fit resistance training within this sort of program yet. At the end of the day the goal is to understand the athlete, their needs, the demands of the sport, and apply the test > train > re-test model to ensure you are getting what you want.

In part 1 of this series I talked a little bit about this concept of the “shock training cycle”. This of course led to some debate on the internet (if it weren’t for debate we might not have an internet!) regarding my use of the phrase “shock training cycle”. Purists of this concept are very strict on the application of this type of training as it is incredibly taxing on the body and typically only used for athletes at the most elite levels of training (to read further about this check out Supertraining by Siff & Verkhoshansky). I cannot disagree with that as I have spent a long time reading Russian training theory and this is the most known approach of shock training and Verkhoshansky did coin the phrase (I believe).

However, my application of this is a bit different as I think of it more from the idea that any sort of short, 1-2 week, increase in volume and/or intensity, as discussed in part 1, would be successful in over stressing the system, “shocking” the system if you will, provided that the right amount of stimulus is applied and the right amount of recovery, following that phase, is given to allow the body to restore itself from that block of training and new fitness gains to manifest.

This is what we could call “concentrated loading” as we concentrate a very high amount of work in one single area (one physiological quality) in order to force an improvement. Thus, the approach I am suggesting could be used with a variety of athletes (not just the most elite trained) and over a variety of different physiological qualities (not just strength/power) provided that the right amount of work is chosen for the athlete and the quality being trained is specific to the needs of their sport.

The Cost of Doing Business

When we train we get two outcomes – fitness & fatigue. We gain some fitness and get faster, stronger, more conditioned, etc. We also gain some fatigue and break down a little bit (remember, training is a stress that the body needs to recover from). Together, these outcomes can be represented graphically in the Fitness-Fatigue Model:

As I like to say with training, “There is always a cost of doing business”. When we train a lot, we may have a large spike in fitness but the cost of doing business is also higher, thus we end up burning out a lot quicker. If we train with a more long term approach in mind, slow and steady over time, we accrue less fatigue and fitness gains can keep being made. When we apply this brief period of concentrated loading there will be a very large cost of doing business, fatigue will rise higher than fitness (causing the athlete to report a greater amount of fatigue and perhaps even a bit of decrease in performance); however, once the recovery phase is performed and fatigue dissipates the new gains in performance made will be revealed and the athlete’s level of preparation (seen as the middle line in the graph above) will rise higher.

By taking the long term approach to training (lowest cost of doing business) we can now see that during certain weeks of the year an application of this concentrated load to a specific physiological quality can be very beneficial, force us to have increased gains in fitness, and perhaps help us to break through some plateaus. A cautionary note: A lot of people want to use these high intensity methods all the time, year round. Unfortunately, this tends to break the body down a significant amount and lead to burnout and overtraining. Additionally, if used too frequently there is less potential benefit when we attempt to apply a concentrated phase of work as the body has already adapted to that training stimulus – the stimulus is no longer novel.

Concentrated Loading For Conditioning

In 2013, Ronnestad and colleagues conducted a study using a block periodization type format over 4 weeks on endurance trained cyclists. There were two training groups who were matched for training volume:

• Block Training Group
  -The block training group performed 1 week of very concentrated aerobic intervals. During this week they trained 5 times alternating each day between intervals of 6x5min @ 88-100% max HR; Rest = 2.5min and intervals of 5x6min @ 88-100% max HR; Rest = 3min.  The following three weeks consisted of only 1 high intensity workout per week (one of the workouts from week one) and the rest of the week they performed high volume/low intensity training in one of two aerobic training zones: (1) 60-82% max HR; (2) 83-87% max HR.
• Traditional Training Group– The traditional training group performed two high intensity training sessions per week for four weeks (they did one session of 6x5min and one session of 5x6min with the intensity and rest interval parameters being the same as the block training group) and the rest of the week they performed high volume/low intensity training in one of two aerobic training zones: (1) 60-82% max HR; (2) 83-87% max HR.

Key Findings

• The block training group reported a greater amount of perceived heaviness in their legs during week one. However, this dissipated over the remaining three weeks of the program.
• The block training group saw greater improvements in VO2max, Max Aerobic Power, and Power Output following their one week of high volume/high intensity training.

Take Home Points & Application

Only one week of the high volume/high intensity training was needed to force an improvement in the cyclists’ fitness. As I discussed in part 1 – whether you call it “shock training”, concentrated loading, or block periodization (I am not too worried about the naming convention that surrounds such things) – these training phases are best utilized when they are brief, 1-2 weeks, with higher intensity, volume, and/or frequency. Subjectively, during this 1 week phase the athletes reported greater heaviness in their legs, which is typical during a week with that much intensity and frequency, and this heaviness dissipated during the following 3 week period (and the athletes also saw performance improvements).

Following the high intensity/frequency week the athletes only performed one high intensity session per week. This could be thought of as a a way of stimulating the system following the high intensity block so that continued improvements can be made at a much lower cost of doing business (lower training volume and frequency of the high intensity work). I do wonder what would have happened if after this four week phase (1 week of concentrated loading and 3 weeks of low intensity with one stimulation workout) the athletes then took a 7-10 day restoration phase? Perhaps the fitness gains would have been even higher?

The traditional training group did a more mixed approach with some high intensity workouts and some high volume workouts throughout the week. I don’t think this concurrent approach is wrong or bad and I would hope that people don’t interpret the study to be saying that this approach is inferior. I believe there are times when this sort of training structure can be helpful and warranted. Typically, when we are in a phase of training where the goal is to build the athlete’s fitness I program high intensity workouts, similar to what was used in this study, once every 7-10 days, which usually ends up being every fourth or fifth conditioning workout. I find that this is enough to keep the system stimulated and provide us a good period of time between high intensity workouts that, when they are performed, we have a chance to look at any KPIs we are trying to improve upon – it is sometimes amazing to see how much higher volumes of submaximal work can improve maximal efforts when programmed properly. We then use the 1-2 week phase of concentrated loading as we approach certain periods of the year to get the most out of those training methods.

This sort of concentrated loading can be very powerful. It is important not to overdo it and risk burnout or overtraining. A less is more approach is best utilized here. Thus, if you think about something like a 10-12 week training cycle this week of concentrated loading/shock might be used somewhere towards the end of the training cycle a week or two prior to testing or competition, depending on how long it takes the athlete to recover (and each athlete is a little different so some trial and error may be needed first). Athletes who are more fit and have a larger training background may be able to tolerate two 1-week phases within the 10-12 week training cycle (for example in week 5 and week 10) provided that this training cycle. Finally, if volume/frequency are slowly built up (which is the opposite of what they did in the study, opting to go straight to the one week phase of with high amounts of work) the cycle can be drawn out over a longer period of time and can have greater undulations in it.

The idea of a “shock training cycle” or “shock week” is certainly nothing new. Many authors have talked about this concept and this concept can often be found in some of the Russian texts.

The idea behind it is that you set up training so that during a certain period of time you actually increase the intensity and/or volume and/or frequency as a means of “shocking” your system into a new level of fitness. Of course this sort of approach comes with a price as the body gets beat down by the frequency/volume/intensity of training and oftentimes the improved level of fitness is not noticeable until after a restoration period (typically 1-2 weeks but definitely depends on the individual athlete and the amount of training done in the shock phase) where the fatigue that has accrued during  training can dissipate.

This first article will discuss some concepts I feel are fundamental to setting up a shock training cycle. Following parts of this series will look at some research around this concept and talk about some practical ways I have applied it before for conditioning and strength training.

What are you trying to improve?

As you look to set up this training cycle or training week you need to first ask yourself what it is you are trying to enhance. Because there is a high amount of intensity and frequency directed at one key quality during this training phase it is difficult to try and focus on multiple qualities. Thus, you need to be very clear about what it is you want to improve so that everything else can be minimized and/or dropped from the program during this time. I know people get very nervous about taking things out of their program but the good news is that this sort of training phase will only last 1-2 weeks (depending on how much frequency of training you choose to prescribe) so you wont risk losing the other qualities you have trained and the benefits that you are hoping to make in the key quality should be something that will improve your capacity for sport (IE, this should be a key quality that is directly linked to the physiological needs of the sport you compete in).

Make sure you are fit!

This sort of training is demanding on the body. There is no need to rush to this type of training if you do not have a solid base level of fitness and are able to tolerate it.

Variables to manipulate

There are a few variables that you can manipulate when performing the shock training cycle:

• Intensity – Intensity needs to be high during the shock training cycle. During this time you will be pushing your body and working over 90% for a majority of your training sessions.
• Frequency – Training frequency is a key variable to manipulate during this sort of training phase. Unlike a more normal training phase where the frequency of your hard/intense workouts is spread out with days of lower or medium intensity between them, during this phase you will try and repeat high intensity sessions with greater frequency (often 2-3 days in a row). While this does create a higher amount of fatigue on the system it raises fitness as well and once that fatigue dissipates, as indicated above, that new fitness level can then be displayed.
• Volume – The final variable that can be manipulated is training volume. I put this one last as I find, from experience, that the two variables above are the most important. Generally, if you are training with that high of an intensity and performing frequent workouts you may find that you don’t require a ton of training volume to get what you want from the program. Where volume may come into play is during the weekly workouts. Because the frequency is high you may choose to manipulate volume, for example, day 1 may be a high amount of training volume and day 2 (the next day) may be similar amount of intensity but a slightly lower training volume. Additionally, volume can be manipulated based on how the athlete is feeling or testing (if you are monitoring certain factors of readiness) and volume can be dialed down or up from there. This would become particularly helpful if you were stretching the training phase out to a second week. If the athlete is fit enough (see point 2 above) then they should be able to handle several workouts in the first week and recover well.

Looking ahead to part 2

That is a little bit of background on the “shock training cycle” and some of the things I think about when using it. A lot of times people want to be high intensity year round, whether it is with their strength training or with their conditioning. Unfortunately this type of approach tends to break you down and also tends to place a ceiling on the amount of improvement you can get when you actually do ramp up the intensity and frequency in one of these shock training cycles. It is analogous to having the stereo on volume 10 all the time. Eventually it just gets annoying and you try and tune it out (or break the stereo). By being methodical in your approach you may get more benefits from your training program. The last thing I’ll say is that this stuff works only in certain phases of the year, mainly the off-season. In-season training is a pretty different animal and trying to do something like this in-season, when competition is the most important thing, is foolish. Thus, we tend to take this approach in the mid to late off-season once the guys have been training a bunch (typically 8-10 weeks of training leading up to this where they perform a concurrent training program with volumes of different qualities being manipulated based on what they need to work on in that phase) and their fitness levels are high and they are ready to tolerate it. The next parts in this series will look at some of the research (mainly done using energy system training) and I’ll provide some of my own ideas for using this with conditioning and/or strength training.