Tag Archives: athletes

Planning the Recovery

Posted on by
4

The inclusion of HRV monitoring into my training has caused me to change my perspective a fair bit on the subject. It has also provided me with a lot more questions than answers, but I don’t consider this to be a bad thing. My main interest and focus has always been on how to increase strength. A quick look over at my bookshelf and I can see that I have accumulated a small library on the topic. In pursuit of increasing my own strength I’ve been on an ongoing mission to discover and learn the best training methods and programs that can get me stronger. Today’s post is about the polar opposite of what I’ve been spending years of my life on learning. That is, the opposite of training. HRV monitoring has inspired me to consider not just appropriate planning of training loads, but the planning of recovery and restoration modalities – the opposite of physically stressful training.

First I’d like to assert my current position or philosophy on training; Your workouts are only as effective as the quality of your adaptation to them. This is analogous to the nutritional concept of being not necessarily what you eat, but what your body assimilates or absorbs from what you eat (I believe it was Poliquin who said that). I believe that the more advanced you get with your training, the more this statement applies. To elaborate on this concept, if you’re out-training your body’s ability to favourably respond to the stress, it doesn’t matter how perfect or scientific your program is. This is what makes monitoring something like HRV so invaluable. Understanding complex training methods and being able to apply them is simply one facet of the overall process. The recovery process also requires planning, structure and strategy.

At this point I wish I could tell you how to perfectly strategize and plan your recovery but I simply don’t know the answers. What I do know, and I’m stealing this term from Mladen Jovanovic, is that a complementary approach to training is necessary. Putting a ton of time into devising your next training cycle must involve considerations of recovery processes. This is not to say that that you must actively perform some mode of recovery at all times but rather that it would be wise to consider matching increases in training stress with a logically applied increase in recovery strategies to assist in the recovery and adaptation process.

Below is a brief list of factors I’ve been considering more when planning my training/recovery process;

(Note that the following are simply stated to provoke thought, I’m not recommending anything in particular as I’m not qualified to do so)

Sleep: Quality and length are obviously important during all phases of training. Can Inclusion of daily naps at certain times/phases be of any benefit? What about time of day training? Myllymaki and colleagues (2011) found that late night exercise resulted in higher heart rates during the first few hours of sleep compared to control however no effect on overall sleep quality or nocturnal HRV was seen. Perhaps post exercise static stretching would further reduce HR post-exercise (see below: static stretching) – You can monitor your sleep with mobile apps although I have yet to do this.

Nutrition:

–          Macronutrients, caloric intake (matched to body composition and/or weight class goals), manipulation of macronutrients according to training phase (i.e. higher volumes accompanied with higher carbohydrate intake?)

–          Micronutrition (Ensuring adequate vitamin and mineral consumption. Does this change with variations in training load?)

–          Anecdotally I can say that I almost always see an acute spike in HRV the morning after a night of purposeful overeating.

–          Ingesting foods that are anti-inflammatory? Reducing or eliminating foods that are pro-inflammatory? For a discussion on nutrition and HRV see this post.

Supplements: Inclusion of ergogenic aids at appropriate times; vitamin D over winter; supplemental forms of Zinc, Magnesium, C, etc. Rather than taking certain supplements year round would they be more effective by being cycled in at certain times?

Massage: Beneficial in periods of high loading? Massage has been show to acutely increase HRV in athletes (Arroyo-Morrales 2008) and healthy subjects (Delaney 2002). See Patrick Ward’s site for more insightful discussions on HRV and massage.

Static Stretching: I understand that static stretching is a bit of a hot topic and is widely debated. But static stretching post-workout increases HRV (Mueck-Weymann 2004, Farinatti et al. 2011) and therefore more rapidly initiates the recovery process. How much of an effect this may have on the overall process I cannot say but it’s worth considering.

Cold Water Immersion: The effect this has on recovery is debateable (see a good article by Dr. Marco Cardinale here) but it does appear to enhance parasympathetic reactivation post-exercise in athletes after supra-maximal cycling exercise (Buchheit et al 2009). The psychological effects of this shouldn’t be ignored either. Does it matter if something like this actually helps if the athletes wholeheartedly believe it does? When I played football during my undergrad the cold tubs were a MUST during training camp. None of us questioned this. If we sat in the cold tub we thought we helped our recovery. If we didn’t we would expect to be more sore the next day. Placebo effect?

Active Recovery: From personal experience I’ve seen a noticeable difference in perceived recovery, also reflected in my HRV scores with active recovery work. However, incorporating active recovery at certain periods and removing it from others may enhance its effects.

To reiterate, the above modalities may or may not be the answer to continued progress. However, their strategic planning and application throughout training may allow you to better handle the higher training loads necessary to stimulate further progress. We periodize the amount of stress we apply to our body’s, why not also periodize modalities that theoretically may enhance our ability to tolerate that stress at the appropriate times?

For the strength coaches reading this, I’d be curious to know how much thought and planning goes into this aspect of your training with your athletes. Do you have your athletes use different recovery interventions? When and why? Do you monitor this?

I am still young and relatively inexperienced compared to many of you that may be reading this. I can say that from my experience coaching strength and conditioning at the collegiate level that monitoring can be an extremely arduous task given the limited amount of time available with the athletes. Not to mention, the process of monitoring is time consuming in and of itself, making it difficult to do when you’re responsible for several teams.

Leave me a comment or send me an e-mail to continue the discussion.

andrew_flatt@hotmail.com

References:

Arroyo-Morrales, M. (2008) Effects of myofascial release after high-intensity exercise: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 31(3): 217-223.

Buchheit, M. (2009) Effect of cold water immersion on postexercise parasympathetic reactivation. American Journal of Physiology, 296(2): 421-427 Full-Text

Delaney, J. (2002) The short-term effects of myofascial trigger point massage therapy on cardiac autonomic tone. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 37(4): 364-371

Farinatti, P. et al (2011) Actue effects of stretching exercise on the heart rate variability in subjects with low flexibility levels. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(6): 1579-1585

Mueck-Weymann, MG., et al (2004) Stretching increase heart rate variability in healthy athletes complaining about limited muscular flexibility. Clinical Autonomic Research, 14(1): 15-18

Myllymaki, T. et al (2011) Effects of vigorous late-night exercise on sleep quality and cardiac autonomic activity. Journal of Sleep Research, 20(1): 146-153

HRV, Adaptation, Progression, Training Adjustments

Posted on by
4

I’ve been reviewing my HRV trends over the last few weeks to analyze how my body is handling my current training set-up. I’ve been noticing smaller drops in HRV the day following a heavy workout (sRPE9). In some instances I’ve seen a small hike in HRV the following day. Today I will provide a few thoughts on what may be happening as well as some thoughts on things to consider when analyzing your data.

It’s been demonstrated in the research quite clearly that HRV reflects recovery status in both weight lifters and aerobic athletes. Therefore, it’s reasonably safe to say that your HRV score the morning after a workout is reflecting how stressful the workout was. However, it’s extremely important to consider other variables that can affect recovery (other stressors). So taking this into consideration, HRV score reflects not so much the stress of the workout, but rather how well your body was able to respond to it since the cessation of yesterday’s training session (assuming the workout was the biggest stressor of the day).

Let’s say you performed an intense workout that you rated a 9 out of 10 on an RPE scale. The following day your HRV score will depend on the following key variables;

Nutrition: Did you provide the resources for your body to recover from the session? Proteins for structural repairs of damaged muscle fibers, fats for overall calorie intake and hormonal support and carbohydrates for glycogen re-synthesis. Was overall calorie intake sufficient? 

Purposeful Rest/Relaxation: Following the workout did you start the recovery process by relaxing, hot shower, etc.? This will allow the parasympathetic nervous system to get the recovery process underway.

Compounding stress: In contrast to the above, did you add further stress to your body? How physically active were you? What stressful events occurred and how bad were they?

Sleep: How restful was your sleep? How many hours? Were there disturbances?

Aerobic Fitness/General Physical Preparedness: The more aerobically fit you are, generally the better your HRV will be. The higher your work capacity, the more stress your body can handle. In my experience, in effort to increase performance in a given quality, it’s important to consider the overall fitness of the individual as this can limit and effect recovery, training frequency, volume, intensity, etc.

Familiarity of the Training Session: What type of workout was it? Have you performed this workout recently with similar loads? In other words, has your body adapted to the workout structure which therefore reduces the stress on the body?

I would like to elaborate on the last point since the above are pretty self-explanatory. When considering HRV response to a training session, it’s important to evaluate if you are introducing a new stress to the body via new workout structure, type and familiarity of work (aerobic, anaerobic, running, rowing, resistance, etc.). It’s been my experience that a new workout structure or unfamiliar training will create a larger drop in HRV. This is obviously because your body is not accustomed to the type of work and must work hard to adapt and recover. For example, the first time I performed a conditioning session this past year my HRV dropped immensely. However, each conditioning session thereafter provoked less and less of an HRV drop. HRV reflected my progressive adaptation to the stress. Even though the workouts may still have been perceived as hard, the body is familiar with the stimulus and homeostasis is quickly restored.

Some follow up questions based on the above discussion;

  1. Is the workout still effective if it does not provoke a marginal stress response (drop in HRV)?
  2. Should we use HRV as a guide to adjust and make changes to training structure to avoid staleness/plateau (periodization)?

In addressing question 1, it’s important to first evaluate training progress. Check your workout log. Are you still getting stronger/faster/running further, etc (whatever your training goal is). If the answer is yes, continue. Other factors and adaptations are obviously taking place.

In response to question 2, we need to carefully examine all of the above factors that affect an HRV score. If your nutrition is on point, you are reducing compounding stress, sleeping well and so forth, we can assume that the following day’s HRV is a reflection of your response to the training session.

If you’re experiencing a plateau it’s time to consider altering training. If you are a strength athlete you have a few options. Adjust volume or intensity. Adjust training sequence/frequency. Make adjustments to the lifts themselves. For example, add a pause to your bench or take it away, rotate assistance lifts, add or remove an exercise. Obviously only one major adjustment is needed. Evaluate progress, keep track of HRV trends and see if that made a difference. It’s also important to consider that training progress in more advanced athletes/lifters is non-linear. Therefore, don’t make drastic changes at the first sign of plateau. It’s okay to repeat workouts. Use your judgement on if a change is needed.

I will continue with my current training structure and set up to see if progress continues or stops and if HRV trends change or stay the same. Once I can evaluate more of my data I’ll write up a report.

Supine vs. Standing HRV Measurement: Is one better than the other?

Posted on by
13

After purchasing my HRV device over a year ago I was unsure of whether to take measurements laying down (supine), seated, or standing up. I don’t recall what it was exactly that prompted my decision, but I decided to measure standing. Since day one I’ve recorded my HRV in the exact same position (standing) after waking up for consistency. I often wonder however if this is the best way of measuring HRV for the purpose of monitoring training load, recovery status, etc. I am not an expert on this topic so understand that this article is simply my perspective on the topic based on my experience and research into the matter. Furthermore, I’ve yet to see this discussed in too much depth and therefore decided to investigate the issue myself.

In this discussion I wish to accomplish 3 objectives;

  1. Briefly discuss the role of the ANS in controlling heart rate at rest and in response to orthostasis (standing up)
  2. To briefly review some of the research I have read pertaining to this issue
  3. To present and discuss some data I collected over the last few weeks comparing my morning supine RHR and HRV score vs. my morning standing RHR and HRV score.

Heart Rate Mediated by ANS

Within the wall of the right atrium of the heart is the sino-atrial node (SA node). The SA node randomly initiates impulses that cause the heart to beat. The cardiovascular center of the autonomic nervous system located in the brainstem governs the SA node via parasympathetic and sympathetic innervation. More specifically, the cardiac accelerating center (sympathetic) and cardiac decelerating centers (parasympathetic) of the medulla are responsible for sending sympathetic and parasympathetic impulses to the heart in response to altered blood distribution and pressure requirements (exercise, stress, standing, laying down, etc.)

Sympathetic impulses increase heart rate by exciting the SA node while parasympathetic impulses reduce heart rate by inhibiting it. Thus, with parasympathetic predominance we can expect heart rate to be less frequent and less consistent (more variability between beats) while sympathetic predominance would result in more beats with less variability. *It’s not that simple but for the sake of this article that will suffice*

At times of rest and relaxation, the parasympathetic branch of the ANS will be more dominant whereas during times of stress (exercise, anxiety, etc) the sympathetic branch of the ANS will increase. This is how monitoring our HRV informs us of the balance of the ANS. Though the two branches of the ANS appear to work in a “yin and yang” relationship, both systems are active simultaneously (however to varying degrees). It is possible to have an elevated heart rate and high HRV and vice versa.

During supine, heart rate and blood pressure are lower as the body rests. From supine (a state of high parasympathetic activity and low sympathetic activity) to standing, there is a shift in sympathovagal balance characterised by a withdrawal of parasympathetic activity and a concomitant increase in sympathetic activity (Montano et al. 1994, Mourot et al. 2004). Naturally, the body needs to accommodate for the shift in position forcing the heart to beat harder and faster to pump blood to the brain; a task much less strenuous in the horizontal position.

Some Pertinent Research

Kiviniemi et al. (2007) provides a very thorough explanation of why HRV might be better measured in a standing position as opposed to seated or supine. Essentially, HRV is susceptible to saturation of the parasympathetic nervous system in subjects with low heart rates. Therefore, in athletic populations, changes in parasympathetic activity (as measured by HF Power) may be harder to detect. The author stated “In the present study, endurance training increased HF power measured at standing position but did not change HF power measured at sitting position. This supports our notions that orthostatic stimulus may be more favorable condition than sitting or supine positions to obtain specific information on the status of cardiac autonomic regulation in exercise intervention settings among relatively high fit subjects.”

Uusitalo et al. (1998) saw an increase in sympathetic activity (measured by LF power) measured in overtrained female aerobic athletes in the supine position.

Mourout et al (2004) saw decreased HRV in overtrained athletes compared to not overtrained athletes in the supine position. Similar results were found when HRV was measured after 60 degree tilt. The non-OT group always had higher HRV in the standing position and saw greater reactivity to the postural change.

Uusitalo et al (1999) saw similar results to the work mentioned above by Mourot. Overtrained athletes saw an increase in LF power in the supine position; lower HRV in the standing position; and decreased reactivity to postural change. Additionally, changes in maximal aerobic power were related to decreased HRV in the standing position.

Chen et al (2011) measured HRV in elite weightlifters before during and after an intense workout. HRV was measured in the seated position. The authors found that HRV reflected recovery status as strength levels returned once HRV reached or exceeded baseline in the days following the workout.

Gilder and Ramsbottom (2008) wanted to test whether volume of training load resulted in changes in HRV in response to orthostasis. The authors findings in their words; “Women reporting higher volumes of physical activity had significantly higher levels of parasympathetic HRV than less active women while supine, but also demonstrated a much greater change in parasympathetic HRV in response to standing. It is of interest to note that short-term vagal measures of HRV for HV while standing are similar to those for LV while supine.” *LV=Low Volume HV=High Volume

Grant et al. (2009) found that standing HRV indicators showed significantly more correlations with cardiopulmonary fitness indicators compared to supine measurements. The authors urge practitioners to use caution when attempting to measure fitness via HRV indicating that this is not yet a reliable process.

Hedelin et al. (2001) found that during a 70 degree head up tilt, LF power correlated to measures of strength and aerobic capacity. A greater shift toward LF power in the tilted position correlated to reduced performance. Changes in LF were linearly related to changes in performance suggesting a reflection of adaptation to training.

Hellard et al. (2011) measured HRV in swimmers to model a relationship between HRV and illness. The main results of this study were the following:

“1) In winter, national-level swimmers showed a greater risk of pathology than international-level swimmers. 2) The weeks that preceded the appearance of URTI and pulmonary infection but also MA were characterized by an increase in autonomic parasympathetic activity in supine position. Conversely, in orthostatic position and in winter, the weeks that preceded the appearance of AP were characterized by a drop in parasympathetic activity. 3) During weeks characterized by URTI and pulmonary infection, a shift was noted in the autonomic balance toward sympathetic predominance in supine position and a drop in parasympathetic drive in orthostatic position. And 4) in winter and in orthostatic position, a drop in parasympathetic drive associated with an increase in sympathetic drive was linked to an increased risk of MA.” MA= Muscular Injury, AP=All type pathologies

Huovinen et al. (2009) measured HRV and Testosterone-Cortsiol ratios in army recruits during a week of basic training (class room based). The authors stated; “In the present study, the correlation between the testosterone-to-cortisol ratio and changes in heart rate, SDNN, and high-frequency power expressing an association between circulating ‘‘stress’’ hormones and cardiac vagal activity was apparent in the standing condition only. Thus, based on the results of the present study, measures of heart rate variability should be done not only at rest but also during a controlled sympathetic stimulation (e.g. during an orthostatic challenge).”

 

Hynynen et al. (2011) looked to compare perceived stress levels with HRV scores during night sleep, supine and after standing. Lower HRV in supine and standing correlated with high stress levels while HRV during sleeping did not.

Iellamo et al. (2004) monitored HRV in elite rowers during overload training and recovery. Measurements were performed in the supine position. HRV decreased with overload and rebounded during a recovery period.

I summarize my thoughts and conclusions on the research at the end of this article.

My Experiment: HRV Supine vs. Standing

I conducted a small experiment over the last few weeks to see how my HRV responded to supine vs. standing positions. The table below presents the collected data.

Date

Supine HR/HRV

Standing HR/HRV

HRV Difference

sRPE

08/10

08/11

08/12

08/13

08/14

08/15

08/16

08/17

08/18

08/19

08/20

08/21

08/22

08/23

08/24

52 / 87

51 / 89.5

48.5 / 94.5

49.5 / 88

50 / 88

49 / 90

48 / 92

53 / 92

51 / 101

50 / 85.5

49.5 / 81.5

47 / 90

52 / 90

50 / 83

49.5 / 87

56 / 85

65 / 80.5

67 / 84.5

66 / 78.5

67 / 79

61 / 86

71 / 79

69.5 / 80

78 / 73

63 / 79

60.5 / 74.5

58 / 86

75 / 70

65.5 / 84

60.5 / 85.5

2

9.5

10

9.5

9

4

13

12

28

6.5

7

4

20

1

1.5

8

1

5

7

3

8

3

8

3

0

0

8

3

8

8

In interpreting the above data, the majority of the scores appear to give similar data. When reviewing my overall trends (not just these two weeks) usually HR goes up and HRV decreases in response to a high loading day (sRPE 8+). Likewise, HR will decrease and HRV will increase in response to a lower loading day. I’ve found this to be subject to change based on sleep quality and other lifestyle factors that can promote a change in HRV.

I have highlighted three instances that showed conflicting scores. In all three occasions supine HRV is high while standing HRV is low. Each of these conflicting scores occurred on days following a higher intensity workout. Based on my trends and perception of stress I find that the standing scores to be a more accurate reflection of my training load. Generally after an intense workout I’m sore the next morning and fatigued from the workout.

Having said all this, I’m not that smart and can be overlooking something completely obvious. Additionally, these scores (and everyone elses who use a smart phone app HRV device) are subject to the accuracy of the devices (EKG Reciever, Heart Rate strap, etc.) Not to say that they aren’t accurate but it is a potential limitation. Lastly, non-training related stressors are not documented. This is a huge limitation since any form of stress can affect HRV.

Thoughts and Wrap Up (for those still reading)

First and foremost, consistent measurements are more important than position. This is because each of the three positions appear to provide important data regarding training status however, each position provides different data. Therefore, pick a position and stick to it 100% of the time for your values to be meaningful. Switching positions from day to day will provide skewed data.

Endurance athletes and athletes with low resting heart rates are probably better off measuring HRV in a standing position.

Nearly every paper I’ve read on HRV stresses that HRV varies a great deal between individuals. This means that you should not be comparing your data to others. This means that in a team setting, it is important to always compare daily values to baseline (of each individual) for meaningful interpretations. A score of 80 may be high for one individual and low for another.

I like the standing test for the simple reason that it provokes a small stress response. This removes the issues of parasympathetic saturation from the supine position. Seeing how your body responds to standing appears to give you a good idea of how your body can/will handle stress that day. If HRV remains high after standing (given time to stabilize) then you are likely in an adaptive state. If HRV is low after standing (given time to stabilize) you are likely less adaptive (currently under higher stress).

HRV test length may influence positional preference. Measuring HRV for 3+ minutes may be more comfortable in a supine or seated position. My device (iThlete) is a 1 minute test and therefore I don’t find the standing position to be a nuisance. However, I did prefer the supine measurements simply because I only needed to focus on breathing and nothing else.

It may be optimal to measure HRV in both supine and standing positions for more complete data. I’ve seen several papers that measure supine-standing-supine HRV (orthoclinostatic measurements). Though this is less convenient and less practical, it may provide more accurate information.

Lastly and most importantly, the research is conflicting and more needs to be done. Formulate your own opinion based on the research and apply it to yourself. Consider experimenting by recording data in various positions, compare it to perceived stress (training, mental, chemical, etc) and determine what you like best. If you do perform this experiment be sure to only save the data on the app for your preferred testing position to keep meaningful trends and daily color indications.

References:

Chen, J. et al. (2011) Parasympathetic nervous activity mirrors recovery status in weightlifting performance after training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(6):  1546-1552

Gilder, M., & Ramsbottom, R. (2008) Change in heart rate variability following orthostasis relates to volume of exercise in healthy women. Autonomic Neuroscience: Basic & Clinical, 143(1-2): 73-76

Grant, C. et al. (2009) Relationship between exercise capacity and heart rate variability: supine and in response to an orthostatic stressor. Autonomic Neuroscience: Basic & Clinical, 151(2): 186-188

Hedelin, R., et al. (2001) Heart Rate Variability in athletes: relationship with central and peripheral performance. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 33(8), 1394-1398.

Hellard, P., et al. (2011) Modeling the Association between HR Variability and Illness in Elite Swimmers. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 43(6): 1063-1070

Huovinen, J. et al. (2009) Relationship between heart rate variability and the serum testosterone-to-cortisol ratio during military service. European Journal of Sports Science,9(5): 277-284

Hynynen, E. et al. (2011) The incidence of stress symptoms and heart rate variability during sleep and orthostatic test. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 111(5): 733-41

Iellamo, F. et al. (2004) T-wave and heart rate variability changes to assess training in world class athletes. Medicine & Science in Sports and Exercise, 36(8): 1342-1346.

Montano, N. et al. (1994) Power spectrum analysis of heart rate variability to assess the changes in sympathovagal balance during graded orthostatic tilt. Circulation, 90: 1826-1831 Free Full Text

Mourot, L. et al (2004) Decrease in heart rate variability with overtraining: assessment by the Poincare plot analysis. Clinical Physiology & Functional Imaging, 24(1):10-18.

Uusitalo et al. (1998) Endurance training, overtraining and baroreflex sensitivity in female athletes. Clinical Physiology, 18(6): 510-20

Uusitalo et al. (1999) Heart rate and blood pressure variability during heavy training and overtraining in the female athlete. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 20: 45-53

HRV in a Team Setting

Posted on by
2

Monitoring athletes throughout training provides coaches with extremely valuable information regarding each athlete’s responsiveness to imposed training loads. Most would agree that the main objective for any coach (at competitive levels) is to win. If you fail to do this you will likely be fired.

I think we can also agree that bringing our athletes to peak physical condition (as it applies to their sport) will increase our chances of winning. To do this effectively, physical preparation in both team practice and S&C must be balanced. The right balance of training loads will yield optimal adaptation.

Adaptation is Key

Training (technical and physical) is a stressor our athletes must recover from. If the stress is too great, adaptation will be compromised. If the stress is insufficient, improvements will not take place. Therefore, the training stimulus must be within our athlete’s ability to adapt, allowing for performance improvements. This is pretty well understood by most coaches. However, the ability to balance loads effectively is much less understood. Too often coaches rely on pre-planned training regime’s that fail to take into account each athletes individual adaptive capacity. It is the coach’s responsibility to critically evaluate several issues that arise throughout the year such as;

  • Why did an athlete get hurt?
  • Why did an athlete fall ill?
  • Why is the team seeing decrements in performance?
  • Why are we not performing to our abilities throughout the entire match?
  • Why are certain athletes improving while others are regressing?

I’m sure you can think of more questions to consider.

Monitoring HRV in Sports Teams

Hap, Stejskal & Jakubec (2010) set out to monitor the HRV of 8 competitive male volley ball players (approximately 18-25 years old) over a 7 day microcycle during training camp. The 7 day camp had the athletes partake in 11-13 volleyball practices and 14-16 conditioning sessions. The training was entirely pre-planned and HRV scores were not shared with players or coaches. HRV was measured once each day for a total of 7 times (6 measurements were performed in the morning immediately after waking and 1 measurement was performed under controlled conditions in the afternoon).

The results showed 2 athletes demonstrated above average ANS activity (high HRV) throughout the entire week. In these athletes, the load was below training capacity and higher training levels could have been tolerated to further increase performance. In 4 athletes, HRV scores decreased to the lower end of average. This indicates a moderate level of fatigue and that training load corresponded to their training capacities. In the last 2 athletes, HRV scores were negative (below average). Training stress was too high in these individuals and reduced loads and recovery/regeneration modalities would’ve increased the quality of their training.

In this instance, the pre-planned training program was appropriate for 50% of the team. 25% were overtrained and 25% were undertrained.

In another study, Cipryan & Stejskal (2010) decided to monitor the HRV of competitive hockey players. There were 18 subjects, 8 were junior level players (18 years old) and 10 were from the adult team (mid-20’s). Both teams underwent their own training and practice programs. HRV was measured twice per week in the morning (Mon and Fri) throughout the 2 month training program.

The results show that from the junior team, 2 players showed above average adaptation capacity. 1 player showed decreased HRV scores indicating high fatigue. Training was appropriate for 5/8 players. In the adult men’s team, 3 players showed higher HRV suggesting that more (volume or intensity) training would’ve been tolerated. 1 player showed decreased HRV. This player could not see an increase in HRV back to baseline levels because the training did not conform to his adaptive abilities. This player was at risk of more frequent health complications. This training program was appropriate for 60% of the team. 30% was undertrained and 10% was overtrained.

In the discussion, the authors proposed that athletes be separated into groups during training with 3 separate programs available. One program for athletes with low HRV (decreased loads) one program from athletes responding appropriately (moderate loads) and one program for athletes with high HRV (increased loads).

The last study that I’ll discuss has been mentioned before in previous articles that I’ve written. Cipryan et al. (2007) measured HRV in Czech U-17 male hockey players once per week in the morning over a 3-5 month period. In addition, the coaches were asked to rate each players performance on a scale of 1-10. The researchers found that as HRV increased, performance was rated better and correlated to more playing time. When HRV was low performance was rated lower. Performance correlated with HRV score.

Thoughts

What I found interesting was that in 2 of the above studies, HRV was monitored only once or twice per week and was still able to provide important data regarding training status. This makes the application of HRV in a team setting much more realistic. Daily measurements can certainly be done and would likely provide more accurate data but can prove to be difficult. The ability to perform HRV measurements are limited by; having access to valid and reliable measuring devices; having a qualified individual(s) to record and analyze data; having athletes capable of following measurement instructions. HRV applications on smart phones certainly would make this process much easier. These are much more cost effective and convenient.

It appears that pre-planned training certainly isn’t optimal for realizing athletic potential in athletes. Though this is very inconvenient for the coach, having the ability to adjust training prescription for certain athletes based on HRV can increase the quality of training and adaptation while decreasing health complications (illness, injury, overtraining).

How often do coaches punish players for poor performance with intense conditioning in practice sessions following a previous competition? How many coaches punish teams with physical conditioning due to team rule infractions? How often are ill or injured players returning to training and competition before they’re ready? Clearly these strategies require some re-evaluation. It is quite possible your training program, no matter how good it looks on paper, is only appropriate for 50-60% of your players.


References

Cipryan, L. & Stejskal, P. (2010) Individual training in team sports based on ANS activity assessments. Medicina Sportiva, 14(2):  56-62

Cipryan, L., Stejskal, P., Bartakova, O., Botek, M., Cipryanova, H., Jakubec, A., Petr, M., & Řehova, I. (2007)  Autonomic nervous system observation through the use of spectral analysis of heart rate variability in ice hockey players.  Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis. Gymnica, 37(4): 17-21.

Hap, P., Stejskal, P. & Jakubec, A. (2010) Volleyball players training intensity monitoring through the use of spectral analysis of HRV during a training microcycle. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis. Gymnica, 41(3): 33-38

How effective is pre-planned training?

Posted on by
12

I was about 4 weeks out from Canadian Raw Nationals 2011 (powerlifting). I was on pace to hit personal records in all 3 lifts at a lighter bodyweight. I took a scheduled deload and when I started my last training cycle before the meet, the weights felt like a million pounds. I couldn’t fix whatever the problem was and ended up pulling out of the meet. This was a huge disappointment. I thought to myself that there had to have been a way to prevent this or at least see it coming so I could make adjustments in time to avoid such a disaster. I knew about HRV and considered using it before but held off. It was this meet prep disaster that inspired me to purchase the iThlete to determine how useful it is for strength athletes (see my post here for an explanation of what the iThlete is and how it works). It’s now been 8 months since I’ve been using this device and it has changed my whole outlook on managing the training process.

In this post from a couple of months ago I wrote about my observations with HRV. I also gave a vague explanation of how I was then going to use HRV to guide my training. At this point I’d like to share what I’ve learned from measuring my HRV since then.

  • I have not taken a deload week since late January. Typically I would deload after every 3 week cycle. The purpose of the deload was to allow my joints a break from the heavy loading, allow my CNS to recover from the heavy lifting and allow for optimal recovery so I return at a higher level of strength (supercompensation). I was pretty surprised to see that in nearly 2 months of training I have not felt the need to deload. Instead I have simply chosen to take a deload day only when my HRV score was low. I have squatted heavy every week during this experiment because my HRV was always at baseline or above on Mondays (Squat day). I have had to deload on only 3 occasions. All of these occurred on a Wednesday (Bench Day). I continue to make progress every week and therefore will continue with not taking a planned deload week. On my deload days I simply work up to the heaviest weight I can handle with zero strain or struggle for the same amount of reps I would’ve done anyway.

    For example, on Bench day when I needed to deload I was supposed to work up to 3 sets of 3 with a 4 rep max or RPE of 9. However since my HRV was low and I had to deload I simply worked up to 1 set of 3 with a weight that I felt if I added any more weight too, would cause me to strain. For the assistance and accessory work I simply cut the volume in half. The take home message (atleast so far) is that deloading should occur when your body will not tolerate intense training. HRV provides this information. What’s the point of taking a whole week to deload if your ability to adapt to stress returns to a good level within only a few days?

    I will experiment with planned overreaching in the future where I will purposely train heavy as my HRV declines and follow it up with a planned deload. This is more similar to how athletes are training. My concern with this method is the potential heightened risk of injury from training when HRV is low. See this post for further discussion on HRV and injury.

  • This past week was my spring break. I went to Cincinnati to visit my family. If you know me personally you are aware that I’m pretty strict with my eating. I eat a lot, but I stick to whole foods and avoid processed/junk foods. I also eat fairly low carb. Well, in Cincinnati I allowed myself to eat whatever I wanted all week. I was crushing home-made oatmeal butterscotch cookies, ice cream, nacho’s and guacamole, Cheesecake Factory dinners and desserts, the famous Cincinnati Chilli, pub food, etc. It was a disaster. Apart from the binge eating I felt very well rested, slept well and enjoyed some unseasonably warm weather.

    Cincinnati Chili

    It’s fair to say that the only thing out of the ordinary that would have been stressful to my body was my terrible eating. Well, my HRV declined after the second day and it got worse each day after. It only climbed back up again since I returned and resumed my usual eating habits. You can see in the screen shot below that my HRV steadily decreased the longer I ate poorly and started to climb back up on Saturday (returned to PA on Friday evening). Although we’re all well aware that nutrition plays a vital role in how we recover from training and perform, it was pretty eye opening to see just how important nutrition is. Such a simple way to improve performance and adaptation to training is to just eat well. How much time are we wasting busting our ass in the gym if we go home every day and eat terribly?

  • Lately, whenever my HRV is low I feel weaker. I found it interesting that on many squat workouts in the past 6 or 7 weeks I felt that I was fighting the bar, not finding my groove, etc, yet was still squatting heavy. When my HRV has been low (3 low days on Bench days) the weight would feel much heavier. 315×5 is a walk in the park for me typically. However, on a deload day it was a major grind. I really shouldn’t have gone that heavy on a deload. This leads me to believe that performance will be worse when HRV is low (consistent with research that I discuss here.) Since I’ve been able to squat heavy even when my technique felt shaky when HRV was high, it leads me to believe that performance will likely be better when HRV is high. I’ll be doing some research in the near future on collegiate football players to see if I observe the same thing.

My experience with HRV and the research I’ve read thus far has lead me to believe that pre-planned training for collegiate athletes is not optimal. It is common for strength coaches to program around Christmas holidays, spring break and so on. Keep in mind that holiday’s and breaks are usually planned deloading periods that mark the end of a given cycle/phase and will mark the beginning of a new one upon return. This may work if the athlete’s all lived the exact same lives and had the same genes as one another.

A common example of pre-planned periodization that I found on google images

Allow me to illustrate for you an example of how ineffective this method is not because the theory is incorrect (a debate for another time), but because it fails to account for the behaviour of the athletes. I’m going to provide 4 scenario’s of what many athlete’s on the same team may do over the break that will effect there adaptation to the previous cycle and readiness for the next cycle.

Scenario 1: The athlete heads to Florida for spring break and drinks alcohol every day, all day on the beach, parties all night and eats cheap restaurant food.

Scenario 2: The athlete goes home and although doesn’t drink or party all night, he eats terribly.

Scenario 3: The athlete goes home and rests all week and eats perfectly.

Scenario 4: The athlete goes home and trains at his own gym and therefore doesn’t get much rest.

Many football teams have over 100 players. This creates 100 different scenarios. It’s quite obvious that not every athlete will be prepared for the same training loads. Any strength coach is already aware of this and unfortunately has to do their best with what they’ve got. However, since HRV is sensitive to any stress that our body experiences, we now have a more accurate way to determine who is ready and who is not. This can prevent you from overtraining certain athletes, undertraining other athletes and most importantly reducing the likelihood of injury. If you so desired, you can investigate further into the personal lives of the athletes to determine why they are experiencing so much stress when the training isn’t the cause.

I realize that monitoring the HRV of all your athletes may seem impossible but the new apps that are available make it extremely easy and affordable. The biggest challenge becomes how you will handle providing different workouts on a day to day basis according to everyone’s HRV score. I’ll share my thoughts on potential ways to accommodate this in a future post, but I believe it can be done without too much burden.

Today’s post paints a picture of what my current thought process is based on my experience and the literature. I am really excited to get the research started on the football players. In my next post I will give an update of exactly what I’ll be doing, why, my hypothesis and all that good stuff.

Thanks for reading.

If you’re not assessing (the ANS), you’re guessing

Posted on by
4

“If you’re not assessing, you’re guessing” is a phrase often used by strength and conditioning professionals to explain the importance of movement assessment prior to exercise prescription. Prescribing a program that doesn’t consider the athlete’s movement ability (or lack thereof) can end up causing problems.Essentially, you would be guessing that your exercise prescription is helpful when in fact it could be exacerbating a problem. I wholeheartedly agree with this. However this article has nothing to do with movement assessment. This was just my way of illustrating what my next point is.

I am going to apply the same logic we use for why we assess movement (to influence program design) with monitoring the function of the autonomic nervous system (ANS); if you’re not assessing the ANS, you’re guessing.

If you’re unfamiliar with what the ANS is and why it’s important I suggest you read this. In a nutshell the ANS governs “rest and digest” and “fight or flight” responses in the body. This is done without our conscious control. The two components of the ANS are the parasympathetic branch and sympathetic branch. Sympathetic activity is elevated in response to stress be it physical, or mental. Adrenaline is secreted and catabolic activity (the breakdown of structures) ensues. Parasympathetic activity is elevated in the absence of stress and functions to heal and repair the body.

We can monitor our ANS status non-invasively and inexpensively through heart rate variability (HRV). I explain how you can do this here.

HRV as an indicator of autonomic function can tell you a tremendous amount about your athlete’s responsiveness to training. I shared plenty of research in this post that lends support to HRV as an effective tool for; reflecting recovery status, showing better adaptation to training and even predicting performance. In a separate post I shared my thoughts on HRV as a predictor for injury.

Let me summarize what I shared in my initial research review post;

HRV reflects recovery status in elite Olympic weightlifters (Chen et al 2011), national level rowers (Iellamo et al 2004) and untrained athletes (Pichot et al 2002).

Cipryan et al (2007) showed that hockey players performed better when HRV was high while performance was rated lower when HRV was low.

Endurance athletes who improved vo2 max had consistently high HRV while athletes who did not improve vo2 max had low HRV (Hedelin et al 2001).

Endurance athletes who trained using HRV to determine their training loads had a significantly higher maximum running velocity compared to athletes in a pre planned training group (Kiviniemi et al 2007, Kiviniemi et al 2010).

Female athletes who used HRV to guide their training increased their fitness levels to the same level as females in a pre planned training group but the HRV group had fewer high intensity training days (Kiviniemi et al 2010).

(references for the above articles can be found in my original post here.

I’d now like to show some more research that lends support to the usefulness of HRV in monitoring athletes.

Mourot, L (2004) saw decreased HRV in overtrained aerobic athletes. Uusitalo et al (2000) also saw decreased HRV in overtrained female aerobic athletes.

Huovinen et al (2009) measured HRV and testosterone to cortisol (T-C) ratio in army recruits during their first week of basic training. The training was class room based (not physical) and therefore all stress can be considered mental. The authors found that HRV declined in several soldiers, though not all. This demonstrates that, what can be interpreted as stress is highly variable and dependent on the individual. The authors used the terms “high responders” and “low responders” to describe the differences among soldiers. Immediately I thought about the differences among athletes and how their bodies perceive stress. You can’t assume everyone is responding in kind to a training program. What is stressful for one athlete may not be as stressful to another.

All soldiers that showed decreases in HRV also showed lower T-C ratios. In contrast, soldiers with higher HRV had higher T-C ratio’s. Baseline T-C levels were not recorded so we shouldn’t draw any concrete conclusions however it appears that low HRV (increased sympathetic activity with parasympathetic withdrawl) is associated with a reduced T-C ratio.

Hellard et al. (2011) found that in national level swimmers, as HRV dropped (sympathetic predominance) there was an increased risk of illness. The drops in HRV that lead to illness were preceded by a sudden increase in parasympathetic activity the week prior to illness. The authors speculated that the preceding increase in HRV (parasympathetic/vagal activity) was a reflection of the body experiencing the first incubation period and that an increase in vagal activity was a protective response trying to modulate the magnitude of early immune responses to inflammatory stimuli. The subsequent increase in sympathetic activity and decrease in HRV occurs during the symptomatic phase of the illness.

In humans, increased sympathetic activity is generally associated with inflammatory responses while parasympathetic predominance actually inhibits inflammation. At this point in time I will not elaborate on this for the simple fact that I don’t fully understand it. However, we can speculate that if we’re seeing consistently low HRV scores in ourselves or our athletes there is probably an increase in inflammation occurring. Check out Thayer (2009) for more information regarding HRV and inflammation. Simon from iThlete sent me that paper and I’m still processing it.

When dealing with a team or if we train multiple athletes at the same time we need to be aware of how they are adapting and recovering from training. Work by Hautala et al (2001) shows that athletes will recover from exercise at different rates according to fitness levels (obviously). Basically, fit individuals recover faster and show less HRV fluctuation compared to less fit individuals. In a team setting, some individuals who are highly fit may not be getting a sufficient training stimulus while other athletes who are less fit can be overworked.

Kiviniemi et al (2010) found that females take longer to recover from aerobic training than males. This needs to be considered if you are training a mixed gender group.

Buchheit et al (2009) and Manzi et al (2009) both found HRV to be a predictor of aerobic performance.

I’m well aware that the development of athletes has been taking place without the use of HRV monitoring. There are many great coaches and trainers who have their own systems and methods of monitoring recovery in their athletes that work well.

HRV is a tool to use within your own systems. I have thoughts about how I would implement this in a team setting that I will share another time.

To truly autoregulate the training of ourselves or of athletes, we need as much information about present physiologic status as possible. Based on the research and my own personal experience with HRV, this technology takes much of the guesswork out of load/volume manipulation and training prescription. Training hard when HRV is low can be counterproductive and delay recovery. Training hard when HRV is chronically low can lead to illness, injury, overtraining syndrome and suppressed testosterone. Alternatively, increasing load/volume on days when HRV is high can lead to more favourable adaptation. HRV can tell us how stressful the training was for our athletes based on how long it takes HRV to reach baseline in subsequent days. HRV can indicate how much stress your athlete is experiencing outside of training. There are several indications one can take from a simple HRV measurement. Further research will reveal more correlation between HRV and sports performance.

I believe that to train an athlete optimally, we need to be assessing the state of the autonomic nervous system… otherwise we’re guessing.

References:

Buchheit, M. et al (2009) Monitoring endurance running performance using cardiac parasympathetic function. European Journal of Applied Physiology, DOI 10.1007/s00421-009-1317-x

Hellard, P., et al. (2011) Modeling the Association between HR Variability and Illness in Elite Swimmers. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 43(6): 1063-1070

Huovinen, J. et al. (2009) Relationship between heart rate variability and the serum testosterone-to-cortisol ratio during military service. European Journal of Sports Science, 9(5): 277-284

Kiviniemi, A.M., Hautala A.J., Kinnunen, H., Nissila, J., Virtanen, P., Karjalainen, J., & Tulppo, M.P. (2010) Daily exercise prescription on the basis of HR variability among men and women. Medicine & Science in Sport & Exercise, 42(7): 1355-1363.

Manzi, V. et al (2009) Dose-response relationship of autonomic nervous system responses to individualized training impulse in marathon runners. American Journal of Physiology, 296(6): 1733-40

Mourot, L. et al (2004) Decrease in heart rate variability with overtraining: assessment by the Poincare plot analysis. Clinical Physiology & Functional Imaging, 24(1):10-8.

Thayer, J. (2009) Vagal tone and the inflammatory reflex. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, 76(2): 523-526

Uusitalo, A.L.T., et al (2000) Heart rate and blood pressure variability during heavy training and overtraining in the female athlete. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 21(1): 45-53