Tag Archives: heart rate variability

HRV Guided Training, Periodization and Training Variables

Posted on by
2

Here are some things to consider when planning your daily workouts guided by HRV;

  1. What load of work can my body handle today?

    I primarily use HRV to determine this, however lately I’ve been doing some morning tap tests as well to see what I find (Tap Test App for iPod).

    I like to break adaptive capacity rating up into 4 categories

    1. High – Increase loads
    2. Baseline – Proceed with planned load (moderate to high)
    3. Below Baseline – Reduce load
    4. Low – Rest or Active Recovery

      *In this context load refers to a combination of volume and intensity of training

    iThlete provides color indications for each of these days to simplify interpretation;

    1. Green = High
    2. White = Baseline
    3. Amber = Below Baseline
    4. Red = Low

      Here is a “Baseline” HRV Score measured this morning

  2. What is the goal of the current training phase?

    Accumulation of volume? Intensity? Weight gain? Weight loss?

Your training plan will obviously reflect your training goal however I’ve learned that it’s wise to make necessary adjustments to load in response to the present day’s adaptation potential. The following are a list of variables that I like to manipulate on a daily basis according to HRV score within the context of the training phase/goal.

  1. Volume (number of sets and reps performed with the main lift and assistance work)
  2. Intensity (the amount of weight on the bar)
  3. Rating of Perceived Exertion (how close to failure I get with my sets)

Here is an example of how I manipulate these variables based on training phase and HRV score.

Example: Volume Phase in a Block Training system:

I consider total reps in the 15+ rep range (usually no more than 25 total reps) to be high volume. This can be 3×5, 5×3, 4×4, 5×4, 6×4, 7×3, etc.

  • If HRV is high: I will typically take the higher end of the volume scale using higher sets and lower reps. RPE falls between 9-10 (10 only on last set).
  • If HRV is baseline: I will work in the middle set/rep range of the volume scale. RPE stays around 9.
  • If HRV is below baseline: I’ll stick with the lower end of the volume scale (no more than 15 total reps) with RPE staying around 8.
  • If HRV is low: Active Recovery work, no lifting.

With this set up I can still accumulate volume as long as HRV isn’t low. If I take care of my sleep, eating and overall stress levels, low day’s usually only occur the day following a training session. This is why I lift every other day and perform active recovery on “off” days. The idea is to increase the volume when HRV is high with higher intensities (<3 reps, higher RPE). When HRV isn’t quite where we would like it, we still accumulate volume, but with less intensity and a lower RPE.

Another method I’ve used for manipulating loads on a daily basis is to use more of an undulating periodization approach as opposed to a block approach. With this approach volume, intensity and RPE are constantly changing from workout to workout.

Example Undulating Periodization Approach;

  • If HRV is high: Both volume and intensity will be higher (ex: 6×2 with RPE 9-10)
  • If HRV is baseline: Reduce volume OR intensity (ex: 3×3 with RPE 9 or 3×8 RPE 8)
  • If HRV is below baseline: Intensity AND volume is reduced (ex: 2×4 RPE 8)
  • If HRV is low: Deload workout/active recovery

With this system we increase total load when the body is prepared to handle it better and back it off when necessary. Higher HRV days will involve lower rep ranges to allow for a higher %of 1RM whereas lower HRV days will have higher reps to reduce % of 1RM.

Keep in mind these set ups were for the purposes of increasing strength. Through constant experimentation and evaluation I’m improving on my approach to training. These set-ups aren’t perfect but they worked well. I’m presently using the block approach illustrated in my first example in my current training.

In a few weeks I’ll hopefully get a good post up on how the tap test fits into my program design. I’m looking to see how it correlates to strength, HRV, RPE, etc.

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

Illness, recovery time, travel stress, monitoring, etc.

Posted on by
5

I think many would agree that the biggest obstacle in making continued training progress is experiencing illness or injury. This assumes of course that the programming is appropriate and progressive in nature for the individual. Therefore, monitoring training status is essential to appropriately manipulate training loads in effort to; a) maximize progress and b) avoid set backs. This gives you much more control over the process of training and in many cases can potentially allow you to avoid illness, injury, overtraining etc.

Unfortunately sometimes, illness or injury happens despite careful monitoring. However, it’s how you handle these unfortunate situations with proper training loads that can make a huge difference in continuing where you left off before the incident, or seeing massive performance decrements that take much longer to recover from. I have experienced both situations. I’ve fallen ill and seen my strength plummet for quite some time after the illness. This was most likely from insufficient recovery from before I resumed intense training again, lifting too heavy, too soon. More recently however, I handled illness much more appropriately and have been able to continue from where I left off without suffering significant performance decrements.

ILLNESS

My nephew Kevin and I at the park


When I was visiting some family in Cincinnati this spring I was very excited to see my twin nephews. I hadn’t seen them in over a year since they were born. A few days before they arrived in Cincinnati (coming from New Hampshire) they contracted hand, foot and mouth disease. My sister warned us that it was contagious for anyone who has never had it before. I wasn’t too concerend and we all wanted to see the twins even if it meant getting a little sick. Well, long story short I picked up the virus and it destroyed me. If you’ve ever had this as an adult you know how awful this can be.

My nephew Ethan and I on the back porch

In my chart below you can see a distinct disruption in my HRV trend occuring when I experienced the first symptoms of the illness. On June 9th I woke up with a resting heart rate of 108bpm and an HRV score of 42.9! I had a terrible sleep that night and had a high fever that morning. The fever persisted for about 72 hours at which point I assumed the worst was over. I saw my HRV start to climb back up a bit, however at this point some new symptoms appeared and my HRV again dropped. As you can see in the chart, I didn’t train (the vertical purple bars represent training load). Once all of my symptoms subsided and HRV returned to previous baseline levels I resumed training at very moderate loads (session RPE of 7).

You’ll notice that these moderate loads were apparently very stressful on my body reflected by large HRV fluctuations. Typically a workout rated as a 7 is a deload workout for me. Being able to see my body’s responsiveness to these moderate loads showed me that although my symptoms were gone, my body was still trying to overcome the illness. In the past I likely would’ve resumed intense training once symptoms subsided, however by monitoring HRV, I was able to hold off on more intense loading until my body was capable of handling it sufficiently. You can see that it was nearly 3 weeks until I performed a more intense workout (sRPE 8). I can happily say that althought there was some minor strength loss (bound to happen after nearly 3 weeks of 0-moderate training loads), I was able to gain it all back very quickly unlike previous instances.

Purple Vertical Bars = Training Load
Horizontal Blue Wavy Line = HRV Baseline
Horizontal White Line = Day to Day HRV Fluctuations

Travel/Moving Stress

In the image above on the right hand side of the chart, you will see about a week’s worth of low HRV scores indicated by red and amber deflections. This was the week that I moved from grad school (I completed my Masters) back to Toronto. Clearly this was a very stressful week settling into a new place and dealing with all of the typical issues associated with a move. After appropriately manipulating my training loads (reducing them) I was able to maintain strength and see a return to baseline once I felt settled in. In the past after my first day of being back I likely would’ve continued with intense training. As you can see, this likely would’ve been detrimental to my progress.

Take Home Messages

First and foremost, have an effective monitoring strategy with yourself/athletes. Without one, it’s nearly impossible to make critical manipulations in training load to avoid running into problems. I’m obviously a proponent of HRV and recommend you track yours. Once you have your monitoring in place, have the discipline to reduce loads when you know you should. Sometimes you may not even perceive yourself as being under significant stress, however this is often how people end up hitting a wall with their training. You can’t necessarily ‘feel’ if your adaptive capacity is high or low. In previous posts I showed what happens when you train hard with low HRV. You simply delay recovery and potentially hurt progress.

Think outside the box a little. Training hard for 3 weeks and deloading on the 4th week is pretty standard and for the most part effective. However, just because your program tells you it’s week 3 and therefore you need to train heavy, doesn’t actually meant you HAVE to. I used to do this and thought that if I missed a workout or didn’t hit my goals that day, that I wouldn’t make progress. I’ve learned that the opposite is actually the case.

Lastly, have a plan in place for when certain events occur such as moving or illness. Have a strategy for how you will deal with it (hopefully in response to your monitoring data). This should help you maintain training progress better by allowing your body the appropriate time to recover while imposing loads that remain within your body’s ability to adapt.

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

HRV response to perceived training load – Observations from 2.5 months of data

Posted on by
9

About two months ago the new version of iThlete was released with some really cool new features. These new features included;

  • The ability to rate your sleep on a score of 1-5
  • A comment section that allows you to make notes about the previous day’s events, stressors, etc.
  • The ability to input training loads that appear on your HRV trend chart so you can see how your HRV responds to your training
  • The ability to export data to drop box

Here is a video that shows the updated features;

The most significant addition in my opinion is the ability to track your training loads with your HRV trend. This really puts into perspective how stressful your workouts are. There is no specific method or formula that you have to use for your training load data. There are several methods that have been used in research to quantify training load, some of which I’ll describe below.

Training Impulse (TRIMP) – this is calculated using training duration, maximal heart rate, resting heart rate and average heart rate during the session

Session Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) for Endurance Athletes – Session RPE score x duration of exercise in minutes (for endurance training)

Session Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) for Strength/Power Athletes – Session RPE score x repetitions

*See Borrensen & Lambert (2009) for a more elaborate review and explanation of the above methods.

       Training Volume – Weight Used x Sets x Reps

Other methods exist, but these tend to be the most commonly used. In deciding how I would monitor my training I simply decided to use an RPE of the session, however, not like the method listed above. Instead, I simply rated my workout on a scale of 1-10 based on how hard, or how much effort I put into the session. I would consider volume, strain, RPE of my main sets, how hard I pushed my assistance work and so forth. I realize this isn’t the most valid or reliable measure of training load, but it’s been working well for me.

To give you an idea of how I grade my workouts, see below. This will make interpreting the charts I attach below of my trends much easier.

Session RPE of 10 – 3 or more top sets for my main exercise, RPE of 9-10 for each set, high volume of assistance work (3+ sets to failure), complete exhaustion by workouts end. I have yet to perform a 10 workout and likely never will.

Session RPE of 9 – 2-3 top sets for my main exercise, RPE of 8-10 for each set, moderate volume of assistance work (2-3 sets not to failure), considerable fatigue at end but not exhaustion.

  • I’ll typically perform these workouts when HRV is above baseline

Session RPE of 8 – 1-2 top sets for my main exercise, RPE of 8-9 for each set, low to moderate volume of assistance work (1-3 sets not to failure), moderate fatigue at end

  • I’ll typically perform these workouts when HRV is at the lower end of baseline

Session RPE of 7 – 1 top set for main exercise with an RPE of 8 or less, low volume of assistance work with reduced weight, minimal fatigue at end.

  • I’ll perform this workout when HRV is below baseline with an amber indication (deload)

Session RPE of 5 – No main exercise performed, light weight, moderate volume

  • This is what I’ve been doing on Sunday’s to hit delts and arm’s since I don’t do much work for them during my main sessions on Mon-Wed-Fri

Session RPE of 3 – Active recovery work for 20-40 minutes. This can be in the form of light jogging, sled dragging, circuits, etc.

  • I try and perform these workouts the day after each workout to facilitate recovery and maintain an aerobic base level of conditioning

Session RPE of 1 – Leisurely walk for 30-40 minutes. This can hardly be described as a workout but it’s more than a zero so I will log it when it happens.

  • This happens sometimes instead of an active recovery session.. usually when I’m visiting my folks as we’ll take a lot of walks.

So as you can see there is no sexy formula (I’ve never been a math guy anyway), but I’m pretty consistent and I’ve noticed some fairly common trends in my recovery (based on HRV). Below I have attached a couple screen shots of my HRV Trends with Training Load (Session RPE ala Andrew Flatt). The purple bars reflect training load (9 being the highest you’ll see) while the horizontal trend is my HRV daily fluctuations with the blue line representing my baseline.

Observations:

  • See here and here for previous posts about observations I’ve made from monitoring my HRV
  • A session rated as 9 is almost always going to cause a pronounced drop in HRV the following day. This is why I don’t typically train on consecutive days.
  • If circumstance causes me to train two days in a row, I’ll use a Session RPE of 8. My HRV will usually drop moderately after the first workout out and drop even more after the second one.
  • During the passed 2.5 months I experienced approximately 16 instances where my HRV dropped enough causing an amber or red indication. The majority of these occurred the day after a session and therefore fell on a recovery day.
  • There were 5 days in which a red or amber indication fell on a training day and therefore out of the 2.5 months, I only deloaded for a total of 5 days. In the past I would typically take a week off after every 3 week cycle however with my new system of training I simply deload on a given day when my HRV is well below baseline.
  • The lowest dip on the graph (around 04/20) I purposefully trained harder than normal on a below baseline day (amber indication) to see how my body would react. The next day my HRV dropped even lower with a red indication. This, as well as other incidences from the past solidifies my stance that training hard when HRV is low delays recovery. You’ll see that it takes several days until my HRV gets back up to previous levels. This negatively effects future training sessions. In my opinion, it’s much better to reduce loads for one day to improve the effect of your following sessions as opposed to just training through a bad day and ruining the next few sessions. This is also what has inspired me to stop deloading at pre-determined times for pre-determined periods. There certainly is value in doing this as the body needs time to recover and adapt to weeks of hard training. However, with HRV monitoring, it seems (atleast to me, for right now) that you can get away with just reducing loads on days when HRV is low.
  • I’m presently the leanest I’ve ever been at my current body weight. I’m about 232lbs at 17%. The leanest I’ve ever been is 14.8% at 218 while the heaviest I’ve ever been was nearly 270lbs when I played collegiate football (I’m the ogre in purple below from back in 2006).

  • I’m presently the strongest I’ve ever been at this body weight.
  • I’ve been able to remain injury and illness free since using HRV to guide my training. I no longer experience any tendonitis in my elbows either which used to be a big problem.

Final Thoughts:

I realize that I may appear overly biased towards HRV’s usefulness in my writing. However, I feel that I’ve been training long enough to know when something’s all in my head (placebo) or when it’s actually making a difference. The science supports HRV (see here) and my experience up to and including the present also seems to support it. The whole concept of planning training in advance and sticking to it no matter what is not as effective as manipulating training on a day to day basis according to an objective measure of your body’s current adaptive capacity. This doesn’t mean you can’t have a general plan, it just means that you need to be prepared to make adjustments along the way to ensure the quickest and safest way to reach your training goal. HRV provides, in my opinion, the simplest and most accurate information to allow you to do this. I will continue with this method of monitoring and training since it has been so successful. I’ll be sure to provide another update in a few months.

Thanks for reading.

How to increase HRV: Part 2 – Nutrition

Posted on by
7

In Part 1 of this series I discussed inflammation and its relationship with HRV. Through monitoring my HRV daily I’ve learned that nutrition plays an important role in improving or reducing your adaptive capacity. Eating foods that promote inflammation in the body creates stress that your body must deal with. In dealing with this stress we reduce our ability to adapt and recover from training. Below is a screen shot of my HRV trend over a week of eating large amounts of foods commonly known to promote inflammation. You can see my scores drop each day and only return once I resumed eating better foods. This experience inspired this article series. To discuss the details of nutrition and inflammation I’ve recruited the help of my friend and PhD candidate Marc Morris.

Hi

My name is Marc Morris and I am a PhD student in Nutrition at the University of Saskatchewan. First, I’d like to thank Andrew for the invitation to participate in the discussion surrounding the use of heart rate variability and strength training. The utility of HRV in strength training is very interesting to me. Being a competitive powerlifter, I am always actively seeking ways to improve my training cycles. Truthfully, I don’t know a great deal about this measurement. What I do understand, however, is the potential that exists in a real-time measurement of the autonomic nervous system. Monitored on a daily basis, HRV may provide a tool from which we can objectively auto-regulate our training.

The goal of a dedicated athlete should be to maximize his or her adaptability to training. This is done in part by minimizing unnecessary stress on the body outside of training. From a nutritional standpoint, what you eat (or don’t) can play a significant role in your recovery and adaptability. This is what drew me to nutrition in the first place. Is it possible to improve my performance and body composition through what I consume? Your lifestyle plays a very big role in your training status and may very well be the difference in the transition from mediocre to elite.

We’ve always been told what you eat can effect performance (I’ve also learned that it’s a good idea to learn why you’ve always been told something on your own terms – usually these beliefs fall into the class of dogma). But, outside of eating complete junk and feeling like garbage, this is a tough concept to see and feel. It may not noticeably affect your body composition, it may not affect your energy, but it may be hindering your recovery. Chronic inflammation is not easy to “feel”. At least not until you’ve over done it.

My job today, and hopefully in future occasions, is to discuss how nutrition may influence inflammation, and what you can do to position yourself to be more adaptable in a training cycle. Andrew noticed a decreasing trend in his HRV over a week of entirely uncharacteristic eating (discussed here). This included plenty of processed foods, trans fats, refined carbohydrates and so on. These foods are common culprits of inflammation in the gut. Andrew felt well rested and rated his overall stress levels as low however his diet that week was creating an apparent stress that he couldn’t feel.

In Part 1, Andrew did a great job distinguishing what we know as acute inflammation, our body’s immediate response to injury and infection, and chronic systemic inflammation. As of late, “inflammation” has been a buzzword in most health circles. It has fallen victim to the black and white, all is bad classification. Chronic inflammation is a lingering, low-grade condition that has been linked to just about every health condition in the modern world, from heart disease to cancer. Managing this type of inflammation will help you not only avoid chronic disease in the latter half of your life, but could improve your performance now.

Health professionals may use biomarkers such as C-Reactive Protein (CRP, an acute inflammatory protein) and interleukin-6 (IL-6, a cytokine involved in the inflammatory response) to assess chronic inflammation (despite having a half life of 19-hours, CRP seems to correspond to the chronic condition pretty well). This may be suitable for someone that regularly visits the doctor. But, if you’re a healthy individual these tests will be costly and invasive (blood drawn). Additionally, this type of test won’t allow for an ideal frequency.

The most pronounced effect of diet on inflammation involves the essential fatty acids (EFA). Without going into too much of the physiology about this, the omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids act as substrates in cascades that control inflammatory products (De Caterina and Basta, 2001 [free review]). Neither are bad, per se, however, the typical North American diet contains larger amounts of omega-6 that largely affect the pro-inflammatory pathway. This topic is so vast it deserves an entire blog post itself. The take home message would be: increase omega-3 intake to balance fats by eating fatty fish (or at least supplement with fish oil).

The ingestion of trans-fats have been shown to increase inflammatory markers, such as the aforementioned markers, CRP and IL-6 (Baer et al. 2004). To minimize low-grade chronic inflammation this would be a fatty acid to avoid (Calder et al. 2011). Foods such as pastries, doughnuts, margarine, and other snack foods commonly have high amounts of this unhealthy fat. So, apart from minimizing excess calorie intake, the high trans fat content of “junk” foods and its effect on inflammation is another reason to avoid these.

The last dietary factor I would like to address today would be alcohol. In small doses (1-2 drinks/day), alcohol has consistently shown to have an anti-inflammatory effect. Above this moderate dose, this effect changes to pro-inflammatory. So a glass of red wine every once in a while isn’t such a bad thing. However, going out and having 10 drinks will have some unwanted effects on your recovery (inflammation being only one of many negative effects).

It is important to acknowledge that not everyone is the same. Dietary choices may have a differing inflammatory response in each person. Having said that, below this article there is a chart of foods that are typically anti-inflammatory verses foods that are typically pro-inflammatory.

That’s it for today. In future posts, I’d like to address the macronutrient composition of the diet and the hypothesized mechanisms for dietary related inflammation.

Note: We are reluctant to categorize foods as in many cases it’s effect on the body is conditional. For example, lactose intolerant individuals will have a more adverse reaction to dairy than one who isn’t lactose intolerant. People with gluten sensitivity should obviously avoid gluten. So take this chart with a grain of salt as they are just intended to be generalizations.

Foods That Promote Inflammation

Foods That Reduce Inflammation
Pastries/Doughnuts Ginger
Margarine Tumeric
Dairy Onions
Gluten Garlic
Refined Wheat Products (breads, pastas) Citurs Peel
Peanuts Olive Oil
Hydrogenated Oils Organic, Grass Fed Meats
Vegetable Oil Wild Caught Fish
Grain/Corn Fed Meat and Fish Green Tea
Processed/Deli Meats Green Veggies (Broccoli, Kale)
Sugar Berries

Practical Applications:

  • Try and stick to grass fed meats and wild caught fish
  • Eat plenty of fruits and vegetables
  • Drink tea
  • Use spices and herbs when cooking
  • Use olive oil
  • Try to minimize refined carbohydrate sources

Note: We understand that eating this way isn’t entirely practical for students and busy folks. The key is simply to eat less of the foods you know may be hurting your progress and eat more of the ones you know will help.

References

De Caterina, R., Basta. G. (2001). European Heart Journal Supplements, 3 (Supplement D), D42–D49

Calder, P.C., Ahluwalia, N., Brouns F. et al. (2011). British Journal of Nutrition, 106, S3, 1-78.

Baer, D.J., Judd. J.T., Clevidence, B.A., et al. (2004). American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 79, 969–973

How to increase HRV – Part 1: Inflammation

Posted on by
11

Over the next several posts I’d like to share my thoughts on ways that you can increase your HRV to improve your health, fitness and responsiveness to training. I will tie in some research with anecdotal experience and encourage you to keep in mind that some of this may be a bit theoretical at times. These thoughts are based on my current knowledge level and experience with HRV as well as discussions I’ve had with other like minded individuals (many of which are much more experienced than I).

I’ve spent a lot of time lately reading about the relationship between inflammation and HRV and therefore this will be the focus of today’s discussion. I highly recommend checking out this article where Dr. Miller presents and summarizes some of the research pertaining to nervous system regulation of inflammation and HRV. I don’t yet fully grasp this relationship as the physiology of inflammation can get pretty technical to say the least, but I would still like to offer some thoughts. Before I get into further detail about anything I’ll go over some preliminaries.

What is inflammation?

Inflammation is the protective or destructive response of body tissues to irritation or injury in attempt to maintain tissue homeostasis. Inflammation may be acute or chronic. The hallmark signs of inflammation are; redness, heat, swelling, pain and is often accompanied by loss of function. Too much inflammation or too little inflammation can be indicative of, or lead to a variety of diseases.

At the most basic level inflammation is a sympathetic response. This isn’t exactly black and white however as I’ve come across some research that shows how the SNS can actually play a small role in reducing inflammation in certain organs under certain conditions (Straub et al, 2006). However, for the purpose of this discussion I’ll generalize the SNS as being predominantly involved in inflammatory responses.

Parasympathetic activity on the other hand, modulates inflammation by inhibiting the secretions of pro-inflammatory cytokines (Mravec, 2011). Inflammation is not just caused from physical stress (training, injury, etc) but can also be brought on by; ingesting certain foods, excessive alcohol intake, smoking and exposure to pollution and certain chemicals. It appears that even psychological stress can cause inflammation (Steptoe et al, 2001).

It should be obvious that inflammation is pretty important to one’s survival. Inflammation is a major part of the healing process. For example, inflammation is necessary for hypertrophy (muscle growth) as it participates in protein breakdown, removal of damaged muscle fibers and production of prostaglandins (Pedersen & Hoffman-Goetz, 2000).

To effectively adapt from a stress (like training) we need to allow our body to go through the process of healing itself. In doing so, we increase our tolerance to the initial stressor. With adequate adaptation to strength training, we increase our strength (this applies to endurance, hypertrophy or any other quality you train to develop). So this explains why making sure we are sufficiently adaptable is important.

The simplest and most effective measure of your adaptability in my opinion is through heart rate variability (HRV) monitoring. In short, HRV tells you when your body can tolerate stress well (such as training) and when it can’t. It does so by providing the user with information about the balance of the autonomic nervous system. It does this by measuring the variability between your heart beats over a given period of time.

Generally speaking,

High HRV = low inflammation, good recovery, good testosterone-cortisol ratio, high tolerance to stress (good adaptability) → A green light for training.

Low HRV = an increase in inflammation (not always), insufficient recovery, reduced testosterone-cortisol ratio, low tolerance to stress (poor adaptability) → Reduction or cessation of training suggested.

It can get a little more complicated than this but for now this explanation will suffice.

Back to inflammation…

So even though I just explained why inflammation is important I’ll switch gears here and say that we are not doing ourselves any favors by contributing to further inflammation via nutritional, environmental and/or psychological factors.

Some of this is out of our control such as pollution and mental stress. It can be difficult to control what’s in the air we breathe or the chemicals we absorb from different surfaces and products. We also can’t control our car breaking down or other mentally frustrating events. However, we can control things like what we ingest (and what we don’t for that matter), how much we sleep, our fitness levels, and so forth. Maximizing these controllable variables can really enhance your adaptability by reducing or preventing unnecessary inflammation and/or promoting parasympathetic activity.

The forthcoming installments to this series will focus on ways that can potentially help raise your HRV (nutrition, aerobic work, restoration, massage, etc.).

The plan right now is for the next post to be about nutrition. I’ve enlisted the help of a friend who’s completing his PhD in Nutrition at the University of Saskatchewan to explain how certain foods contribute to inflammation and why this is something we generally want to avoid. I feel that much of the information presented in the next post will really illustrate WHY you should be more conscious about what you eat. As a former athlete and current trainer of athletes I’ve seen what it’s like to be on either side. Athletes know that they’re supposed to eat certain foods and avoid others. But they usually don’t understand why. They have a hard time understanding how what they ate on the weekend can affect their ability to get stronger or faster. We’ll discuss not just the importance of reaching appropriate macronutrients (protein, carbs, fats), but touch on which sources are likely better than others. We’ll touch upon alcohol intake as well since that’s obviously a major factor in the life of college (and let’s be honest, high school) athletes.

Thanks

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