Key result
Relative heart rate responses and ratings of perceived exertion during standardized training sessions were comparable between masters and young cyclists (P > .05).
Why the study?
Due to age-related changes in the psychobiological state of masters athletes, this study aimed to compare training load responses using heart rate and perceived exertion between masters and young cyclists.
Do heart rate training load and perceptual effort differ between masters and young cyclists during standardized training sessions?
Observational (n=18)
Do heart rate training load and perceptual effort differ between masters and young cyclists during standardized training sessions?
Relative heart rate responses and perceived exertion can be used interchangeably to monitor training load in both masters and young cyclists irrespective of chronological age.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports using relative HR and RPE interchangeably to monitor training load across ages; leaves open confirmation in prospective cohorts.
PURPOSE: Due to age-related changes in the psychobiological state of masters athletes, this brief report aimed to compare training load responses using heart rate (HR) and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) during standardized training sessions between masters and young cyclists. METHODS: Masters (n = 10; 55.6 [5.0] y) and young (n = 8; 25.9 [3.0] y) cyclists performed separate endurance and high-intensity interval training sessions. Endurance intensity was set at 95% of ventilatory threshold 2 for 1 hour. High-intensity interval training consisted of 6 × 30-second intervals at 175% peak power output with 4.5-minute rest between intervals. HR was monitored continuously and RPE collected at standardized time periods during each session. Banister training impulse and summated-HR-zones training loads were also calculated. RESULTS: Despite a significantly lower mean HR in masters cyclists during endurance (P = .04; d = 1.06 [±0.8], moderate) and high-intensity interval training (P = .01; d = 1.34 [±0.8], large), no significant differences were noted (P > .05) when responses were determined relative to maximum HR or converted to training impulse and summated-HR-zone loads. Furthermore, no interaction or between-group differences were evident for RPE across either session (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: HR and RPE values were comparable between masters and young cyclists when relative HR responses and HR training load models are used. This finding suggests HR and RPE methods used to monitor or prescribe training load can be used interchangeably between masters and young athletes irrespective of chronological age.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Borges et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Healthy cyclists (n=18). Standardized training sessions (endurance and high-intensity interval training) vs. Young cyclists vs Masters cyclists was evaluated on Relative heart rate responses and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) (p=>.05). Relative heart rate responses and ratings of perceived exertion during standardized training sessions were comparable between masters and young cyclists (P > .05).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: