Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper was concerned with the periodization training and its impact on athletic fitness and performance. The quasi-experimental study involved 24 track and field athletes in secondary schools aged 11-18. Muscular strength and endurance were measured by using sit-ups, trunk extensions, left hip extensions, 35-meter sprints, and vertical jumps. The experimental group was given the 6-week periodized training plan: they were presented with warming-up or conditioning exercises to prepare the body to undergo the training process, and then all activities of the periodized training plan were performed according to the linear periodization model, and ended with cool-down exercises to restore the body. The untreated group was the control group. Therefore, running performance and fitness in the experimental group were more than in the control group owing to the training program. Training periodically improved physical fitness more than conventional training and muscle-specific training, which improved athletic performance. The conclusions made in the study have implications for coaches, trainers, players, and policymakers. They suggest specific training programs, identifying who might need additional assistance, and using control groups to evaluate them accordingly. The findings can assist decision makers in promoting sports among athletes and the general population. Going by the findings, trainers are to develop muscle-group-specific training programs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Erwin R. Mañalac (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: