Moving Beyond Distance Alone - A More Nuanced Approach to Training Load in Runners
Key Messages from Paquette, Napier, Willy, and Stellingwerff (2020), Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
This commentary from the Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy argues that runners and coaches should move beyond solely focusing on weekly distance when quantifying and monitoring training load. The authors explain that running distance is only one aspect of training stress and fails to capture the full picture of the mechanical, physiological, and psychological demands of running. They advocate for a more comprehensive approach that considers both external factors such as volume and pace, and internal factors such as perceived exertion and heart rate. The commentary highlights the growing use of wearable technology to measure biomechanical variables during running, which could offer a more accurate understanding of training stress and injury risk. However, the authors caution that research is still needed to determine the best practices for incorporating biomechanical data into training monitoring.
The Problem with Solely Relying on Running Distance
Traditionally, runners and coaches have primarily focused on weekly running distance as the key metric for quantifying training. However, this singular focus on distance overlooks the multifaceted nature of training stress. While running distance does provide some insights into mechanical, cardiovascular, and psychological loads, it's just one piece of the puzzle.
Relying solely on running distance can lead to an underestimation of training stress and fail to capture the nuances of individual athletes' responses to training. The same distance covered can result in significantly different training stresses depending on various factors such as pace, fatigue levels, and running surface.
Alternative Approaches to Quantifying Training Load
To gain a more comprehensive understanding of training stress, coaches should consider alternative approaches that incorporate both external and internal load factors.
External load refers to the mechanical stresses imposed on the athlete during training. Common examples include:
Training Duration
Distance
Running Pace
Ground reaction forces
Ground Contact time
Peak tibial or sacral acceleration
Number of strides in a session
Internal load encompasses the physiological and psychological responses to the external load. These internal responses can vary between individuals and even within the same individual on different days. Key metrics for assessing internal load include:
Heart rate
Heart rate variability
Blood lactate levels
Combining external and internal load metrics provides a more accurate representation of training stress and can help coaches tailor training programmes to individual athletes' needs.
For instance, the Training Impulse method, which considers both sRPE and session duration, is commonly used to quantify training stress. Similarly, monitoring training load by comparing current fatigue (acute stress) to accumulated fitness (chronic stress), such as using the acute-chronic workload ratio, can provide valuable insights into training adaptation and potential injury risks.
Incorporating Biomechanical Metrics for Enhanced Training Load Quantification
The integration of biomechanical data into training load quantification is an emerging area of research that holds great promise. Biomechanical metrics, acting as effect-measure modifiers, can provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between external and internal loads and how they contribute to training stress.
Wearable technology, such as Stryd and Garmin products, offers coaches the opportunity to continuously monitor biomechanical factors during running, including tibial shock, foot-strike angle, ground contact time, and leg stiffness. These data can reveal how running mechanics are influenced by various factors like:
Running surface (e.g., road vs. trail)
Fatigue levels
Footwear
Terrain (e.g., hills vs. flat)
While research in this area is ongoing, the potential benefits of incorporating biomechanical data are significant. It can lead to:
Improved understanding of running-related injury risks: By combining biomechanical data with traditional training load metrics, coaches can potentially identify runners at higher risk of injury and implement preventive measures.
More precise training prescription: Insights into how biomechanics are affected by different running conditions can enable coaches to create more targeted and effective training plans.
However, further research is needed to determine best practices for integrating biomechanical data into training load models, including identifying the most relevant biomechanical variables, establishing classification methods, and determining appropriate weightings relative to other training load metrics.
Implications for Athletics Coaches: Moving Forward
The insights presented in the paper by Paquette et al. have crucial implications for track and field coaches. By moving beyond the sole reliance on running distance, coaches can implement a more holistic approach to training load quantification, ultimately leading to:
Reduced risk of running-related injuries: Accurately assessing training stress and individual athlete responses can help coaches tailor training programmes to minimise injury risk.
Enhanced training adaptations and performance outcomes: A comprehensive understanding of training load can facilitate optimal training progression and maximise athletes' potential.
Key takeaways for coaches:
Embrace a multi-dimensional view of training load: Consider both external and internal load factors when quantifying training stress.
Ask runners to complete a sRPE and monitor training load over time: Track athletes' perceived exertion and use tools like the acute-chronic workload ratio to monitor training adaptation and potential fatigue.
Explore and integrate biomechanical data: Stay informed about advancements in wearable technology and research on biomechanical metrics to enhance your understanding of training load and injury risks.
Educate athletes on the importance of balanced training: Foster a training culture that values recovery and considers individual responses to training loads.
By adopting these principles, track and field coaches can significantly contribute to athletes' well-being, longevity in the sport, and ultimately, their performance success