To improve physical performance, running fast is slightly more effective than running far. But what really matters is recovery.
- The WHO recommends that adults get 30 minutes of physical activity at least 5 days a week.
- Regular physical activity reduces the risk of overweight, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease and falls.
If you have made a New Year’s resolution to run at least three times a week, you may be wondering if it is better to run at your own pace and last a long time, or to favor fast running sessions over a longer period of time. short ? Rest assured: both methods will improve your physical performance.
This is the conclusion of researchers from the University of Jyväskylä (Finland) after comparing two-week blocks of low-intensity training and high-intensity interval training in terms of performance and recovery. . The results, published in the journal Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, show that both methods improve endurance performance in recreational athletes after two weeks. But on one condition: that the training is considerably increased compared to what the individual is accustomed to.
Two approaches with equivalent results
Most distance runners favor a weekly routine that consists of a mix of low-intensity training and moderate-to-high intensity training: what’s known as interval training.
But according to this new study, block periodization with a more focused training goal during a single period may also have its benefits. The researchers recruited men and women between the ages of 20 and 45 who exercised recreationally. They were divided into 15 per group: on 300m running tests, they either increased the volume of low intensity training by 70% or performed 10 sessions of 6 3-minute intervals (5 times a week) for two weeks.
“Both groups improved their running performance over 3000m immediately after bouldering, explains Olli-Pekka Nuuttila, lead author. The interval group improved by an average of 13 seconds and the low intensity group by 11 seconds. The same trend was seen after the recovery week: the time in the interval group was on average 19 seconds faster from baseline and in the low intensity group the difference was 17 seconds. No statistically significant difference was observed between the groups.”
Better recovery in the low intensity group
The researchers also took recovery into account, and found differences in the two groups. In the interval group, they saw an increase in muscle soreness. This is due to the concentration levels of norepinephrine, a stress hormone, which remained high after the week of recovery. This same group also showed nocturnal variability in heart rate compared to the low intensity group.
“Based on the recovery markers we measured, interval blocking seemed more demanding than low-intensity blocking, summarizes Professor Nuuttila. Therefore, it would be important to ensure sufficient recovery, especially after such a period. It is also recommended to monitor recovery at least via subjective markers during these types of blocks to avoid excessive impairment of recovery status.”
.