Güreşçilerde Antrenman Yükünün Belirlenmesinde Kullanılan Farklı Yöntemlerin Karşılaştırılması

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 119 - 127, 15.06.2024

Ayşenur Turgut Kaymakcı Ertuğrul Gelen Volkan Sert Taha Erün İbrahim Odunkıran Serhat Kırık

https://doi.org/10.18826/useeabd.1463237

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı da güreş sporunda antrenman yükünü belirlemek için kullanılan yöntemlerin karşılaştırılmasıdır.
Yöntem: Çalışmada 8 erkek elit güreşçi (Yaş 21,6±0,91 yıl; Güreş Yılı, 9,3±1,6 yıl; boy, 172±6,71 cm; Beden Ağırlık, 75,3±12,3 kg) 3 ayrı antrenman seansına katılmıştır. Seansların ilk ikisi aynı yükte iken üçüncü seans yükü tekrar sayıları ve antrenman süresi ile arttırılmıştır. Antrenman yükü, Banister Antrenman Uyaranı (AU), Edwards Antrenman Yükü (AY) ve Seans Algılanan Eforun Derecesi (sAED) ile hesaplanmıştır. Kalp atım hızı (KAH) seanslar boyunca Polar (Verity Sense) nabız bandı ile kaydedilirken sAED ise seanstan 30 dakika sonra alınmıştır. Farklı yöntemlerin seans yükü hesaplamaları arasındaki ilişki Spearman korelasyon analizi ile kontrol edilmiştir. Üç ayrı seansın yükleri ise tekrarlı ölçümlerde Anova ile karşılaştırılmış ve Wilcoxon testi ile farkların hangi değerler arasında olduğu kontrol edilmiştir.
Bulgular: Her bir seansın kendi içinde, yöntemler arasında ilişki bulunmuştur (p<0,05, ρ= 0,786-1,000). İlk iki seans aynı yüklerle yapılmasına rağmen istatistiksel olarak yapılan karşılaştırmalarda Banister AU ve sAED yöntemleri anlamlı fark belirtmezken (p=0,055-0,844, EB= 1,41-0,12 sırasıyla), Edwards AY yöntemi seanslar arasındaki yüklerin farklı olduğu (p=0,039, EB= 1,75) sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.
Sonuç: Her bir seanstaki üç yöntemin birbiri ile ilişkili olması tüm yöntemlerin güreşte antrenmanlarında güvenle kullanılabileceğini gösterirken, Edwards AY yönteminin seanslar arasındaki farkı belirleyememesi bu yöntemin güvenilir olmadığı düşündürtmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Antrenman Uyaranı, Savunma Sporları, Seans Algılanan Zorluk Derecesi, İç yük, Dış Yük, Antrenman İzleme

Destekleyen Kurum

Tübitak

Proje Numarası

1919B012303508

Teşekkür

Tübitak'a desteklerinden dolayı teşekkür ederiz.

Comparison of Different Methods Used in Determination of Training Load in Wrestlers

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the methods used to determine training load in wrestling.
Methods: In the study, 8 male elite wrestlers (Age,21.6±0.91 years; Wrestling Years, 9.3±1.6 years; Height, 172±6.71 cm; Body Weight, 75.3±12.3kg) participated in 3 separate training sessions. The first two sessions had the same training load, while the third training session load was increased by the number of repetitions and training duration. Training load was calculated by Banister Training Impulse (AU), Edwards Training Load (AY) and Session Perceived Exertion Rating (sAED). Heart rate (HR) was recorded with a Polar (Verity Sense) pulse band throughout the sessions, while sAED was taken 30 minutes after the session. The relationship between the sessions load calculations of different methods was checked by Spearman correlation analysis. The loads of the three different sessions were compared by repeated measures ANOVA and Wilcoxon test was used to check between which values the differences were.
Results: Within each session, a correlation was found between the methods (p<0.05, ρ=0.786-1.000). Although the first two sessions were performed with the same loads, Banister AU and sAED methods did not show a significant difference in statistical comparisons (p=0.055-0.844, EB= 1.41-0.12, respectively), while Edwards AY method showed that the loads between sessions were different (p=0.039,EB=1.75).
Conclusion: The correlation of the three methods in each session showed that all methods can be used safely in wrestling training, while the inability of the Edwards AY method to determine the difference between the sessions suggested that this method was not reliable.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Training Stimulus, Defence Sports, Session Rate of Perceived Exertion, Internal Load, External Load, Training Monitoring

Destekleyen Kurum

Tübitak

Proje Numarası

1919B012303508

Teşekkür

Tübitak'a desteğinden dolayı teşekkür ederiz.

Kaynakça

• Arney, B. E., Glover, R., Fusco, A., Cortis, C., de Koning, J. J., Erp, T. et al. (2019). Comparison of RPE (rating of perceived exertion) scales for session RPE. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 14 (7), 994–996 https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0637.
• Banister, E. W. (1991). Modeling elite athletic performance. In Physiological Testing of High-Performance Athletes (D. MacDougall, H. A. Wenger, and H. J. Green, Eds. 2nd ed). Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics Books.
• Bayraktar I., Deliceoğlu G., & Yaman M., Y. Ç. (2012). The Comparison of Some Physical and Physiological Parameters of Sprinters And Throwers with Same Age Wrestlers. Uluslararası Hakemli Akademik Sağlık ve Tıp Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(2), 36–45.
• Bourdon, P. C., Cardinale, M., Murray, A., Gastin, P., Kellmann, M., Varley, M. C. et al. (2017). Monitoring athlete training loads: Consensus statement. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(2), 161–170 https://doi.org/10.1123/IJSPP.2017-0208.
• Buchheit, M. (2014). Monitoring training status with HR measures: Do all roads lead to Rome? Frontiers in Physiology. 5, https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2014.00073.
• Casamichana, D., Castellano, J., Calleja-Gonzalez, J., San Román, J., & Castagna, C. (2013). Relationship between indicators of training load in soccer players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 27(2), 369-374.
• Coutts, A. J. (2014). In the age of technology, occam’s razor still applies. In International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 9(5), 741. https://doi.org/10.1123/IJSPP.2014-0353.
• Crawford, D. A., Drake, N. B., Carper, M. J., Deblauw, J., & Heinrich, K. M. (2018). Validity, reliability, and application of the session-rpe method for quantifying training loads during high intensity functional training. Sports, 6(3), 84 https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6030084.
• Curby, D. G., & Jomand, G. (2015). The Evolution of Women’s Wrestling: History, Issues and Future. International Journal of Wrestling Science, 2-12 https://doi.org/10.1080/21615667.2015.1040536.
• Edwards, S. (1994). The Heart Rate Monitor Book. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 5(3), 454 https://doi.org/10.1249/00005768-199405000-00020.
• Falk Neto, J. H., Tibana, R. A., de Sousa, N. M. F., Prestes, J., Voltarelli, F. A., & Kennedy, M. D. (2020). Session Rating of Perceived Exertion Is a Superior Method to Monitor Internal Training Loads of Functional Fitness Training Sessions Performed at Different Intensities When Compared to Training Impulse. Frontiers in Physiology, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.00919.
• Foster, C., Florhaug, J. A., Franklin, J., Gottschall, L., Hrovatin, L. A., Parker, S. et al. (2001). A New Approach to Monitoring Exercise Training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. https://doi.org/10.1519/1533-4287(2001)015<0109:ANATME>2.0.CO;2.
• Fusco, A., Knutson, C., King, C., Mikat, R. P., Porcari, J. P., Cortis, C., & Foster, C. (2020). Session RPE during prolonged exercise training. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 15(2), 292-294. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2019-0137.
• Haddad, M., Stylianides, G., Djaoui, L., Dellal, A., & Chamari, K. (2017). Session-RPE method for training load monitoring: Validity, ecological usefulness, and influencing factors. In Frontiers in Neuroscience. 11, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00612.
• Halson, S. L. (2014). Monitoring Training Load to Understand Fatigue in Athletes. In Sports Medicine. 44, 139-147 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0253-z.
• Hopkins, W. G., Marshall, S. W., Batterham, A. M., & Hanin, J. (2009). Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. In Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 41(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e31818cb278.
• Lupo, C., Capranica, L., & Tessitore, A. (2014). The validity of the session-RPE method for quantifying training load in water polo. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 9(4), 656-660. https://doi.org/10.1123/IJSPP.2013-0297
• Lupo, C., Capranica, L., Cortis, C., Guidotti, F., Bianco, A., & Tessitore, A. (2017). Session-RPE for quantifying load of different youth taekwondo training sessions. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 57(3), 189-94 https://doi.org/10.23736/S0022-4707.16.06021-X
• Mangine, G. T., Van Dusseldorp, T. A., Feito, Y., Holmes, A. J., Serafini, P. R., Box, A. G. et al. (2018). Testosterone and cortisol responses to five high-intensity functional training competition workouts in recreationally active adults. Sports, 6(3), 12 https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6030062
• Padulo, J., Chaabène, H., Tabben, M., Haddad, M., Gevat, C., Vando, S. et al. (2014). The construct validity of session RPE during an intensive camp in young male Karate athletes. Muscles, Ligaments and Tendons Journal, 7(6), 125 https://doi.org/10.11138/mltj/2014.4.2.121
• Shaw, J. W., Springham, M., Brown, D. D., Mattiussi, A. M., Pedlar, C. R., & Tallent, J. (2020). The Validity of the Session Rating of Perceived Exertion Method for Measuring Internal Training Load in Professional Classical Ballet Dancers. Frontiers in Physiology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.00480
• She, J., Nakamura, H., Makino, K., Ohyama, Y., & Hashimoto, H. (2015). Selection of suitable maximum-heart-rate formulas for use with Karvonen formula to calculate exercise intensity. International Journal of Automation and Computing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-014-0824-3
• Slimani, M., Davis, P., Franchini, E., & Moalla, W. (2017). Rating of perceived exertion for quantification of training and combat loads during combat sport-specific activities: A short review. In Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002047
• Tabben, M., Tourny, C., Haddad, M., Chaabane, H., Chamari, K., & Coquart, J. B. (2015). Validity and reliability of the session-RPE method for quantifying training load in karate athletes. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000477429.41094.00
• Tabben, Montassar, Sioud, R., Haddad, M., Franchini, E., Chaouachi, A., Coquart, J., Chaabane, H. et al. (2013). Physiological and perceived exertion responses during international karate kumite competition. Asian Journal of Sports Medicine, 4(4), 263-271 https://doi.org/10.5812/asjsm.34246.
• Tanaka, K., & Matsuura, Y. (1984). Marathon performance, anaerobic threshold, and onset of blood lactate accumulation. Journal of Applied Physiology Respiratory Environmental and Exercise Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1984.57.3.640.
• Tibana, R. A., de Sousa, N. M. F., Cunha, G. V., Prestes, J., Fett, C., Gabbett, T. J. et al. (2018). Validity of session rating perceived exertion method for quantifying internal training load during high-intensity functional training. Sports. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6030068.
• Timón, R., Olcina, G., Camacho-Cardeñosa, M., Camacho-Cardenosa, A., Martinez-Guardado, I., & Marcos-Serrano, M. (2019). 48-hour recovery of biochemical parameters and physical performance after two modalities of CrossFit workouts. Biology of Sport. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2019.85458.