their highly trained state [reviewed in 5]. Lindsay et al.
[25] examined the effect
of replacing 15% of the cyclists’ normal base training with interval training,
which consisted of 6–8 repetitions × 5 min at an intensity that elicited 80% of
each subject’s peak power output (PPO), interspersed with 60 s of recovery. Af-
ter 6 sessions of HIIT over a 4 weeks’ period, the cyclists improved their peak
power and speed during a 40-km time trial that translated into improved per-
formance (56.4 vs. 54.4 min). Stepto et al. [26] investigated the effect of varying
the intensity and duration of a 3-week (6 sessions) HIIT stimulus on 40-km time
trial performance. Twenty well-trained cyclists were randomly assigned to one
of five types of interval-training session: 12 × 30 s at 175% PPO, 12 × 60 s at 100%
PPO, 12 × 2 min at 90% PPO, 8 × 4 min at 85% PPO, or 4 × 8 min at 80% PPO.
As the authors hypothesized, training sessions that employed work bouts that
were closely matched to race pace (8 × 4 min at 85% PPO) significantly enhanced
performance (2.8%, 95% CI: 4.3–1.3%). Somewhat surprisingly, the short dura-
tion, supra-maximal work bouts (12 × 30 s at 175% of PPO) were just as effective
in improving performance (2.4%, 95% CI: 4.0–0.7%), whereas the other interval
protocols did not produce statistically significant improvements in perfor-
mance. However, the sample size in each group was small (n = 4), and Laursen
et al. [29] have subsequently reported that 40-km time trial performance is im-
proved in trained cyclists after a 4-week HIIT protocol that consists of 8 × ∼2.5
bouts per session at an intensity equivalent to 100% PPO.
The mechanisms responsible for the observed performance improvements
after HIIT in highly trained individuals are likely different compared to less
trained subjects. Whereas rapid increases in skeletal muscle oxidative capacity
are observed after a short period of low-volume HIIT in untrained and recre-
ationally active subjects [2, 11, 12, 17], several weeks of HIIT does not further
increase the maximal activity of mitochondrial enzymes in highly trained indi-
viduals [27, 28]. HIIT has been reported to improve skeletal muscle buffering
capacity in highly trained subjects, and it has also been suggested that training-
induced changes in Na+/K+ pump activity may help to preserve cell excitability
and force production, thereby delay fatigue development during intense exercise
[8].
It has been proposed that a polarized approach to training, in which ∼75% of
total training volume be performed at low intensities, with 10–15% performed
at very high intensities may be the optimal training intensity distribution for
elite athletes who compete in intense endurance events [9]. While it is clear that
many athletes do adopt this approach, there are also examples of highly accom-
plished athletes who complete their continuous ‘steady-state’ training at rela-
141.213.236.110 - 8/2/2013 9:30:29 PM
tively high intensities and who include sustained ‘tempo’ training sessions in
Univ. of Michigan, Taubman Med.Lib.
their weekly program [30]. It would therefore seem appropriate for athletes to
Downloaded by:
High-Intensity Interval Training 57
van Loon LJC, Meeusen R (eds): Limits of Human Endurance.
Nestlé Nutr Inst Workshop Ser, vol 76, pp 51–60, (DOI: 10.1159/000350256) Nestec Ltd., Vevey/S. Karger AG., Basel, © 2013
