Influence of Different Methods to Determine Maximum Heart Rate on Training Load Outcomes in Basketball Players. Issue 11 (November 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Berkelmans, Daniel M.; Dalbo, Vincent J.; Fox, Jordan L.; Stanton, Robert; Kean, Crystal O.; Giamarelos, Kate E.; Teramoto, Masaru; Scanlan, Aaron T.
• Is Part Of: Journal of strength and conditioning research. Volume 32:Issue 11(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-11
• Subjects: team sport -- summated-heart-rate-zones -- age-predicted -- internal load -- Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test; Physical education and training -- Periodicals; Weight training -- Physiological aspects -- Periodicals; Physical fitness -- Periodicals; 613.7
• DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002291
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1064-8011

Abstract

Abstract : Abstract: Berkelmans, DM, Dalbo, VJ, Fox, JL, Stanton, R, Kean, CO, Giamarelos, KE, Teramoto, M, and Scanlan, AT. Influence of different methods to determine maximum heart rate on training load outcomes in basketball players. J Strength Cond Res 32(11): 3177–3185, 2018—The summated-heart-rate-zones (SHRZ) approach uses heart rate (HR) responses relative to maximum HR (HRmax) to calculate the internal training load (TL). Age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based approaches have all been used to determine HRmax in team sports. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of using age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based HRmax responses on SHRZ TL in basketball players. Semiprofessional, male basketball players ( N = 6) were analyzed during the preparatory training phase. Six age-based approaches were used to predict HRmax including Fox (220 − age); Hossack (206 − [0.567 × age]); Tanaka (208 − [0.7 × age]); Nikolaidis (223 − [1.44 × age]); Nes (211 − [0.64 × age]); and Faff (209.9 − [0.73 × age]). Test-derived HRmax was taken as the highest HR during the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (Yo-Yo IRT), whereas session-based HRmax was taken as the higher HR seen during the Yo-Yo IRT or training sessions. Comparisons in SHRZ TL were made at group and individual levels. No significant group differences were evident between SHRZ approaches. Effect size analyses revealed moderate ( d = 0.60–0.79) differences between age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based methods across the group and individually in 2 players. The moderate differences between approaches suggest age-predicted, test-derived, and session-based methods to determine HRmax are not interchangeable when calculating SHRZ. Basketball practitioners are encouraged to use individualized HRmax directly measured during field-based tests supplemented with higher HR responses evident during training sessions and games when calculating the SHRZ TL to ensure greatest accuracy.