Intense Recovery

Over the past several years there has been an emergence of high intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT) for an array of athletes including endurance athletes. There is evidence incorporation of HIIT or SIT workouts may improve endurance capacity and VO2max on par or even more efficiently compared to traditional high-volume low intensity training (Davidson, 2011; Gist et al., 2014; Wahl et al., 2010). Dependent upon the stimuli, homeostatic perturbations including mechanical, metabolic, hormonal, and neuronal ensue.

 Diligence in prescribing the most appropriate and most effective dose to achieve the desired result takes careful consideration. Acute variables such as frequency, intensity and duration may adequately outline the work bouts, yet adding granularity may allow more precision and efficacity to the session. One example of this may be manipulation of the recovery periods in between intervals. Ideally performance capacity is restored as quickly as possible. While we are still learning the exact mechanisms underpinning the array of biological perturbations induced by interval training, mode of recovery likely influences restoration to homeostasis amongst all systems.

Comparing active and passive recovery tactics yields differing results depending on the intervals in question. An example of the alterations in circulating blood cells dependent upon the stimulus, e.g., HIIT or SIT, produce differing responses with an active or passive recovery. Specifically, researchers have demonstrated passive recovery attenuated increases in lymphocytes and neutrophils in comparison to active recovery. Conversely, active recovery in SIT attenuated increases in lymphocytes and neutrophils and mixed cell counts in comparison to passive recovery (Wahl et al., 2019).

So, while you may be tempted to lay on the track one meter beyond your interval finish, the best may bet may lie ahead!