Introduction

In sports sciences the progression of increased knowledge is the resulted of different criteria within
for organizing training programs which is often dominated by the trend to design workouts based on
the specific adaptation and outcomes achieved throughout the training process. Therefore, athletes
can pursue performance progressions with more complex or effective training modalities only once
they have achieved progressive basic adaptations (Fernando, Jeremyand and Mark, 2013).
Training is the process of an athlete for prepared to reach the highest level of performance (Bompa
and Haff,2009). According to Bompa and Haff, 2009) in training theory the main concepts is
Periodization.

The modern periodization was developed in the Soviet Union around the time of the Russian
revolution by Russian physiologist Leo Matveyv in the 1960s (Michael et.al., 2016 and Fernando,
Jeremyand and Mark, 2013). Matveyev summarized the modern concept of periodization dividing
the training year into distinct phases, each with different characteristics and special application to
train endurance or strength and power athletes (Siff, 2004). The fundamental concepts presented by
Matveyev were applied to the preparation of many sports such as track and field, swimming,
rowing, cycling, skiing, weightlifting or skating (Issurin, 2010; Siff, 2004).

According to Issurin, periodization means “the subdivision of the seasonal program into smaller
periods and training cycles (3, pg. 191).” Periodization is used to promote long-term training and
performance improvements. It is a design strategy that includes preplanned, systematic variations in
training specificity, intensity, and volume organized in periods or cycles within an overall program.
It is encouraged to be used as a year-long plan that is broken into smaller time increments. The
entirety of the schedule should include all aspects of an athlete’s program, including general
conditioning, sport-specific activities, and resistance training (Michael et.al., 2016).

Periodization is a core scientific concept of training theory and methodology, and is widely
acclaimed as being beneficial in exercise prescription, both for performance and health purposes
(Issurin, 2008; Naclerio et al., 2013). It consists of the “systematic planning and structuring of
training variables throughout designated training timeframes aimed at maximizing performance
gains and minimizing the potential for overtraining or decrements in performance” (Harries et al.,
2015, p. 1113). As its definition implies, periodization requires training variation (Gamble, 2006),
but extends well beyond that. Indeed, it aims at achieving peak performances in certain, pre-
specified periods in time (Fleck, 2008; Turner, 2011), while also avoiding overtraining and reducing
the risk of injury (Naclerio et al., 2013).

DEFINING PERIODIZATION AND BASIC PROCEDURES

Periodization simply defined as the planning and organization of training (Turner, 2011). Fernando,
Jeremy and Mark (2013) also defined Periodization as the methodical planning and structuring of
training process that involve a logical and systematic sequencing of multiple training variables
(intensity, volume, frequency, recovery period and exercises) aimed to optimize specific
performance outcomes at predetermined time points.
Periodization should not only focus on performance but also on athlete’s development and injury
prevention (Haff, 2013). Although, several periodization models have been proposed across
different sports and competitions structures (Fernando, Jeremy and Mark, 2013). Periodization
should not be considered a simply training variation strategy but an appropriate sequencing and
integration of different training variables involving volume, intensity, frequency, recovery periods
and exercises selection. Thus the main objective of periodization will be to achieve the desired
outcomes and training gains at the predetermined time point within the training process (Haff,
2013). And periodization used to manage the training stimulus in order to maximize the desired
neuromuscular adaptions and avoid excessive accumulation of fatigue. By constructing a periodized
a blueprint based around key competitions, this allows the coach to schedule when specific qualities
can be developed and when fatigue will need to be minimized (DeWeese et al., 2015).
Periodization represents an optimal modality for organizing training programs in athletes,
recreational and rehabilitative practitioners and the procedure should be based on the athlete’s age,
level of performance, specific goals or competition characteristics (Fernando, Jeremy and Mark,
2013).
A common theme throughout all periodization paradigms is the requirement to manipulate the entire
program variables (intensity, volume, frequency, recovery periods and exercise selection) in order to
progress from general to a more sport-specific training, dissipate fatigue and reduce the risk of
injury. Although further scientific evidences are required, the understanding of periodization
methodology including the appropriate procedure for designing sessions, microcycles and
mesocycles is of

An Overview of the Major Models and Concepts Associated with Periodization.

Periodisation is considers the progression from more general, less specific training into more sport-
specific training. Models will typically refer to two phases: the preparatory phase and the
competitive phase (Bompa & Carrera, 2005). The preparatory phase can then be subdivided into
general physical preparation (GPP) and specific physical preparation (SPP) phases (Matveyev,
1981).

Application of linear periodization

Linear periodisation typically progresses through three training mesocycles in a step-wise manner
based upon the goal of that mesocycle: a) hypertrophy-focus, b) strength-focus, and c) power-focus
(Turner, 2011). This would then be followed by a tapering mesocycle leading into competition.
The step-wise system better reflects two key points. First, the fact that a mesocycle will typically
focus on the development of one key bio-motor at a time. Second, the idea that volume will
normally increase within a mesocycle despite the trend for a decrease over the macrocycle.

The evolution of linear periodisation

The step-wise progression of volume and intensity across multiple mesocycles and macrocycles will
follow a linear trend – i.e. progressive overload – real-world periodisation rarely conforms to classic
linear models.

Two systems perhaps better explain linear periodisation in action:

 Block periodisation
 Conjugate periodisation
Block periodisation
Block periodisation is based on the writings of Vladimir Issurin. This system involves the cycling of
mesocycles containing specific, highly concentrated mesocycles designed to maximise the potential
for adaptation (Issurin, 2016). Block periodisation referred to as accumulation (volume-based),
transmutation (intensity-based) and realisation (tapering).
Block periodisation can be performed in two ways dependent upon the number of bio-motors that
will need to be developed for optimal performance.

Unilateral block periodisation

A concentrated unidirectional block approach aims to maximally develop one leading bio-motor
over the course of the macrocycle (Issurin, 2016). Each individual mesocycle will then focus on the
development of one quality on the road to developing that overarching bio-motor.
The sequencing of each mesocycle is designed to potentiate the next (Siff, 2004) Multi-targeted
block periodisation
A multi-targeted block approach seeks to develop multiple bio-motors in a consecutive, not
simultaneous, manner through sequencing specialised training blocks (Issurin, 2016).
Conjugate periodisation
Conjugate periodisation is based on the writings of Yuri Verkhoshansky. In line with the definition
of CU block periodisation, the system involves the successive introduction of concentrated
mesocycles in order to elicit the greatest cumulative training effect (Siff, 2004). In the conjugate
system, these blocks are termed accumulation and restitution (Plisk & Stone, 2003). In line with the
definition of MT block periodisation, the system will typically aim to maintain additional bio-
motors in a deemphasised fashion.
One aspect of the conjugate system that appears to be more emphasised than in the block system is
the nature of the long-term delayed training effect. Accumulation blocks are designed to infer a
period of functional overreaching before fatigue is dissipated during the restitution blocks and
greater adaptations may now be realised (Plisk & Stone, 2003).
Concurrent periodisation
Concurrent periodisation seeks to develop multiple bio-motors simultaneously. Typically each bio-
motor is with a similar degree of emphasis, but this this is not always the case.

Non-linear approaches
In non-linear models, training volume and intensity are varied within the mesocycle or microcycle.
These strategies can be termed wither weekly undulating periodisation (WUP) or daily undulating
periodisation (DUP), with utilisation of the latter much more commonplace.

Organisation of Training program

Training can be divided into several structural units, as defined by Zatsiorsky and Kraemer (2006):

 Training session – refers to a single unit of training.

 Microcycle – refers to a group of training sessions. Typically, although not always, one-
week in duration to fit with the Gregorian calendar.
 Mesocycle – refers to a group of microcycles. Typically two- to six-weeks in length.
 Phase – refers to specific portions of the season. Typically divvied into preparatory and
competitive phases
 Macrocycle – refers to one entire competitive season. Typically, a year in length given
typical sporting calendars.
 Appropriate manipulation of all training variables should be considered at all levels within the
training process (workout, day by day, microcycle, mesocycle and macrocycle, year and multi-
year training plan) (Fernando, Jeremy and Mark, 2013). Variation should never be excessive or
randomly applied rather it has to be introduced considering the interrelation and sequencing of
each training variable (Haff, 2013).

The periodization approach is based on breaking the training plan into specific interrelated
periods of time which are structured to meet specific goals (Haff, 2013). This procedure
provides the opportunity for a systematic, organized method to all training in terms of several
basic structural units, namely the training sessions which are the fundamental unit, the
microcycles, mesocycles and macrocycles (figure 1). In addition to this, there are more extended
cycles such as Olympic or quadrennial cycles that consider long time preparation for athletes
(Siff, 2004).

Figure 1. Basic component of training plan. T: transition period.

 ANNUAL PLAN, MACROCYCLES, AND PHASES

Depending on the sports and athletes characteristics, there are several variants for developing
annual training plans (Fernando, Jeremy and Mark, 2013).
Macrocycles
The Macrocycle is generally referred to a single competitive season. One macrocycle involves a
number of mesocycles that in addition can be assigned to specific period or phases: Preparatory
(general and specific), competitive and transition (Bompa & Haff, 2009). In some cases as in the
Olympic programs, macrocycles can run over a 4 years cycle (Turner, 2011). Macrocycles are
structured to contain the entire season of training. Thus, is not an annual training plan, for
example, some sports such as swimming or boxing can contain multiple seasons or macrocycles
over the annual calendar (Haff, 2013).
Preparatory phase: Depending upon the length of the macrocycle, type of sport and athletes level
of performance, this phase can last for more than 2 until 6 month. Even if this phase is usually
broken down into a general and specific preparation, both general and specific sub phases should
be always considered interconnected unit (Siff, 2004).
The General preparatory phase is aimed to provide fundamentals physical and technical
conditioning (basic strength, endurance, flexibility and basic motor skills) in order to support the
further development of the specific capacities and motor sport skills (Siff, 2004; Verchoshansky,
1996). In general more advanced athletes will depend less on this phase compared to less prepared
or novice athletes (Haff, 2013).
Conversely the specific preparatory phase is aimed to translate the previously established fitness
gains into very specific performance characteristics (Fernando, Jeremy and Mark, 2013). This sub
phase is focused to develop specific sports capacities while maintaining the general performance
achieved during the previous general phase. Its length is longer in high performance athletes (Haff,
2013; Verchoshansky, 1996).

Competitive phase: Used to develop the specific competitive sport skills meanwhile maintaining
the general physical performance achieved at the end of preparatory phase. During this phase
athletes reduce the general conditioning preparation while emphasise more skill-based
conditioning activities focused on technical or tactical preparedness for competition (Haff,
2013).

Transition Phase: Crucial linking structure used to bridge macrocycles or annual training plans in
which athletes have the opportunity to recover from the previous training cycle (Haff, 2013).
Athletes should not completely stop training but reduce load and minimize the emphasis on
sports specific skills. In general this phase last for 2 to 4 weeks (Haff, 2013; Siff, 2004).

Mesocycles
Medium duration training cycles that typically contains more than two to six interrelated
microcycles. These microcycles serve as a recurring unit over a period of several weeks along
the mesocycle extension (Plisk & Stone, 2003; Turner, 2011). As the mesocycle configure the
minimum required period of time needed to produce a measurable and relatively stable
adaptation, this special period has been denominated “biocycle of adaptation” (Zatsiorsky &
Kraemer, 2006). A biocycle configure the functional units of the season which usually involve
between 4 and 6 weeks or microcycles (Turner, 2011). Every microcycle within each particular
mesocycle should have its own specific objectives, which have to be consistently integrated with
the general purpose of the entire mesocycle and phase. Therefore, the mesocycle involves a
specific and fundamental period of time over which the training objectives should be
subsequently established across the season (Verkhoshansky, 1998).

Microcycle
This structure targets very specific training objectives that serve as basic for achieving the goals
set forth the mesocycle structure (Haff, 2013). A Microcycle involves a number of training
sessions appropriately interrelated in order to reach one or more specific objectives. It is
generally accepted that a microcycle can range from a few days to 14 days in length (McHugh &
Tetro, 2003), with the most common length being 7 days (Turner, 2011). The microcycle
duration will depend on its characteristic. For example, a restorative
microcycle can last from a few to 7 or more days but shock or impact microcycles usually extend
for more than 7 to 14 days (Siff, 2004).

Mesocycles as the basic structure of training process

Periodization should not be considered as a rigid concept and perhaps more as a framework
within an interdisciplinary support team can be able to design a program for a specific
performance or training goal. This model also lends itself to the establishment of training and
performance objectives, emphasis of training and test standards for each determined period of
training, thereby eliminating the random approach that may lead to excessive increases of
training loads, and insufficient regeneration (Smith, 2003).

The modern scientific foundation of sports sciences support the criteria by which the
organization of the entire training process should be designed on the basis of specific aims
athletes are required to achieve throughout the training process (Verkhoshansky, 1998).
Therefore, the guidelines for driving the training process should be based on the summation of
positive accumulated after-effects thorough the different mesocycles and phases. For example,
the development of explosive strength should be based on the maximal strength performances
achieved from previous phases. Thus the positive outcomes of preceding training periods will
result in more unidirectional elevation of performance to a higher and more stable work capacity
(Siff, 2004). Strength and power together with endurance are important in terms of basic
physiological capacities in many athletes (Siff, 2004). In soccer and others team sports, a
minimum level of maximal strength is usually connected with an improvement of power, sprint
and specific skills performance (Hoff, 2006) in addition to a less injury rates (Reilly et al., 2008).
This required level of maximal strength has been associated with a performance close to 2 kg per
kg of body mass in parallel squat (Hoff, 2006). Thus, by increasing the available force at the end
of preparatory period, team athletes would be better prepared for supporting specific
performance enhancement and reduce injury rate during competition.

Mesocycles organization
There are three fundamental unit of training that need to be distinguished: Macrocycle,
mesocycles, and the microcycles. As stated above, the preparatory period usually involves two
phases (general and specific) each of one can involve between one or two mesocycles assigned to
reach different conditioning or technical outcomes (Siff, 2004).

Mesocycles usually are composed of three to five microcycles where the final one serves as a
recovery and restoration stage (Plisk & Stone, 2003; Siff, 2004; Stone et al., 2007). There are
several forms of microcycle combinations or loading paradigms available, however these can be
developed over time based on the coach/athlete relationship and understanding of adaptation to
training stress (figure 2).
 Figure 2. Example of different microcycles pattern paradigms.

In a ‘2 x 1’ model, progressive loading increase for two microcycles followed by one with
progressive decrease or lighter loading is the normal procedure. A ‘3 x 1’ model shows a
progressive increase for the first three microcycles followed by a forth with a significant reduced
load. This model is the most popular loading paradigm (Turner, 2011). The load progressively
increase through the first three microcycles and decreases during the fourth one with the aim of
restoration. The recovery microcycle reduces fatigue and thus allows adaptations to occur across
the overall mesocycle (Stone et al., 2007). This structure would favour a super-compensation
expression during the subsequent fifth microcycle.

Depending of the amount of fatigue accumulated during the first three microcycles, the fourth or
restorative can be shorted to 3 or 4 days (Stone et al., 2007). In this case it is possible to include a
fifth microcycle involving two to three days for assessing the athletes’ performance (figure 3).
The results obtained from the fifth microcycle would be used to establish and design the
objectives and training programs for the subsequent mesocycles or phases. This methodical
monitoring will objectively indicates the development of the training process, allowing coaches
to quantify its efficiency and supporting an athlete motivation (Verchoshanski, 1999).
 Figure 3. Theoretical representation of 3 x 1 plus a control mesocycle
paradigm.

Considering mesocycles as a key period where measurable effects can be assessed, only after
gaining a greater understanding of how an individual athlete adapts and responds to the applied
training stimulus (load/volume/intensity/frequency/duration) a coach will be in a position to
establish a realistic objective for the next phase and design the most appropriate training method
for the following mesocycles or phases (Verkhoshansky, 1998). This procedure would allow a
coherent mesocycle connection where the outcomes achieved at the end of each biocycle provide
the framework and support for further increase in the athletes’ performance (Viru, 1995;
Zatsiorsky et al., 2006). Therefore, the success of training process as a whole will depend on a
full understanding of the objectives and the most appropriate individualized training
methodology to get the proposed results for each specific phase.

Microcycles characteristics configure and determine mesocycles goals

Microcycle constitute the basic unit of mesocycles providing their characteristics. Microcycles
are essential tools that permit an adequate control of training variable (volume, intensity,
recovery periods, frequency and exercise selection) in order to establish priorities at any stage of
the training process (Platonov, 2001). Throughout the annual plan, the nature and dynamic of
microcycles will change according to the phase of training, objectives, physiological and
psychological demands of the different sporting activities (Bompa & Haff, 2009).

Each microcycle involves specific numbers of sessions that have to be coherently organised and
effectively sequenced. The organisation of the loading, and associated characteristics of every
session within the microcycle should be established in accordance with the specific objectives of
each microcycle and the general goals of the entire mesocycle. Therefore, the selected training
activities have to allow athletes to train at the required level of performance for achieving the
expected training outcomes (Smith, 2003).

Session as a basic unit of microcycles

A session is the key element for organising the daily programs (Bompa & Haff, 2009). Although
sessions tend to be the smallest components within a periodized plan, in more complex and
advanced programs
design a session can include several small numbers of training units (Platonov, 2001). Training
sessions and their composition are the primary requirement for the configuration of microcycles,
providing them with their final appearance and detailed characteristics (Siff, 2004). However, it
is important to highlight that the definitive design of both sessions and microcycle have to be
based on the mesocycle main objectives.

Depending on the dominant factor and the dynamic correspondence, each session can be
allocated into the following three main groups:
 Physical conditioning: These sessions are specifically oriented to develop physical
capacities such as strength, explosiveness, speed, flexibility, and aerobic or anaerobic
endurance. In addition these can be aimed to assess or control the athletes’ level of
performance.
 Technical: These sessions are focused on learning and technique and therefore should not
be performed in fatigue state. Fatigue not only has the potential to hinder the learning
process but can also induce negative outcomes related to the assimilation of incorrect
motor patterns (Bompa & Haff, 2009).
 Tactical: Involves specific sports actions with correct technique, motor control and
knowledge of the dynamic roles and basic structure of the sports. These sessions are
often emphasised in high performance athletes as opposed to novice athletes who would
usually focus on the progression of physical conditioning and the development of
technical proficiency.
It is important to highlight that both technical and tactical sessions will contribute to the imposed
physiological and mechanical demand on the athletes’ body depending on the sport specific
requirements and the intensity of the assigned training task.
The effect of any training session is determined by the orientation of training load (Oca &
Navarro, 2011). Load orientation will depend on two main factors:
 Qualitative, refers to the predominant physical capacity to be trained. From a
physiological point of view this variable is identified by the intensity of exercise (Smith,
2003).
 Quantitative, refers to the amount of work performed and is related to the volume. The
amount of volume athletes can perform within a given intensity is highly related with the
 athlete’s level of performance (Kuznetsov, 1989).

To obtain the desired adaptation at the end of each mesocycle or phase, several sessions with
similar qualitative orientation although often, with a different volume, must be repeated several
times (Bompa & Haff, 2009). Regardless of the quality, each training session can be classified
according the assigned volume as low, moderate, high and maximal (Platonov, 2001). For this
classification the individual maximum tolerated volume for a given intensity is considered the
100%. Thereby the amount of work allocated for low (~30%), moderate (>30% to 60) and high
(>60% to 80) will be determined in accordance with the corresponding maximum (Kuznetsov,
1989). These volumes are also connected with the main athletic preparation objectives:
maintenance, activation, regain and increase performance. Table 1, depicts the principal
characteristics of low, moderate, high or maximal volume sessions, their most common
allocation within the microcycle and supposed effects on performance (Kuznetsov, 1989;
Platonov, 2001).
 Table 1. Training session characteristics Insert Table 1 near here.

Amount of the
Reccomended
Volume work (%) respect Principal objectives
allocation within the
to the maximum
microcycle
tolerated load After hard trainng
10% Activate or session (first session
Low
15 to 30% potentiate Maintain after shock
performance microcycle),
More frequentor the end
in
Moderat 40-60% Regain or slow introductory
e performance microcycles or in the
Moderateimprovement
performance middle of
>60 to 70% increase (non effective in Usually applied at the
elite athletes) start and the middle of
High
standard and shock
Higher increase of performance microcycles
>70 to 80%
(applied for most important Only one for standard
Maximal >80 to 100% Maximum stimulation for microcycles and until
expecting the higher degree of two or three for shock
improvement microcycles
Time of recovery between sessions
To some extent, the majority of sports require training of several motor abilities involving
different degrees of speed, strength, and endurance. Performed abilities will demand a particular
pattern of energy system contribution as well as different levels of neural and mechanical stress.
This is because the rate of recovery will be different depending not only on the training workout
characteristics (Bompa & Haff, 2009) but also upon the allocation of any particular session
inside the microcycle. Such factors will significantly influence the recovery process of individual
athletes (Platonov, 2001). The effect of a maximum volume session is substantially different
from that determined by high, moderate or low volume (figure 4). After a low volume session the
recovery process could take anything from a few minutes to a few hours, for a moderate volume
session between 12 hours and one or even two days depending on the session quality (performed
capacity), for example: high intensity with great metabolic demand such as anaerobic endurance
could require up to two days of recovery, explosive strength with light load would need a
minimum of one day, meanwhile in the case of light intensity endurance, 12 or 18 hours could be
sufficient (Platonov, 2001). High volume training load requires a longer recovery period than
moderate and low but significantly less when compared with a maximum volume session or
competition where up to four days have been shown to be necessary for a complete recovery in
team sports athletes (McLean et al., 2010). In elite athletes, high volume load could not produce
benefits to increase performance and it would be necessary for several high or maximum volume
sessions to occur in order to induce small benefits (Platonov, 2001). As a general
orientation, after a high volume session, depending on both, the predominant energetic pathway
and the physical stimulated capacity (strength, speed or endurance), one, two or three days would
be required for recovery. For example, one day could be enough after a flexibility or a light
intensity endurance workout; two days seems to be adequate for an explosive strength or
moderate intensity aerobic endurance workout, meanwhile more than two days would be
necessary for speed, maximal strength, hypertrophy, high intensity endurance (near maximal
aerobic speed) or anaerobic-glycolytic endurance (Platonov, 2001). In addition, the success of a
periodized plan is based on an optimal sequence of maximal; high; moderate and low volume
sessions with different orientation throughout the microcycles. The appropriate organization of
session will facilitate recovery and the expected positive adaptation to different training loads
(Graham, 2002).

Figure 4. Theoretical effect of low, moderate, high and maximum volume session on
performance.

Session orientation
When designing a single training session, maximal intensity and maximal strength training
should always precede endurance (Chiu & Bernes, 2003). The onset of fatigue with more
endurance oriented exercises is nearly immediate, as opposed to maximal intensity and strength,
where the potentiation after-effect can offset the effect of fatigue especially if low volume is
performed (Chiu & Bernes, 2003; Tillin & Bishop, 2009). Authors have speculated that this is
because explosive, speed and more technical or tactical related activities should be performed
first, leaving the more endurance related exercise for the end part of the workout (Chiu &
Bernes, 2003; Verchoshansky, 1996).

In team sport, complex sessions involving several physical, technical or tactical tasks are a
common practice (Bompa & Haff, 2009; Platonov, 2001). In such cases it is advisable to apply
low volume load for each of the combined capacities. Moderate load can be an alternative when
coaches wish to focus in one special preparation over another, (perhaps technical or tactical in
the last few days before a competition) (Platonov, 2001). When using complex sessions, coaches
must be aware that the summation of three or four different activities can easily determine high
or maximum volume of training, which may, as a result,
require longer recovery periods. Such an example can occur in team sports with one or two
competition per week. Complex sessions involving more than three or four capacities should be
trained toward the middle of microcycle when there is enough time for appropriate recovery
before the match.

Types of Microcycles
As the specific microcycle design will determine their global effects and outcomes achieved at
the end of the planned mesocycles, their structure should be considered in the context of
mesocycles and based on the sports demand and individual athletes’ requirements (Platonov,
2001).

In general it is possible to distinguish between five types of microcycles: 1) introductory or

applied; 2) standard or ordinary; 3) shock; 4) restorative and 5) competitive or activation (which
include the session allocated before competition or test) (Siff, 2004). In order to facilitate the
achievement of some specific goals (learning technique, maintenance or increases in
performance) these microcycles should be appropriately integrated within the mesocycles.

Introductory or applied:
These microcycles do not include maximum volume session and are not recommended to involve
high volume ones. Introductory microcycles could be applied to teach new technical skills,
correct mistakes or adjust training loads. In addition they are used as a form of ‘training
barometer’ of the programmed training tasks in order to assess if the prescribed training activities
are appropriate for the athlete’s age or biological maturation as well as the level of performance
(Smith, 2003). In some sports, appropriately scheduled and structured low to moderate volume
sessions could be more appropriate to minimise the potential of excessive fatigue which can
impair the ability to learn, understand new motor skills, or ascertain the viability of new training
methods and loads. Introductory or applied microcycles are usually included at the start of
mesocycles lasting between 5 to 7 days (Viru, 1995).

Standard or ordinary:
These microcycles are the most frequently used throughout the annual plan, representing around
50% or more of the total microcycles of the structured macrocycle (Navarro, 1999). Standard
macrocycles are classically defined as low or high. The rational for such classifications is the
number of included high or maximum load volume sessions (Platonov, 2001). The simplest
model would be as follows:
1. Low standard microcycles usually do not include maximum volume sessions. These
microcycles include one high volume session and are more similar to introductory
microcycles.
2. High standard microcycles are most common and include one maximum and one or two
high volume session, being close to shock microcycles.

Standard microcycles are usually included at the beginning or after the introductory microcycles.
The extension should vary between 5 to 7 or 8 days (Platonov, 2001).

Shock:
These microcycles are usually included during preseason when there is a need to stimulate
profound adaptation in specific phases of the training cycle (Verchoshansky, 1996). Shock
microcycles include more than one maximum (two to three) load volume sessions. However,
when more than one session a day is programmed, four maximum load sessions can be included.
Usually these types of microcycles involves between 7 (Platonov, 2001) to 10 days (Siff, 2004).
As general rule shock microcycles should be followed by regenerative microcycles. It is not
recommended to assign shock microcycles during a period with frequent competitions, which is
the case of many team sports that have at least one competition per week. The high level of
fatigue determined by such a hard microcycle, in addition to impaired performance can
contribute to an increased risk of injury or unplanned overreaching. Technical and strength and
conditioning coaches must work closely together to carefully control and monitor athletes’
performances during these extremely challenging microcycles (Smith, 2003). As a final
recommendation, due its high levels of physical demand it is recommended not to use shock
microcycles when training biologically young athletes (Martin et al., 2001).

Regenerative or restorative:
These microcycles are aimed to assist the body in recovery from a previous period of
programmed shock training or several standard microcycles. The principal goal of these
microcycles is to lead athletes to the level of performance required to continue with the next
training phase. Restorative microcycles will always start with a regenerative session (low volume
and low intensity exercises such as light aerobic swimming or light dynamic flexibility
exercises). The end session of these microcycles usually involve some short high intensity
exercise (explosive or speed) aimed to monitor the recovery process. Neuromuscular explosive
capacities take more time to be completely restored (Siff, 2004) and thereby control the athletes
capacity for performing explosive or high speed actions is a practical and effective method to
assess the recovery state (Sanchez-Medina & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2011). Regenerative
microcycles usually last between 3 to 5 days. Tapering strategies include regenerative sessions
followed by a longer period with high intensity low volume activation session (this type of
strategy can last between 8 to 14 days) (Bosquet et al., 2007).

Competitive or activation:
These microcycles are aimed to prepare athletes for competition and therefore include the
competition as well (Siff, 2004). However, for the aim of this article we will consider only the
few sessions situated immediately before the competition or any other special activity for which
athletes must be able to express their maximal level of performance. Although the volume of
activation microcycles can be as low as for the restorative, their purposes are different.
Activation is aimed to potentiate athlete’s performance for subsequent workouts, competition or
test. Prior to begin an activation microcycle athletes should be appropriately recovered and be
able to perform high intensity exercises. The activation microcycle should stimulate recovery
processes ending with a short duration and low intensity exercises such as light flexibility or low
intensity aerobic activity.

How to design microcycles with different characteristics

As previously stated, a training session is the functional unit that should determine the
orientation and characteristics of each particular microcycle. Therefore, in order to achieve the
desired outcomes each session should be appropriately integrated within the entire microcycle.
Table 2; shows a practical orientation for designing different types of microcycles considering
both 1 and 2 workouts per day.
 Table 2. Guidelines for microcycles design. (Adapted from Platonov, 2001 p 435).

Type of 1 session per day 2 or 3 session per day

Microcycl workout programme workout programme
e Involvedesign
several low volume Involvedesign
several low volume
Restorative sessions, being possible to sessions, being possible to
include 1 moderate at the end. include 2 moderate at the end.
Involve very low volume Involve very low volume
Activation sessions (10% of maximum sessions (10% of maximum
volume) with high intensity volume) with high intensity
No maximum volume session; 1 No maximum volume session, 2
Introductory high; 2 to 3 moderate and 1 or 2 high 3 moderate and 2 or 3 lo,
low, where one should be a where at least one should be
1 or 2 maximum volume
1 maximum volume sessions; 1 or
Standard sessions, 2
2 high; 2 moderate and 2 low,
or 3 high 2 or 3 moderate and 2
where one should be a regenerative
1 a 2 maximum volume sessions, 2 3or 3to low
4 where at least
maximum one
volume
Shock
to sessions, 3
(usually
3 high; 2 moderate and 2 to 3 to 4 high, 2 to 3 moderate and 3
more than 7
low where one should be a to 4 low, where tow should be
Designing a microcycle
According to the fitness fatigue paradigm, athlete preparedness may be determined based on the
principle after effects of training: fitness and fatigue (Chiu & Bernes, 2003). This concept
differentiates the predominant type of stress determined after workout, such as neuromuscular,
and metabolic stress (Chiu & Bernes, 2003). Therefore, if the athlete is too fatigued to repeat the
same exercise with the required level of performance, he/she may still be able to perform another
type of training. This, for example, provides the criteria for combining workouts with different
orientation such as the concurrent training involving both aerobic and power exercise as usually
designed in team or fighting sports (Platonov, 2001).
It is not advisable to introduce two high or maximum volume sessions with the same neural or
physiological orientation (explosive strength, speed or maximal strength) in two consecutive
session (Platonov, 2001). One possible exception to this rule is when training with light or
moderate aerobic endurance loads using different type of motor patter such as in the case of
triathletes for example who perform running, cycling or swimming in consecutive days or even
in the same day (Bompa & Haff, 2009).
When concurrently training different qualities, early in the microcycle the emphasis should be on
maximal intensity training (explosive strength or speed). As the fatigue after-effect is shortest for
this type of activities rather than for predominantly metabolic ones (Chiu & Bernes, 2003), this
arrangement will produce the smallest negative effect on subsequent days of training. However,
depending on the sporting activity, performing neuromuscular high intensity sessions in the first
day may positively influence subsequent training days. A day emphasizing maximal strength
or endurance may be beneficial after
explosive or speed training, so it does not negatively affect the previous explosive-speed training
sessions. On the other hand, in well resistance trained athletes a previous low volume maximal
strength session has only been shown not to hinder subsequent high intensity performance but
also acts with a potentiating effects on the following speed or explosive activities (Dochety et al.,
2004; Saez et al., 2007).

Depending on which paradigm is being implemented, endurance oriented sessions should occur
toward the end of the week, closer to days of rest, which will allow fatigue to recover (Chiu &
Bernes, 2003). When the coach has to include two sessions with high or maximum load in a row,
they have to assign them with different orientation. For example, if the first session involves
tactical activities that require high level of explosive strength, the second can be oriented to train
anaerobic-glycolytic endurance (Verkhoshansky, 1998). It would not be advisable to perform
power-oriented tasks that potentially will produce large neurological stress after a high volume
endurance training session (some exception could be in endurance athletes such as triathletes). A
fatigued body is not able to perform high quality and powerful muscle contractions. That is the
reason by which explosive, power or maximal strength training that require a high recruitment of
fast twitch fibres should be performed before endurance exercises (Bompa & Haff, 2009; Siff,
2004). High to maximum anaerobic-glycolytic volume session should be toward second part of
the microcycle. This type of training has been shown to require longer recovery periods
(Hellsten-Westing et al., 1993). Thereby when introduced at the beginning of the microcycle,
before other high intensity training such as explosive or speed, performance of this activities can
be seriously compromised (Hellsten-Westing et al., 1993).

Regardless of sports or special training goals it is not advisable to include two consecutive high
or maximum volume session with a high amount of cognitive, coordinative or tactical task
(Platonov, 2001). Due to accumulated fatigue the learning process and ability to concentrate in
the subsequent highly cognitive demanding task would be seriously impaired (Bompa & Haff,
2009). Thus, it is advisable to alternate low or moderate sessions with different orientation
(aimed to maintain the level of performance in the specific capacity) with maximum or high
volume session. This approach can enhance recovery process and stimulate positive adaptations
created by the main training capacity (Turner, 2011). The previous rationale legitimates the
following two main considerations for an appropriate microcycle session’s allocation:
1. The previous session have to support and not impair athletes performance during the
subsequent session (this is the key principle that should not be violated).
2. Highly cognitive (tactical and technical), explosive or speed focused workouts should be
introduced into the first part leaving more endurance oriented session for the middle or
end part of the microcycle.

In order to check the accomplishment of the above principles, identify possible mistakes and
determine the microcycle objectives, coaches should consider the following recommendations:
 The connection between all microcycles in the mesocycles should permit the compliance
of the first principle.
 Confirm if the objectives and orientation assigned to the microcycles are coherent with
the quality and volume of the assigned session. For standard and shock microcycles, the
maximum and high volume sessions should be in-line with the above principal objective.
Meanwhile the task included in moderate and low volume session should consider the
secondary and other less demanding objectives (Platonov, 2001). For example, if one of
the objectives is to maintain a given level of performance, to obtain this particular
outcome, the inclusion of only low volume sessions would be appropriate (Gamble,
2006).
CONCLUSIONS

Periodization organizes the training process into phases and cycles to promote peak condition
for the most important competitions. The macrocycle is divided into phases (preparatory,
competitive and transition) each of which is allocated with a determined number of
mesocycles that are designed to achieve specific physiological and performance goals. In all
cases the specific nature of the sporting season and athlete’s individualities dictates the length
and number of mesocycles and phases during the macrocycle.

A comprehensive monitoring of athletes is necessary along the entire training process. This
approach will allow a coach to make informed decisions regarding the effects and consequent
planning of subsequent training programs. The principle of individualisation suggests that
athletes will react and adapt differently over individual times frames even when presented
with identical training regimes. The attainment of consistent high performance requires
effective training that is carefully designed and monitored and is accompanied by planned
recovery. Consider the possibilities in skill instruction, acquisition and the proposed goals
throughout the phases as principal drivers of the training process will permit an optimal and
flexible determination of the most appropriate training methods and further objectives for
each particular athlete.

More researches are needed in the areas of multi-mode training, programs design for athletes
of different level of performance, sports specialities and short- and long-term program
design. Without this information, coaches have to continue to periodize based on the results
coming from physiological and biomechanical researches as well as their experience and
particular opinion.
Tools and Benefits of Periodization: Developing an Annual Training Plan and Promoting
Performance Improvements in Athletes

Authors: Michael B. Phillips, Jake A. Lockert, and LaNise D. Rosemond Sports Medicine
(Auckland, N.Z.), 01 Mar 2016, 46(3):329-338
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-015-0425-5 PMID: 26573916 

Corresponding Author:
Jake Lockert, MA
810 Quadrangle
TTU Box 5043
Cookeville, TN 38505
jalockert42@students.tntech.edu
423-779-7127
Jake Lockert works at Tennessee Technological University in Cookeville, TN as research
assistant in the department of Exercise Science, Physical Education, and Wellness

Tools and Benefits of Periodization: Developing an Annual Training Plan and Promoting
Performance Improvements in Athletes

All teams and athletes have goals in mind with their prospective sports. They work hard and train
in the off-season to achieve their goals. Most coaches and athletes change the intensity, volume,
and exercises in their workouts to improve performance. In the past, the attempts at this have
been from intuitive knowledge. But over the past 20 years, many coaches have learned and
utilized the periodization theory. Although periodization has become more popular, coaches and
athletes still appear to struggle with completely grasping the idea of periodization.

Many coaches periodize training without a full understanding of the many facets of this
invaluable training method (10). A long term plan can periodize training in the weight room that
will allow athletes to reach their full athletic potential, and, just as important become as strong as
possible in the off-season right leading up to competition. The goal of this article is to give
coaches and athletes a better understanding of a very relevant way to program for improvements
in strength and performance. It will also provide specific ways of applying facets of
periodization in setting goals for their athletes (11).

Facets of Periodization
Intensity versus Volume
When deciding the amount of work and type of work to prescribe athletes, it is vital to
understand the inverse relationship between intensity and volume. As the volume of workload
increases for athletes, the intensity of the work will have a planned decrease. Athletes cannot
maintain a high intensity over a high volume of work so coaches and athletes must adjust
appropriately. This means the athletes can only have a high intensity, a high volume, or moderate
amounts of both. The adjustments coaches and athletes make to intensity and volume of
workload have a direct effect on volume load. The amount of total volume in resistance training
is essentially repetitions multiplied by the load which can also be called volume load. The least
amount of volume load to prescribe would be enough to cause strength and fitness gains. The
greatest amount to prescribe is to the point of diminishing returns. Beyond this point, there are no
more positive benefits, but instead they produce harmful side effects. The volume load should
change as athletes improve in a program. The volume load can be viewed as one of the indicators
for an athlete’s progress and should be manipulated as needed.

Advanced athletes usually place more significance on the intensity of training which can be
measured as task execution power output. Variable programming strategies tend to yield better
results than linear programming in this arena. Greater workload is often warranted for gains in
endurance aspects of fitness. This higher work volume can help develop a base of work capacity
as well as affect the duration and stability of related training effects. It is a favorable prerequisite
for intense focus in special and technical preparation. Higher work volumes are usually achieved
by doing more repetitions and/or doing more sets as well (10, p.268).

Macrocycles and Mesocycles

To fully understand periodization, it is imperative to discuss macrocycles and mesocycles.

Macrocycles and mesocycles are fundamental organizational planning elements used throughout
periodization. The larger period of training is considered a macrocycle and can range from
multiple months to four years long. The mesocycle is what the macrocyle is broken up into and is
numerous weeks to numerous months. There are also microcycles, which are the broken up
periods of a mesocycle. The microcycle is focused more on daily and weekly specific training
differences, whereas the macrocycle is the bigger picture of the overall training goals and styles.
The traditional periodization system, the macrocycle is divided up into two major parts; the first
is for more wide-ranging work in the preparatory period and the second is geared toward sport-
specific work and getting ready for competition in the competition period (3). Periodization is
simply devising a macrocycle that has specific mesocycles and microcycles for each planned
period.

For the neuromuscular system to fully benefit from the training load or stress, it is imperative to
vary the volume and intensity. If the system is allowed to adapt to stressors without associated
changes in overload, the body will no longer need to adapt, and increases in the wanted results
will stop in time. Planning changes in volume and intensity assists in avoiding this problem since
the load on the neuromuscular system is constantly changing. Periodization is useful for adding
variations to workouts, which helps athletes avoid boredom and/or training plateaus (8). The
most common and beneficial way to utilize a periodization program is to manipulate the volume
and intensity of the workouts.

PHASES OF PERIODIZATION

In the off-season conditioning program, there will be more volume and less intense strength and
conditioning training with less of a sport-specific focus. As the season approaches, the volume
will continue to drop and the intensity will increase with more of a focus on sport-specific
activities. “The conventional periodization model includes four distinct periods: preparatory, first
transition, competition, and second transition (11, p.509).” These four periods make up an annual
training plan and allow for progress to be made to help with overall performance in an athlete’s
respective sport. Each phase will be distinctly different, but all have the goal of preparing
athletes for optimal performance in their respective sports.
The preparatory phase is widely considered the off-season and involves no competitions. It is the
longest of the four periods and has only a select few sport-specific activities. The purpose of this
period is to get athletes ready for intense training and increase their strength and conditioning.
The workouts in this period are longer and less intense than in other periods. There is not a large
amount of sport-specific movements because the athletes will most likely be more fatigued from
the high volume and would not improve as much from those movements during this time. The
farther along a program gets into the preparatory phase, there will be less volume and more
intensity in their workouts. Since Matevyev came up with the idea of periodization in the 1960’s,
the preparatory phase has been broken down into more specific phases called
hypertrophy/endurance phase, basic strength phase, and strength/power phase (11).

The hypertrophy/endurance phase occurs at the beginning stages of the preparatory period lasting
one to six weeks. The goal of this phase is to develop more lean body mass and/or increase
endurance capacity. The training starts at a rather low intensity and higher volume. As the phase
progresses over the weeks, there are more sport-specific activities included in the training
regimen. For example, basketball players may start this phase with slower endurance-based runs
and a resistance training program geared towards high number of repetitions (reps) with lower
loads. Before beginning the basic strength phase, a recovery week may be needed with lower
intensity and volume to help prepare for optimal gains.

The basic strength phase concentrates on increasing the strength of the athlete’s muscles that will
be needed most for their sport’s movements. With a basketball player, the training regime will
include more jumping and plyometric drills that parallel with the sport. Also, the resistance
training will begin to use heavier loads for fewer repetitions. These are usually 80-90% of the 1
repetition max (RM) for 3-5 sets of 4-8 repetitions.

The strength/power phase is the final stage of the preparatory period. It is the highest intensity of
this period including resistance training of 75-95% of the 1RM for 3-5 sets of 2-5 repetitions. For
example, the basketball team would begin to incorporate many more sport-specific drills
(dribbling, shooting, passing, etc.) into the routine. As the season gets closer, players need to
gear their training towards being ready for competition.
From a physiological standpoint, the importance of using the concept of periodized training
cannot be denied. By using this model, one can avoid harming relevant physiological capabilities
and traits. These could be negatively affected by the high number of competitions in the sport’s
season, frequency of injuries, and catabolic responses if the training is not properly planned and
structured (3).

The Competition Phase

As the season for different sports draws nearer, it is imperative to gear training toward being
fully ready for the games or competitive periods of the sports’ respective season. It is best to
progressively decrease the overall volume and increase intensity of the workouts as this time
nears. As the athletes’ bodies adjust during this time, they will have more energy, achieve
supercompensation, relax mentally, and be more motivated to perform their best on competition
day. It is important during this transition to still keep strength training a priority. Sport specific
strength programs can help prevent detraining during this period. Lack of strength training can
result in decreased performance and losses in strength that were worked so hard for in the off-
season (1). This is a graph example of the intensity and volume changing in relation to one
another as training progresses. (12, p.510)
Nonlinear Periodization
Over the years, periodization has been revised and improved in some ways, mainly by dividing it
up into linear periodization and undulating or non-linear periodization. The traditional model of
periodization signified a gradual increase in intensity as time progressed and can be termed a
linear model. The non-linear model offers more drastic variations in intensity in the weekly and
daily programming. According to Kramer and Fleck, “nonlinear programs may have originated
in the late 1980’s with two-week training periods using various training zones to meet the needs
of athletes (4, p.12).” The term non-linear is used more frequently than undulating. In non-linear
periodization, volume and load are altered more frequently, which could range from every week
to every day, to allow the neuromuscular system to frequently recover. With greatly shortened
phases, there are more recurrent fluctuations in stimuli; this may be extremely favorable to
strength gains (8). The traditional model still has variations in intensity within each microcycle,
but there is more variability in the non-linear model (3).

Studies (5-7, 9) have shown that nonlinear periodization results in greater fitness gains and
overall better results than other training models provide. These studies, which included Division
III college football players and women Division I tennis players, proved that nonlinear training
models produced significantly greater changes in body composition, strength, and power than
nonvaried training models. These changes still continued to happen after months of training. It
was evident that these benefits hold true for trained and untrained athletes (4, p.15-21).

Block Periodization
Block periodization became more popular in the early 1980’s and consisted of “a training cycle
of highly concentrated specialized workloads (3, p.198).” These block cycles are made of a high
number of exercises that focus on a low number of specific skills. One of the best known
developers of the block periodization system is Dr. Anatoly Bondarchuk. He coached the gold,
silver, and bronze medalist at the 1998 and 1992 Olympic Games. He had created a system with
three specialized mesocycle blocks. He implemented developmental blocks that steadily
increased workload to maximum levels. Then, in competitive blocks, the work load is leveled off
and the focus shifts to competition. Finally, in restorative blocks, athletes employ active recovery
and get ready for the next bout of programming. The ways these blocks are implanted depends
on the athlete’s sport and how the athlete respond to the programming (3, pp.198-199).
Through experiments with block periodization in other sports, the chief organizational loads of
training were nearly indistinguishable. The overarching themes of block periodization remained
constant. Training blocks have a high number of exercises that focus on a low number of specific
skills. The projected number of training blocks is usually three to four. This is different from the
traditional model which has a mesocycle taxonomy of 9-11 types; one mesocycle block can be
from 2 to 4 weeks in length. This helps permit the beneficial biochemical, morphological, and
directed changes to occur without unwarranted fatigue build up. The linking of one mesocycle
creates a training phase. Putting mesocycles in the best order possible is valuable to competition
and peaking (3, p.199).

APPLICATION IN SPORT

Laying Out a Training Year

Planning is the most valuable resource a coach has at his/her disposal. By using a well-organized
and proven process like periodization, the coach can construct a training timeline that allows
each athlete to optimize performance at the optimal times. The coach has goals in mind for each
season and it is of utmost importance to lay out the training year in a specifically planned manner
to accomplish short and long-term goals (2, p.235). According to Bompa, “A long-term training
plan is an essential component of the training process because it guides the athlete’s
development. A major goal of long-term planning is to facilitate the progressive and continual
development of the athlete’s skills and performance (2, p.237).” With all training programs and
periodization in particular, the coach must monitor athletes’ training and performance results to
ensure the athlete is adapting and improving consistently (2, p.237).

What Is Periodization?

Contemporary discussion is hampered by the absence of a universally accepted formal defnition

of periodization. The term was originally employed to describe programs taking the form of
predetermined sequential chains of specifcally focused training periods. However, today the
term is frequently indiscriminately employed to describe any form of training plan, regardless of
structure. The archetypal periodized model, exemplifed by the writings of Matveyev,6 was
typifed by a progressive segmented transition from high to low volume, and low to high
intensity, accompanied by a simultaneous reduction in training variation as competitive peak
approached. Since the frst English translation of Matveyev’s influential 1981 Fundamentals of
Sports Training,6 various authors have proposed novel periodized designs—for example,
nonlinear,7 block,8 fractal,9 and conjugate sequence.10 Although these models differ in terms of
structure and supporting rationale, there is an evident common set of
shared assumptions underpinning such approaches:

• Established time frames exist for the development

and retention of specifc ftness adaptations.7,11,1

Various ftness attributes are best developed in a sequential hierarchy (eg, strength before power,
endurance before speed).7,8,12

• Idealized training structures, time frames, and progression schemes can be generalized across
athletic subgroups.7,8,11–14 Inevitably arising from these premises are 2 implicit
assumptions:
• Biologicaladaptationtoagiventrainingintervention

follows a predictable course.

• Appropriate future training can be adequately forecast.

Scientific Support for Periodization Principles

The science of periodization is a frequently encountered

phrase in exercise-science and coaching domains, with many studies commonly cited as
evidencing periodization’s superiority as a training organizational means. For
example, in review of 15 studies of meso-cycle length (7–24 wk), 13 studies concluded that
periodized training provided statistically superior performance improvements when compared
with constant-repetition programs.15 A similar review concluded that periodized strength
training
led to enhanced outcomes, in a variety of performance measures, in comparison with
nonperiodized models. 16A meta-analysis comparing periodized and nonperiodized strength-
training programs concluded that periodized structures were more effective for males and
females,
individuals of varying training backgrounds, and a range of age groups.17 A rare study failing to
support superiority of periodized regimes found no difference in efficacy between undulating-
periodized and nonperiodized groups when volume and intensity were equalized over a shortterm
period.18 Similarly, a study employing elderly untrained participants concluded that fxed-
repetition strength training was as effective in developing strength as a periodized program.

Bompa, Tudor O.
Periodization training for sports / Tudor Bompa, Carlo Buzzichelli. -- Third Edition.
pages cm
Previous edition was authored by Tudor O. Bompa and Michael Carrera.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Periodization training. 2. Weight training. I. Buzzichelli, Carlo, 1973- II. Title.
GV546.B546 2014
613.7'13--dc23
2014014399
ISBN: 978-1-4504-6943-2 (print)
Copyright © 2015 by Tudor O. Bompa and Carlo Buzzichelli

Periodization as Planning and Programming of Sport Training

Periodization involves two basic concepts: periodization of the annual plan and periodization of
biomotor abilities.

• Periodization of the annual plan involves dividing the program into units in order to better
manage the training and adaptation processes and, if necessary, to ensure peak performance at
major competitions. Annual plan periodization is particularly useful to coaches for the following
reasons:
- It helps coaches design a rationally structured training plan.

- It enhances coaches’ awareness of the time available for each phase.

- It integrates, at appropriate times, technical and tactical loads, biomotor ability development
loads, nutrition, and psychological techniques for the highest increment of the athlete’s motor
potential and peak performance.
- It allows management of fatigue and planning of a higher volume of high-quality
training.

- It helps coaches plan a rational alternation of loading and unloading periods in the training
phases, thus maximizing adaptation and performance while avoiding the accumulation of a
critical level of fatigue and the onset of overtraining.

• Periodization of biomotor abilities allows athletes to develop their biomotor abilities

(strength, speed, and endurance) to an optimal level as the basis for a higher level of sport
performance. This form of periodization is based on the following premises:

- Improvement in sport performance is based (especially for the high-level athlete)

on increasing the athlete's motor potential.

Morpho-functional adaptations (i.e., positive changes in the body structure and

functions) require time, as well as alternation of work and recovery, in order to manifest
themselves.
- The development of the biomotor abilities and the improvement of technical and tactical
factors require a progressive approach in which the intensity of training
stimuli is gradually increased on the basis of previously induced morphological
and functional adaptations.

- An athlete cannot maintain peak performance for a prolonged or undefned time.

Planning, Programming, and Periodization

The terms planning, programming, and periodization are often used as if they were synonymous,
but they are not. Planning is the process of arranging a training program into long and short
phases in order to achieve training goals. Programming, in contrast, is the act of flling this
structure with content in the form of training modalities. Periodization incorporates planning
and programming—in other words, the structure of the annual plan and its content (consisting
of training methods and training means) as it changes over time. Thus we can defne the
periodization of the annual plan as the structure of the training process and the periodization of
biomotor abilities as the plan’s content. In other words, each time we divide the year into phases
and establish a sequence of development for each biomotor ability, we form a periodized plan.
Some critics of periodization state that it was created for individual sports that include a long
preparation phase and a short competitive phase. Therefore, they assert, periodization is not
applicable to modern team sports, which feature a short preparation period and a very long
competitive period. This criticism would be true if the relevant factors could be put together in
only one combination. In reality, however, we can design as many periodized plans as necessary
for the range of possible situations we may encounter in the sport training process.
Furthermore, if we were to analyze what these critics actually do, we would see that their plans
still entail a division of the year into smaller periods and a periodization of biomotor abilities,
thereby qualifying them as periodized plans. Figure 6.1 lists the composing elements of every
theory about planning the training process. Periodization itself is a wide methodological
doctrine that includes many theoretical and methodological concepts. In fact, before we discuss
which planning and programming method is better suited for a certain sport, we should agree on
terminology—and, even more important, on the very concepts that form the theory of the
planning and programming of training. Annual Plan Terminology Leonid Matveyev’s book The
Problem of Periodization of Sport Training (1964) analyzed the training diary of Russian
athletes who took part in the 1952 Olympic games. Unsurprisingly, in the same period, Tudor
Bompa was already applying periodization of training with his athletes, including Mihaela
Penes (gold medalist in the javelin throw at the 1964 Tokyo Olympics), and developing what
would become his concept of the periodization of strength, which is detailed in this book.
However, it was not until Bompa’s popular
work Periodization: Theory and Methodology of Training (1983) that periodization gained
wide popularity, especially in North America.

Different from Soviet authors, who spoke of microcycle, mesocycle, and macrocycle—the
latter being of various time lengths (six-month, annual, or four-year [Olympic cycle])—we use
the following terminology (see fgure 6.2):

• Annual plan (annual macrocycle for the Soviets): The year is divided into phases,
subphases, macrocycles, and microcycles to better manage the training process. Annual plans
are characterized by the number of competitive phases and are thus defned as monocyclical, bi-
cyclical, or tri-cyclical.

• Phases (macrocycles for the Soviets): The three phases are preparation, competition,
and transition.
Subphases: This further specifcation of the content of the phases includes general preparation,
specifc preparation, precompetition, competition, and transition. A subphase is made up of a
group of macrocycles with the same training direction and whose length can vary from 1 week
(for a short transition phase) to 24 weeks (for a long general preparation phase).
• Macrocycle (mesocycle for the Soviets): A macrocycle is a group of microcycles with
the same training direction (according to the macrocycle and subphase) whose length can vary
from 2 weeks (for a precompetitive unloading macrocycle, also called a taper
macrocycle) to 6 weeks (for a long introductory macrocycle in general preparation) but are
generally 3 or 4 weeks long.

• Microcycle: This is a cyclic sequence of training units that follow the macrocycle goals;
its length can vary from 5 to 14 days but is usually 7 days long to match the week.
• Training unit: This is the single training session with pauses within the session
shorter than 45 minutes.

Here we can make a distinction: The annual plan, phases, and subphases are tools used
for planning, whereas the macrocycles, microcycles, and training units are tools used for
programming. The former group allows trainers to draw up a long-term plan, and the
latter group allows them to defne in detail the content of the training process. Generally,
the planning and programming process starts with the long-term tool (the annual plan)
and ends with the shortest one (the training session). Thus the annual plan contains
both elements of planning (e.g., phases and subphases) and elements of programming
(e.g., macrocycles and microcycles depicting the periodization of biomotor abilities) and
thereby addresses the whole training process (see fgure 6.3). Note that intensity values
refer to the overall training intensity, not to the dominant energy system.
The programming of the training process takes shape in the microcycle, through the
use of methodological concepts such as the alternation of workloads and energy systems.
Coaches can make use of training sessions and tests as feedback and feedforward elements
to readily modify the program in order to individualize and maximize the training process.

Periodization of Biomotor Abilities

The goal of biomotor abilities training is to improve the athlete’s performance on the basis
of specialized morphological and functional adaptations. The most important feature of
training the biomotor abilities is progressive overload. Even though an athlete’s full motor
potential is present in his or her genetic code, its expression requires the training process
to be composed by general and specifc means, not only for the principle of variety of
training but also according to the trainability of the biomotor abilities themselves. For
instance, trainability determines that endurance training for long-duration sport should
be based mainly on specifc work, which can represent up to 90 percent of the annual
training time. By contrast, the more limited speed trainability requires major focus on
general elements (such as strength and its various expressions). Four elements differentiate each
theory and methodology of the planning and programming of training in reference to the
periodization of strength, speed, and endurance:

1. Integration of biomotor abilities

2. Development of each determinant biomotor ability throughout the plan

3. Degree of specifcity of the training means throughout the plan

4. Load progression

Periodization
Theory and Methodology
of Training
Fifth Edition
Tudor O. Bompa, PhD
York University
G. Gregory Haff, PhD
West Virginia University

AnnuAl
TrAInIng PlAn
ChAPTer
6
The annual plan is the tool that guides training over a year. It is an essential component of
periodization because it divides the training year into distinct phases with very specific
objectives. An annual training plan is necessary to
maximize physiological adaptations, which will improve performance. The annual
plan directs the athlete through 12 months of training. During the last month of
training the plan will vary from the rest of the training year to reduce physiological
and psychological fatigue, induce regeneration, and prepare the athlete for the next
year of training.
The goal of training is to induce physiological adaptations and maximize performance at specific
time points, usually during the main competitions of the year.
To accomplish this goal, the athlete’s preparedness must increase at the appropriate
time, thus ensuring a greater potential for a high level of performance. The athlete’s
level of preparedness is a complex interaction of developing skills, biomotor abilities,
psychological traits, and the management of fatigue. The best approach for accomplishing these
goals is to use periodized training that is logically constructed and
appropriately sequenced.
The annual plan is the foundation for stimulating physiological and psychological
adaptations while managing fatigue. In the context of this plan, the greatest challenge is peaking
the athlete at the appropriate times throughout the training year.
When working with inexperienced athletes, the coach will direct the training plan
with little input from the athletes. Conversely, with elite athletes the coach should
encourage input from the athlete when establishing the annual training plan’s objectives and
structure. By involving the elite athlete in the planning process, the coach
can create a positive environment in which the athlete can use the planning process
as a motivational tool.

PerIodIzATIon

Periodization is the foundation of an athlete’s training plan. The term periodization

originates from the word period, which is a way of describing a portion or division of time.
Periodization is a method by which training is divided into smaller, easy-to-manage segments
that are typically referred to as phases of training. Periodization of training
has evolved over the centuries, with many sport scientists and authors contributing to
its development (6, 42, 43, 52, 53, 63, 64, 71, 72, 79, 82-85).
Periodization is not a new concept, but many people are not familiar with it or
do not understand its history. The origins of periodization are unknown, but an
unrefined form of the concept has existed for a long time. Evidence suggests that a
simplified form of periodization was used in the ancient Olympic Games (776 BC
to 393 AD). As mentioned previously in this book, Philostratus is considered one of
the early proponents of periodization. Philostratus referred to the simple annual
plans used by the Greek Olympians where a preparatory phase preceded the ancient
Olympic Games with few informal competitions before and a rest period after the
games. A similar approach has been used to prepare for the modern Olympic Games
by both U.S. and European athletes.
Planning for the European competitions at the beginning of the 20th century followed a similar
pattern. However, planned periodization became more sophisticated,
culminating with the German program for the 1936 Olympic Games, when coaches
used a 4-year plan composed of annual training plans. After World War II, the Soviets
started a state-funded sports program, using athletics as a means to demonstrate the
superiority of their political system.
In 1965, Lenoid P. Matveyev, a Russian sport scientist, published a model of an
annual plan based on a questionnaire that asked Russian athletes how they trained
before the 1952 Olympic Games in Helsinki, Finland. He borrowed the term periodization from
history, where historians refer to the periods or phases of human development. Matveyev
analyzed the data collected on the Russian athletes and produced a
model of an annual training plan that was divided into phases, subphases, and training cycles.
Some call this the classic model of periodization. However, the true classic
model could be considered the works of Philostratus. In the 1950’s and 1960’s, Russian,
German, Romanian, and Hungarian sport scientists published books about the evolution of
periodization from ancient times to the post–World War II period, whereas
their Western counterparts were slow to adopt the concept of periodization.
Matveyev structured training to culminate with only one competitive phase (44).
However, this practice did not meet the needs of all sports. Thus, as the theory of
periodization evolved, training plans were adapted to meet the competitive needs of
athletes who participated in more than one major competition per year. Annual training plans
were developed where two main competitions per year (bi-cycle plans), three
main competitions per year (tri-cycle plans), and multiple peak plans were developed.
Additionally, the concept of periodization of main motor abilities was developed as
a tool for improving skills and maximizing athletic performance (2-5).
Periodization can be examined in the context of two important aspects of training:
1. Periodization divides the annual training plan into smaller training phases,
making it easier to plan and manage the training program and ensure that
peak performance occurs at the main competition.
2. Periodization structures the training phases to target biomotor abilities, which
allows the athlete to develop the highest levels of speed, strength, power, agility,
and endurance possible.
Many are unaware of the difference between periodization as a division of the
annual plan and periodization of biomotor abilities. In most sports, the annual train- ing plan is
divided into three main phases: preparatory, competitive, and transition.
The preparatory and competitive phases are divided into two subphases, which are
classified as general and specific because of their differing tasks. The focus of the
general subphase is to develop a physiological base by using many nonspecific training
methods. The specific subphase is used to develop characteristics needed for a sport
by using sport-specific modalities. The competitive phase of training is subdivided
into precompetitive and competitive phases. Each phase of the annual plan contains
macrocycles and microcycles. Each of these subunits has objectives that contribute
to objectives of the annual training plan. Figure 6.1 illustrates the division of the
annual training plan into phases and cycles.
Athletic performance depends on the athlete’s physiological adaptations and
psychological adjustments to training combined with the ability to develop and
master skills and abilities required of the sport. The duration of each phase of the
annual plan depends on the time necessary to increase the athlete’s training status
and elevate preparedness. The main determinant of the duration of each phase of
training is the competitive schedule. To optimize performance at the appropriate
time (i.e., for major competitions), athletes undergo several months of training. The
training plan must be well organized and must sequentially develop physiological
adaptations as well as manage fatigue to elevate preparedness, which increases the
athlete’s performance ability. The optimal periodization model for each sport and
the time required for an optimal increase in training status and preparedness have
yet to be elucidated. Confounding the coach’s ability to optimally dose training is
the individual athlete’s ability to tolerate and adapt to a training plan, which is influenced by
many factors including genetic endowment, psychological traits, training
status, diet, social stressors, and recovery methods used. Because of this individuality
of response to training, programs must be tailored to meet the individual needs as
well as the demands of the sporting activity.

needs of Periodization
The phases of training are structured to stimulate physiological and psychological
adaptations and are sequenced to progressively develop specific components of performance
(physical, technical, and tactical) while elevating the athlete’s performance
capacity. A sequential approach to developing the athlete’s potential is necessary
because it is not possible to maintain the athlete’s physiological and psychological abilities at
maximal capacity throughout the entire training year. Additionally,
preparedness will vary depending on the phase of training and type of training,
psychological, and social stress encountered by the athlete. Therefore, the annual
training plan must be subdivided into phases that sequentially develop specific
aspects required to maximize performance.
The preparatory phase is the time when the physiological foundation for performance is
established, whereas the competitive phase is the time when performance
capacity is maximized. If the preparatory phase is inadequate, performance will not
be maximized during the competitive phase because the physiological adaptations
necessary for optimum performance have not been developed. After the competitive
phase is completed, a transition phase is necessary to remove fatigue developed across
the competitive season and enable the athlete to recover from the physiological and
psychological stresses of competition. Additionally, the transition phase allows the
athlete to relax and prepare psychologically for the next annual training plan, which
will commence shortly. This phase of training is a transition, not an off-season. The
term off-season is inappropriate because serious athletes do not have an off-season;
rather, they transition from one annual training plan to another. Therefore, the
transition is an important link between annual training plans.
The development of skills, strategic maneuvers, and biomotor abilities requires a
special approach that is unique to each phase of training. Technical skill sets and
tactical maneuvers are learned over time in a sequential fashion across the phases of
training. The athlete attempts to perfect his technical capabilities, and as his skill
level increases the complexity of tactical training can also increase. The sequential
approach is also essential for the development and perfection of biomotor abilities.
When attempting to improve biomotor abilities and stimulate physiological adaptations, the
coach must alternate the volume and intensity of training, as proposed in
the principle of load progression. Training should not occur in a linear fashion, and
periodization is truly a nonlinear approach to training (70).
Climatic conditions and the seasons influence the duration of training phases
within a periodized training plan. For example, seasonal sports such as skiing, rowing,
and soccer are restricted by climate. In a periodized plan the phases of training are
tailored to meet the individual needs of the sport, and this will account for the climatic
conditions. In soccer and rowing, the preparatory phase of training occurs during
the winter, and the competitive phase typically occurs in the spring, summer, or fall.
The reverse is true for winter sports such as speedskating, ice hockey, and skiing.
Competition and intense training create a large amount of physiological stress
and cumulative fatigue. If this stress is applied for too long, overtraining can occur
and performance capacity will decrease. Therefore stressful training or competition
phases should be alternated with periods of recovery and regeneration. These types
of phases are transition phases that will decrease fatigue and allow the athlete to
prepare for the next phase of training

Classifying Annual Plans

Figures 6.2 through 6.5 illustrate different models of annual training plans. Figure 6.2
represents the original annual training plans presented by Matveyev (44). Although
dated, this model is still promoted by several authors, especially those in the United
States. Careful examination of the model reveals several characteristics:
• It is a monocycle and therefore is appropriate for seasonal sports with one major
contest.
• The model is based on the specifics of training for speed and power sports such
as sprinting, jumping, and throwing events in track and field.
• The volume and intensity curves may not be appropriate for sports that are
dominated by endurance.
Annual training plans differ according to the requirements of the sport, and the
classification of these plans largely depends on the number of competitive phases.
Seasonal sports such as skiing, canoeing, and soccer and other sports with one major
competition during the year usually require one competitive phase. These annual
training plans can be classified as monocycles, because they contain only one competitive phase
and one major peak (figures 6.6 and 6.7). These plans are divided into
three major phases: preparatory, competitive, and transition phases. The monocycle
plans shown in figures 6.6 and 6.7 include a preparatory phase in both general and
specific phases of preparation. In figure 6.6, note the relationship between general
and specific preparation: As one decreases, the other increases substantially. In some
instances, such as in soccer, the general preparatory phase can be very short or can
be eliminated altogether.
The competitive phase in figures 6.6 and 6.7 is divided into several smaller subphases. The
precompetitive subphase, which usually includes exhibition competitions

only, comes before the main competition subphase in which all official competitions
are scheduled. Before the most important competition of the year, two shorter subphases should
be planned. The first is an unloading phase or taper, which is generally
marked by lower volumes and intensities of training (see chapter 7). This phase allows
for the removal of fatigue and an elevation in preparedness, which creates a performance
supercompensation effect. After this subphase a special preparation phase
follows, during which technical and tactical changes can be made. This subphase
can occur in conjunction with the unloading phase or can be a separate subphase.
The preparatory and competitive phases of the annual training plans are marked
by some specific characteristics. During the preparatory phase and early competitive phase,
training volume is emphasized with lower intensities according to the
specifics of the sport. During the preparatory phase, the quantity of work is very high
and the intensity of work is low. As the competitive phase approaches, the training
volume decreases while the intensity curve increases (figures 6.6 and 6.7). Thus the
competitive phase has a higher emphasis on intensity or quality of work. This type of
monocycle model is typical for sports dominated by speed and power because as the
volume curve decreases fatigue also decreases and the training emphasis can shift
toward speed and power development.
The monocycle model illustrated in figure 6.6 is an example of an annual training
plan for a speed and power sport and would be inappropriate for endurance-based
sports because the development of specific endurance would be insufficient and performance
would be negatively affected. For sports where the bioenergetic contribution
is 50%:50% (anaerobic/aerobic) or is dominated by aerobic metabolism, the training
volume curve must be high throughout the competitive phase. Therefore, a different
annual training plan model can be generated for these types of sports (figure 6.7).
The division of the annual training plan is based on the type of endurance training
the athlete will perform. Additionally, note the high volume of training, which is
typical for the training plan of endurance athletes.
When working with sports that have two separate seasons, such as track and field,
which has an indoor and outdoor season, a completely different approach is used to
develop the annual training plan. Because there are two distinct competitive phases,
an annual training plan that contains two peaks, or a bi-cycle, is used. Figure 6.8 gives
an example of an annual training plan with a bi-cycle structure that incorporates
the following phases:
• Preparatory phase I: The first preparatory phase, which should be the longest,
lasts approximately 3 months and is broken into general and specific subphases.
• Competition phase I: The first competitive phase lasts about 2 1/2 months and
brings the athlete to a peak performance.
• Transition phase I: The first transition phase lasts approximately 1 to 2 weeks
and is marked by a period of unloading to recover the athlete. This phase leads
into the second preparatory phase.
Preparatory phase II: The second preparatory phase is shorter than the first
preparatory phase, lasting approximately 2 months. This phase has a much shorter
general preparatory subphase, with most of the training being performed in the
specific preparatory subphase.
• Competition phase II: The second competitive phase is slightly longer, about 3
1/2 months, and brings the athlete to a peak performance.
• Transition Phase II: The second transition phase is approximately 1 1/2 months
long and is used to unload and recover the athlete. This phase links to the next
annual training plan.
A bi-cycle plan contains two short monocycles that are linked by a very short
unloading and transition phase. The approach is similar for each cycle except that
the training volume in preparatory phase I is much greater than that in preparatory
phase II. Additionally, the level of preparedness will be lower during competitive
phase I. For example, in track and field, the outdoor championships are considered
to be more important that the indoor competitions, and so the second competitive
phase of the annual plan should target this major competition. Thus, it is warranted
to bring the athlete’s preparedness to its highest level of the year in the second competitive
phase.
Although the bi-cycle annual training plan is useful for some sports, other sports
such as boxing, wrestling, and gymnastics may have three major competitions during
the annual plan (e.g., national championships, a qualifying meet, and the competition itself).
Assuming each competition is 3 or 4 months apart the athlete would
have three competitive phases, which would create a tri-cycle annual training plan
structure. As illustrated in figure 6.9, a tri-cycle plan incorporates the following
sequence of training:
• Preparatory phase I: Preparatory phase I is the longest preparatory phase of
the annual training plan, lasting around 2 months. It contains both general and
specific preparatory subphases.
• Competition phase I: Competitive phase I is the shortest of the three competitive
phases in the annual training plan, lasting around 1 1/2 months.
• Transition Phase I: The first transition phase is very short and links the first
competitive phase with the second preparatory phase. As with all transition phases,
there is a period of unloading to allow the athlete to recover.
• Preparatory phase II: Preparatory phase II is shorter than the first preparatory phase, lasting
around 1 1/2 months. This preparatory phase only contains a
specific preparatory phase.
• Competition phase II: Competitive phase II is longer than the first competitive
phase, lasting approximately 1 3/4 months.
• Transition phase II: The second transition phase contains a short period of
unloading designed to allow the athlete to recover from competition. This transition is also short
because it links competitive phase II to preparation phase III.
• Preparatory phase III: This preparatory phase is a short preparatory phase
lasting only about 1 1/2 months. As with the second preparatory phase, only the
specific preparatory subphase is used.
• Competitive phase III: This competitive phase is the longest of the three competitive phases
contained in the tri-cycle annual training plan (~2 months). As such
this phase should peak the athlete for the most major competition of the year.

Transition phase III: This transition phase is the longest transition phase contained in the annual
training plan lasting approximately 1 month. It serves an
important role in inducing recovery and preparing the athlete for the next annual
training plan.
In a tri-cycle plan, the most important competition of the three should occur
during the last cycle of the year. The first of the three preparatory phases should
be the longest, during which the athlete builds the technical, tactical, and physical
foundation from which the next two cycles are built. Because this type of plan is
typically used with advanced athletes only, the first preparatory phase contains the
general preparation subphase.
In an annual plan with a tri-cycle structure, the volume curve is the highest in the
first preparatory phase. This highlights the importance of training volume in this
phase. The intensity curve depicted in the tri-cycle structure (figure 6.9) follows a
pattern similar to that seen in a monocycle. Both the volume and intensity curves
decrease slightly for each of the three unloading phases that precede the main competitions.
Within the annual training plan, the highest level of preparedness should
be planned for the third competitive phase to allow for the highest performances to
occur at the main competition of the year.
Although the bi-cycle and tri-cycle structures are useful for many sports, other
sports such as tennis, martial arts, and boxing may have four or more competitions
that require peak performance (figure 6.10). In these situations the preparatory
phase, which is crucial for the development of technical and tactical skills as well as
biomotor abilities, is shortened significantly. Advanced athletes who have developed
a strong foundation of training during the early years of their athletic development
may find it easier to cope with such a heavy competitive schedule; young athletes
may not. This may be a reason why so many young tennis players burn out before
winning a major tournament.

Developing a multiple-cycle of four or more competitive phases (figure 6.10) is

a challenging task. This is especially true if the athlete skips a preparatory phase

that focuses on regeneration and improvement of biomotor skills in a nonstressful

environment. This scenario is often seen in tennis where many players are injured or
withdraw from tournaments because of physical stress and mental exhaustion.

Selective Periodization
Far too often the annual training plans developed for elite athletes are used for young
athletes who lack the training experience and physiological maturity to tolerate intensive
competitive schedules. This is one reason why periodization of training should
be individualized. The coach should consider the athlete’s readiness for intensive
competitive schedules, using the following guidelines:
• A monocycle is strongly suggested as the basic annual training model for novice
and junior athletes. Such a plan has a long preparatory phase during which the
athlete can develop foundational technical, tactical, and physical elements without the major
stress of competitions. The monocycle is the typical annual plan
for seasonal sports and sports for which endurance is the dominant biomotor
ability (e.g., Nordic skiing, rowing, cycling, long-distance running).
• The bi-cycle annual training plan is typically used for advanced or elite athletes who can
qualify for national championships. Even in this scenario, the
preparatory phase should be as long as possible to allow for the development of
fundamental skills.
• The multiple-peak annual training plan is recommended for advanced or international-level
athletes. Presumably, these athletes have a solid foundation that
allows them to handle an annual plan that contains three or more peaks.
The duration of the training phases depends largely on the competitive schedule.
Table 6.1 for provides guidelines for distributing the training weeks contained in
each training phase.

Stress: Planning and Periodization

The ability to manage the stress that accumulates as a result of training and competition is an
important factor that underlies successful athletic performances.
Training-induced stress can be considered a summation of both physiological and
psychological stressors and can be elicited by both internal and adverse external
influences. Therefore it may be warranted to focus on the training effects induced
by the training plan rather than the work being completed. The training plan must
consider the development of fatigue, which is a by-product of training, and how to
monitor or evaluate its effect on performance.
Periodization is an important tool in the management of fatigue that accumulates
in response to physiological, psychological, and sociological stressors resulting from
training and competition. In creating the annual plan, the coach needs to consider
the effects of both training and competition on the development of fatigue and the
level of stress experienced by the athlete. If structured correctly, the annual plan will
manage this fatigue and reduce levels of fatigue during major competitions, when
stress can be very high. Figure 6.11 shows how stress may vary across an annual training plan.
Note that stress does not have the same magnitude throughout the annual
plan, which is a distinct advantage of periodized training.
The stress curve in figure 6.11 parallels the intensity curve in that the higher the
intensity, the higher the level of stress. The shape of the stress curve also indicates
that stress is lowest during the transition phase and increases throughout the preparatory phase.
In the competitive phase of training, levels of stress will fluctuate in
response to competitive stress and short periods of regeneration. During the preparatory phase,
the magnitude of the stress curve is a result of the relationship between
training volume and intensity. Although the volume or quantity of training is high,
the intensity is low because it is difficult to emphasize a high amount of work and
an elevated intensity simultaneously (with the exception of weightlifting).
Training intensity is a prime contributor to stress. Therefore, the coach should
consider decreasing the athlete’s level of stress during the preparatory phase by
emphasizing volume more than intensity. However, it is likely that the high volumes
of training typically seen in the preparatory phase also produce a significant amount

of metabolic stress (45, 46, 79) and large hormonal disturbances (36), which can result
in high levels of fatigue, a form of stress.
The stress curve throughout the competitive phase undulates in accordance with
competitive, developmental, and regeneration microcycles. The number and frequency
of competitions during the competitive phase clearly can have a negative impact on
the athlete’s level of stress. Frequent competitions can increase the athlete’s level of
stress, and the coach must allow a few days of regeneration following these competitions. To
further deal with the stress of the competitive phase, a short period (2 or 3
days) of unloading prior to the competition may be warranted.
In addition to alternating high- and low-stress activities, the athlete can use relaxation techniques
to deal with stress. The ability to tolerate stress is highly individual,
and athletes who have difficulty dealing with stress may need to use motivational
and relaxation techniques. The athlete’s ability to tolerate stress depends largely on
the training plan. The coach must structure the training plan to include phases of
regeneration that use relaxation and visualization techniques to help the athlete
tolerate training and competitive stress.
The athlete’s psychological state depends largely on her physiological status (17, 69).
If the athlete is experiencing high levels of fatigue, this accumulated stress appears to
negatively affect psychological status. The better physiologically prepared the athlete,
the greater the likelihood that she has a positive psychological status. A periodized
training program that is structured correctly will ensure superior physiological preparedness,
psychological readiness, stress management, and mental training.

PerIodIzATIon of BIomoTor ABIlITIeS

The concept of periodization is not limited to the structure of a training plan or the
type of training included in a given training phase. Periodization is a concept that
applies to the development of dominant biomotor abilities for a chosen sport. Because
an in-depth discussion about the periodization and development of biomotor abilities is provided
in later chapters, the present discussion centers on topics related to
the development of the annual training plan.
Some sports, mostly individual, have a loose structure of periodization, especially
regarding endurance. However, in most team sports the periodization of dominant
abilities allows room for improvement. In many sports, the dominant biomotor ability
is power. Recognizing this, some coaches use exercises aimed specifically at developing power
throughout the year, from the early preparatory phase to the beginning
of the competitive phase. This type of approach stems from a misunderstanding
of periodization and the principles of specificity. Power is a function of maximal
strength and speed, so it is better to develop maximal strength during the early part
of the preparatory phase and then convert that strength gain into power-generating
capacity in the competitive phase (figure 6.12). Several examples of periodization of
dominant abilities are presented in figures 6.13 through 6.17.

References

1. John Kiely , 2012, Periodization Paradigms in the 21st Century:

Evidence-Led or Tradition-Driven? International Journal of Sports Physiology and
Performance7, 242-250Preston, UK. Human Kinetics, Inc.

Bompa TO, Carrera MC. Periodization Training for Sports. 2nd Edition ed. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics 2005.
DeWeese BH, Hornsby G, Stone M, Stone MH. The training process: Planning for strength-
power training in track and field. Part 1: Theoretical aspects. Journal of Sport and Health
Science. 2015: 4: 308-317.
Issurin VB. Benefits and limitations of block periodized training approaches to athletes’
preparation: a review. Sports Medicine. 2016: 46: 329-338.
Matveyev L. Fundamentals of Sports Training. English Translation ed. Moscow: Progress
Publishers 1981.
Plisk SS, Stone MH. Periodization strategies. Strength & Conditioning Journal. 2003: 25: 19-37.
Siff MC. Supertraining. 6th Edition ed. Denver, CO: Supertraining Institute 2004.
Swinton PA, Lloyd R, Agouris I, Stewart A. Contemporary training practices in elite British
powerlifters: survey results from an international competition. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research. 2009: 23: 380-384.
Turner A. The science and practice of periodization: a brief overview. Strength & Conditioning
Journal. 2011: 33: 34-46.
Zatsiorsky VM, Kraemer WJ. Science and Practice of Strength Training. 2nd Edition ed.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics 2006.
Naclerio F, Moody J, Chapman M. Applied Periodization: A Methodological Approach. J. Hum.
Sport Exerc. Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 350-366, 2013.

Periodisation for Powerlifting – An Overviewhttp://www.maloneyperformance.com/Blog/?

p=1598
Posted on  April 24, 2016 by Maloney Performance
Michael B. Phillips, Jake A. Lockert, and LaNise D. Rosemond Sports Medicine (Auckland,
N.Z.), 01 Mar 2016,

Periodisation for Powerlifting – An Overview http://www.maloneyperformance.com/Blog/?

p=1598
Posted on  April 24, 2016 by Maloney Performance