Isamed Journals

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine

2018, Volume 2, Issue 1

Research Article Open Access

Effect of Upper-Body High Intensity Interval Training on Exercise
Performance in Professional Cricket Players
Thomas D. Turner1, Jeremy A. Moody1, Paul J. Byrne2, Michael G. Hughes1, Paul M. Smith1 and Stephen-Mark
Cooper1
1
Cardiff School of Sport & Health Sciences (Sport), Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
2
Department of Science and Health, Institute of Technology Carlow, Carlow, Ireland

*Corresponding author: Thomas D Turner, 65 Cwmdare Street, Cathays Cardiff, CF24 4JZ, Tel: 07851809717;
Email: turner_399@hotmail.com
Received: 11-07-2017
Accepted: 01-30-2018
Published: 02-26-2018
Copyright: © 2018 Thomas D Turner
Abstract

The aerobic energy pathway is a significant contributing factor to the performance of a professional cricket player. The physical de-
mands of professional cricket place a high workload on the lower body, presenting a possible advantage to train for aerobic improve-
ments via the upper body. The aim of the present study was to investigate the transfer effect of upper body high intensity interval training
(HIIT) on lower body performance. Eleven male professional cricket players were assigned to either a control group (n = 5) or a rope
training group (n = 6). Both groups performed pre-season resistance conditioning training circuit sessions, with the rope group per-
forming additional upper body HIIT training three days/week for four weeks. Performance testing was conducted on both groups during
pre- and post-training intervention periods. The rope group experienced a significant increase in upper body maximal exercise capacity
(~12%) estimated by the upper body VO2max test (P = 0.016) with no significant change in the control group (P > 0.05). There was no
significant change in VO2max, HRmax, VE and RER in either group (P > 0.05). Lower body maximal aerobic performance, assessed by the
Yo-Yo IR1 test increased significantly (~11%) in the rope group (P = 0.011) with a large effect size identified in the control group ~3%
(ES = 1.07). The results show that short-term upper body HIIT can produce specific improvements in upper body anaerobic power and
maximal exercise capacity. Additionally, the upper body HIIT improved maximal exercise capacity in the untrained limbs, although the
mechanism responsible for the adaptation is unclear. Upper body HIIT is an effective method of improving the lower body maximal
exercise capacity in professional cricket players.

Keywords: Arm; Transfer; Battle; Rope; Anaerobic

Introduction

Cricket is a sport played in three different game formats, all of which involve players participating in batting, bowling and fielding. GPS
work:recovery ratio data gathered from cricketers suggests that when batting the ratio is 1:43 [11] and 1:23 when bowling [29] with
activity patterns that are characterized by high intensity bursts of short duration, followed by fairly long recoveries. Aerobic fitness is
thought to be crucial for cricket players in order to optimize recovery between bursts of activity [27] and this is further evidenced by
heart rate data obtained during play [6,8,14,36]. With aerobic performance being identified as advantageous for recovery in cricket,
various forms of general aerobic training should be considered to improve aerobic fitness in professional cricket players.

It has been well documented in the literature when comparing endurance or moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) [7,18,26], to
high intensity interval training (HIIT) [15,17,22,40] or sprint interval training (SIT) [4,5], that all forms are effective methods of training
to improve aerobic performance. From the literature reviewed [4,5,15,17,22,40] HIIT is considered as being constituted of equal bouts
of work to rest (1:1), whereas SIT has a much longer rest period between bouts of exercise (> 1:8). This is an important consideration
Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine
Isamed Journals.com
given the work:rest ratio, in addition to the intensity of the exercise and it will produce different adaptations [33]. Improvements have
been typically identified by a change in maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), which is one of the primary determinants of cardio-
respiratory fitness and aerobic performance [39]. Although both MICT and HIIT protocols have been shown to improve VO2max, the
underlying physiological factors contributing to this improvement seem to be varied from study to study. The general trend reported
is that MICT causes adaptations through predominantly a central change, indicated by an increase in cardiac output [22,26]. Whereas
improvements in VO2max from HIIT have been identified by changes in both central and peripheral factors [15,17,22]. Peripheral changes
from HIIT include increases in arterial-mixed venous oxygen difference [18] and a decrease in net muscle glycogenesis and lactate ac-
cumulation in the working muscles [35].

Whilst MICT and HIIT have been shown to produce an increase in VO2max, HIIT and SIT may be considered the superior methods for
improving aerobic performance in team sports players due to their ability to produce significant improvements in markers associated
with aerobic performance with a lower exercise volume and reduced total session duration [4,5,17,22]. Short training durations provide
an advantage when addressing multiple areas of fitness within a given time frame, and are typical with concurrent training programs
[24]. Although HIIT can be used alongside other types of physical training, the additional volume of work performed by trained muscle
groups could lead to overtraining [16], together with a reduction in neural function as a result of an imbalance in endogenous hormones
[10].

During exercise training, it is possible for adaptations to occur even in limbs that have not specifically been used during training. This
is known as a transfer effect. Research exploring the magnitude of a transfer effect from aerobic training [2,21,23,30,31,38], is reported
to result in an increase in performance with an untrained muscle mass and indicates that the adaptation is dependent upon the magni-
tude of the increase in performance within the specifically-trained muscles. In arm training studies, it has been highlighted that when
mode-specific improvements in VO2max are below 20%, no transfer effect was observed [2,23]. However, other authorities [21,31] have
demonstrated a significant transfer effect when an increase of greater than 30% VO2max was achieved in upper body aerobic capacity. In
studies investigating the crossover effects from arm training, subjects performed MIT protocols, with one exception, where a low volume
of repeated, high-intensity efforts was used [38].

It can be confidently acknowledged that the lower limbs are a constant factor in exercise performance and training for cricket
[6,8,11,14,29,36]. When training volume is at a high level, it would be beneficial to add aerobic conditioning via the upper body when
additional lower body exercise may lead to overtraining [16], or when lower limb exercise may not be possible due to injury. The transfer
effect of training has only shown improvements in lower body performance when arm tests produce an improvement greater than 30%
in VO2max [21,31]. However, we are not aware of any studies that have used a HIIT protocol where a minimum amount of exercise time
is spent at or near to VO2max through repeated high intensity intermittent bouts of exercise [12,33]. The aim of this study was therefore
to investigate if a general form of upper body HIIT, as a standalone aerobic training stimulus, would bring about improvements in lower
body aerobic performance in professional level cricket players and thereby the optimization of recovery between high intensity bursts
of activity in matches.
Methods

Participants

Eleven professional male cricket players who played in the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) domestic competition during the
2013 season volunteered to participate in the study. Subjects (mean ± SD: age = 25 ± 4 years, height = 181.6 ± 5.7 cm, and body mass
= 85.7 ± 6.5 kg) were randomly assigned to either a rope training group (n = 6) or a control group (n = 5) before testing. The rope group
was required to perform high intensity interval training (HIIT) in addition to the regular resistance training sessions. The control group
performed the resistance training sessions only with no additional training. All participants were fully informed of any risks involved
in the study before volunteering to be involved. Participants completed a physical activity readiness questionnaire (PAR-Q) and written
informed consent was gained before participation. The study also received local institutional research ethics approval.

Experimental approach to the problem

All participants took part in a four week training program with fitness testing pre- and post-intervention. Training sessions were per-
formed over three days per week for the four weeks with a minimum of 48 hours between each session. A training session consisted of
a resistance training conditioning circuit (see Table 1), which lasted for 50 minutes (a 5 minute warm-up, 15 minutes of mobility/stretch-
ing, and, a 30 minute circuit) followed by the study intervention. The participants were randomly assigned to the HIIT training group
(rope group) or the no additional training stimulus group (control group). The rope group performed the HIIT session following com-
pletion of the resistance session circuit; the control group performed no additional exercise following the resistance session circuit. All
Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 2
Isamed Journals.com
participants had no previous experience of upper limb aerobic training using a rope, arm crank or arm ergometer. All participants were
instructed to follow the training plan and to not perform additional cardiovascular training alongside the training plan. On completion
of the four week program, participants were then re-tested using the same procedures used in the pre-training intervention assessment.

Monday Wednesday Friday

Number of exercises 5 8 6
Exercise/Reps/Load (kg) Squat/20/10, Hip thrust/20/20, Split squat/10+10/0, Ham- Walking lunge/8+8/20, Single
Alternate leg lunge/10+10/0, string bridge/20/0, Step- arm row/10+10/15, Sumo dead-
Romanian deadlift/20/15, Plate ups/10+10/20, Alternate leg lift/20/40, Overhead press/20/20,
twist/10+10/10 reverse crunch/10+10/0, Press Calf raise/20/20, Knee rais-
up/20/0, Inverted row/12/0, es/20/0
Curl and press/12/5-10,
Side raise/20/2.5, Bent over
row/20/15
Sets 4 3 4
Rest 30 seconds between exercises 1 30 seconds between exercises 1 30 seconds between exercises 1
minute 30 seconds between sets minute 30 seconds between sets minute 30 seconds between sets
Table 1. Resistance training conditioning circuit.

The testing procedures consisted of three separate sessions with a minimum of 24-hours between each session. The initial testing session
consisted of anthropometrical assessment and the Yo-Yo IR1 test. The second testing session assessed upper body anaerobic power
and upper body VO2peak. The final testing session consisted of an assessment of a sub-maximal running. Throughout the testing periods
subjects were told to refrain from high intensity physical activity other than that involved in the testing and to maintain their normal
dietary intake.

Performance testing

Upper body sprint test: was assessed using an arm-crank sprint test, where the seating position and resistive loads applied (0.05 kg . kg
body mass-1) were selected for the test following procedures suggest by Smith and Price [34]. Participants were instructed to warm-up
at a crank rate of 60 W for three minutes, during which two trial sub-maximal three second sprints were performed. On completion of
the warm-up, participants were instructed to pedal backwards unloaded for 1.5 minutes to allow for recovery before the sprint test. On
completion of the recovery period each participant was asked to pedal forward again at 60 W with the resistance applied at 30 seconds
following the start of the test. Once the resistive load was applied, the participant performed a maximum effort sprint for 15 seconds.
Following the sprint test, a rest period of 15 minutes preceded the VO2max test. Power output was measured directly at the crank via a
SRM PowerMeter (SRM, Jülich, Germany). The power output (W) for each second of the sprint was recorded and downloaded on to
the SRM software as a report. Peak power output (PPO), mean power output (MPO) and time to peak power (TTPP) were analyzed
and recorded.

Upper body maximal test: was performed on an Angio arm ergometer (Lode, Groningen, Netherlands), and subjects adopted the same
seating position as during the sprint test. Subjects’ VO2peak was measured using a breath-by-breath analysis performed on an Oxycon Pro
(CareFusion, Hoechberg, Germany). Heart rate was recorded using a Polar heart rate monitor with a Polar T61 coded transmitter (Polar
S610i Heart Rate Monitor, Polar Electro Oy, Kemple, Finland). The VO2peak test was performed using a ramp protocol which consisted
of a three minute warm-up period at 40 W, followed by an increase of 1W every six seconds [34]. VO2peak was defined as the highest
VO2 value recorded in the last 30 seconds of the test providing the participant met at least two of the following three criteria: (i) 90%
of modified age-predicted maximum heart rate (210 – age (yrs)), (ii) an respiratory exchange ratio (RER) > 1.15, and, (iii) a plateau in
oxygen uptake (< 150 ml . min-1 in VO2 over the last 30 seconds of the test). Peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak), maximum heart rate
(HRmax), ventilatory exchange (VE), RER and the highest completed power output (Wpeak) were recorded.

Yo-Yo IR1 test: was used to estimate maximal aerobic performance, specific to intermittent sports [1]. The test was conducted as part
of the players’ standard battery of fitness tests and was performed in an indoor cricket facility on a concrete based floor. The Yo-Yo IR1
was performed according to the procedures suggested by Krustrup et al. [20]. Distance completed in the test measured in meters (m)
and maximum heart rate (HRmax) was recorded.

Submaximal running test: was designed to assess the participant’s ability to cope with an intermittent aerobic running task by estimat-
ing the change in exercise efficiency in relation to changes in maximal aerobic performance (Yo-Yo IR1). The test is not specific to the
Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 3
Isamed Journals.com
work:rest ratios identified in cricket [11,27], but rather, it is a generic assessment of intermittent aerobic running. Work intensity was
selected at 80% of the maximal aerobic speed (m . s-1) achieved in the Yo-Yo IR1 test. The work to rest ratio (work:rest) was set to
imitate that of the Yo-Yo IR1, with the subjects’ work time calculated to the nearest second covering 40 m ± 10% at their calculated run-
ning speed. Rest intervals were for 10 seconds as used in the Yo-Yo IR1 test. Participants performed a total of eight minutes of interval
running. Upon completion of the test, heart rate was recorded and whole blood lactate (BLA) concentrations were measured one minute
after the interval running test was completed. For the post-intervention test, the participants’ new maximal aerobic speed, as assessed in
the post-test Yo-Yo IR1, was used to recalculate the 80% submaximal running test intensity thereby ensuring a commensurate intensity
at the pre- and post-intervention assessments.

Upper body HIIT training

The upper body HIIT was performed using a training rope of length = 15 m, diameter = 38 mm and mass = 12 kg (Wolverson Fitness,
Wolverhampton, United Kingdom). The rope was fed through a secure loop on a weighted down sprint sled to enable the subject to
grip each end of the rope. Work-to-rest intervals were selected to mirror that of a previous lower limb HIIT study [17] with participants
performing 15 seconds of exercise followed by 15 seconds of complete rest (15:15). However, the repeated work bouts on the rope were
performed at maximum effort: the intensity was not standardized, and consisted of multiple arm movements, which varied during each
repetition. Rest intervals consisted of the subject holding the rope in a seated position. For the duration of the exercise set, the partici-
pant maintained a seated upright position therefore eliminating any lower body contribution that could come from standing (Figure 1).
In the two minute recovery period between exercise sets, participants were advised to stand and drink water if required.

Figure 1. Subjects performing the upper body HIIT training using the rope in a seated position.

The HIIT program consisted of a gradual increase in training volume over four weeks (see Table 2). Individual training session volume
was designed to target a minimum of five minutes of activity at 85% upper body VO2peak; HR data were recorded to allow analysis of
time spent at 92% of upper body HRmax (T@92%HRmax) on completion of the training session. T@92%HRmax has been identified
as an appropriate field measure to accurately predict the time spent at VO2peak (T@VO2peak) in healthy, young adults [37]. Training inter-
vals were designed in multiple sets in order to allow for a high exercise intensity to be performed over the prescribed session duration
[12,15]. HR data was analyzed following training sessions, and, as a result, no adjustment was made at the time of the session if the
T@92%HRmax was below five minutes.
Week 1 Week 2
Session number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Sets x reps 2x12 2x8 2x10 2x12 2x8 2x10
Repetition work: 15:15 15:15 15:15 15:15 15:15 15:15
rest (seconds)
Total session 6:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 4:00 5:00
work (minutes)
Total session rest 8:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 6:00 7:00
(minutes)

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 4

Isamed Journals.com

Total duration 14:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 10:00 12:00

(minutes)
Week 3 Week 4
Session number 7 8 9 10 11 12
Sets x reps 3x9 2x10 2x12 3x9 2x10 2x12
Repetition work: 15:15 15:15 15:15 15:15 15:15 15:15
rest (seconds)
Total session 6:45 5:00 6:00 6:45 5:00 6:00
work (minutes)
Total session rest 10:45 7:00 8:00 10:45 7:00 8:00
(minutes)
Total duration 17:30 12:00 14:00 17:30 12:00 14:00
(minutes)

Table 2. HIIT plan for the 4-week intervention.

Statistical Analyses
Because we had repeated measures on one independent variable (IV = pre-test vs. post-test) and independent measures on the other IV
(rope group vs. control group) we were able to fit a mixed-design analysis of variance (GLM 5 ANOVA) [13] to analyse the scores col-
lected for each of the 12 dependent variables. In all cases, residuals were saved when running the ANOVAs and were confirmed as being
drawn from a population that was normally distributed on the variables of interest (Anderson-Darling test). Homogeneity of variance
about means was confirmed in all relevant cases using Levene’s test. Due to the small sample sizes in the study, to help determine the
meaningfulness of the effects identified we used Cohen’s d as an effect size statistics (ES) [9]. Here a small effect is characterised as an
ES < 0.2 and a moderate effect as an ES < 0.5 and are considered trivial. Large effects (ES ~ 0.8) were reported irrespective of statistical
significance. Where statistically significant interactions were identified between the experimental groups and the training intervention,
these were considered with respect to contrast plots of the estimated marginal means. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM
SPSS Statistics v22. Statistical significance was accepted at P ≤ 0.05 throughout the data analyses. Data are reported as means ± standard
deviations unless otherwise highlighted.

Results
Adherence to training session attendance was > 95%: rope (96.6 ± 4.6%) and control (95.8 ± 4.8%). There was a non-significant differ-
ence in adherence between the two groups (P > 0.05). Participants in the rope group achieved an average T@92%HRmax of 4:22 ± 1:11
minutes per session, which fell below the target time of five minutes per session. A representative participant’s response for a single rope
training session is shown in Figure 2.
200

180

160

140
Heart rate (bpm)

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
0:00 1:40 3:20 5:00 6:40 8:20 10:00 11:40 13:20

Exercise time
 
Figure 2. Heart rate (HR) response for a representative subject to a high intensity interval session consisting of 2 sets of (12 x 15 seconds [work]: 15
seconds [rest]) with a 2 minute recovery period between sets.

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 5

Isamed Journals.com
Upper body performance

Upper body sprint test: Table 1 shows that in the control group there was a non-significant difference in pre- and post-test means for
both PPO and MPO (P > 0.05). In the rope training group, there was a statistically significant increase in both PPO (CI0.05 = 81 to 208
W, F1,11 = 34.2, P = 0.002; ES = 2.39) and MPO (CI0.05 = 39 to 125 W, F1,11 = 23.7, P = 0.005; ES = 1.98). The interaction effect for
PPO (intervention x groups) was statistically significant: F1,9 = 27.7 (P = 0.001). For MPO the interaction effect was also significant:
F1,9 = 13.9 (P = 0.005). In the control group, there was a non-significant difference in pre- and post-test means for TTPP (P > 0.05). In
the rope group there was a statistically significant reduction in the TTPP (CI0.05 = 1.0 to 2.6 seconds, F1,11 = 35.6, P = 0.002; ES = 2.43).
In terms of the interaction effect recorded (intervention x groups) this was statistically significant: F1,9 = 6.3 (P = 0.034) – see Figure 3.

Figure 3. Time to peak power (TTPP) in the upper body sprint test before (Pre) and following the 4 weeks (Post) of upper body HIIT training (rope)
or the equivilent period without the HIIT training (control). Values are mean ± SD for the 6 and 5 subjects in the groups respectively. *P ≤ 0.05 vs
pre-training.

Upper body maximal test: Table 3 shows that there were non-significant results recorded for the main effect for the intervention (pre-
vs. post-test means), for the main effect between groups (rope vs. control means) and for the interaction effect (intervention x groups) in:
VO2peak, VE, HRmax and RER (P > 0.05). With respect to Wpeak there was a statistically significant main effect for the intervention (F1, 9 =
25.4, P = 0.001), where the rope training group’s increase was statistically significant (pre vs. post diff = 144.7 ± 60.6 W, CI0.05 = 81.1 to
208.3 W; F1,9 = 34.2, P = 0.002; ES = 2.39). However, there was a non-significant change in the control group (pre vs post diff = -3.2
± 15.7 W, CI0.05 = -22.7 to 16.3 W; F1,9 = -0.2, P = 0.673). Whilst there was a non-significant main effect for the groups (F1,9 = 0.3, P
= 0.611) with respect to Wpeak, the interaction effect was statistically significant (F1,9 = 27.7, P = 0.001). In the rope training group, the
significant increase in Wpeak, with no change in VO2peak, highlights an improvement in exercise efficiency when performing the test (see
Figure 4).
3000

2500

2000
VO2 (ml/min)

1500 Pre

1000 Post

500

0
40 40 40 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Power Output (W)

Figure 4. VO2 consumption (ml/min) plotted with power output (w) in the VO2max test before (Pre) and following the 4 weeks (Post) of upper body HIIT
training. Values are mean for the 6 participants in the rope group and reported up to the power output of the lowest value achieved by a participant.

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 6

Isamed Journals.com

Group Pre-test Post-test

Upper body maximal test

Control 35.1 ± 5.5 34.7 ± 4.7

VO2max (ml kg-1 min-1)
Rope 36.1 ± 4.2 35.6 ± 3.9

Control 183 ± 7 183 ± 9

HRmax (b min-1)
Rope 180 ± 6 179 ± 4

Control 160 ± 21 159± 21

VE (L min-1)
Rope 141 ± 22 139 ± 18

Control 1.1 ± 0.1 1.1 ± 0.1

RER
Rope 1.1 ± 0.1 1.1 ± 0.1

Control 168 ± 26 169 ± 21

Maximum completed power output (W)
Rope 149 ± 31 167 ± 24*

Upper body sprint test

Control 639 ± 172 636 ± 164

Peak power output (W)
Rope 610 ± 135 755 ± 100**

Control 507 ± 127 517 ± 137

Mean power output (W)
Rope 478 ± 74 560 ± 39**

Control 5.4 ± 1.5 5.0 ± 0.7

Time to peak power (seconds)
Rope 6 ± 0.9 4.2 ± 0.4*

Yo-Yo IR1 test

Control 1760 ± 294 1804 ± 329

Distance completed (m)
Rope 1927 ±343 2133 ± 269*

Control 190 ± 6 191 ± 6

HRmax (b min-1)
Rope 193 ± 3 192 ± 4

Submaximal running test

Control 172 ± 3 171 ± 7

Test completion HR (b min-1)
Rope 169 ± 8 167 ± 5

Test completion whole blood lactate Control 4.0 ± 0.2 5.6 ± 0.5*

(mmol. L-1) Rope 4.5 ± 1.3 4.3 ± 1.4

* Significant
* Significant differencecompared
difference comparedtotoPre-test
Pre-testmean
mean(P
(P≤≤0.05)
0.05)
**Significant
**Significant differencecompared
difference comparedtotoPre-test
Pre-testmean
mean (P
(P≤≤0.01)
0.01)
Table 3. Physical performance testing.

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 7

Isamed Journals.com
Lower body performance

Yo-Yo IR1 test: In the control group, there was a non-significant difference in pre- and post-test means despite the total mean distance
completed in the test (1760 ± 294 m to 1804 ± 329 m; CI0.05 = -7 to 95 m, F1,11 = 5.76, P = 0.074; ES = 1.07). In the rope group there
was a statistically significant increase in the total distance completed for the test (1927 ± 343 m to 2133 ± 269 m; CI0.05 = 73 to 340 m,
F1,11 = 15.75, P = 0.011; ES = 1.62). The interaction effect recorded (exercise mode x groups) was statistically significant: F1,9 = 7.4 (P
= 0.024). There was a non-significant difference recorded between pre- and post-test means for HRmax in both the control group (190 ±
6 b min-1 vs. 191 ± 6 b min-1) and the rope group (192 ± 3 b min-1 vs. 192 ± 4 b min-1) (P > 0.05).

Submaximal running test: With respect to BLA, there were non-significant results recorded for the main effect for the intervention
(pre- vs. post-test means) and for the main effect between groups (rope vs. control means) (P > 0.05). However, the impact of the effect
of the exercise intervention (intervention x groups) on BLA was statistically significant: F1,8 = 7.7 (P = 0.024). There were also non-sig-
nificant differences for the intervention, groups and the interaction effect with respect to end test HR (P > 0.05).

Discussion
The primary findings of this investigation are that the rope training group achieved a significant increase in the watts obtained during
the upper body maximal test (Wpeak); a significant increase in both peak power output (PPO) and mean power output (MPO), with a
reduction in time to peak power (TTPP) on the sprint test; and a significant increase in the distance achieved on the Yo-Yo IR1 test.
The control group exhibited a large effect on the distance completed in the Yo-Yo IR1 test; and a significant increase in post test whole
blood lactate (BLA) on the submaximal running test when compare to the rope training group following the intervention period. Before
conducting the present study, we could find no literature published on the specific training potential of the upper body in professional
cricket players; no literature on upper body aerobic training other, than that performed on an arm ergometer, and no study to date has
investigated an upper body high intensity interval training (HIIT) protocol using maximal effort intensities for short work and rest bouts.

In the current study there were non-significant differences in adherence to the conditioning training sessions between the groups with
above a 95% attendance rate. The average HIIT time at 92% heart rate maximum (T@92%HRmax) fell below (-13%) the recommended
time of five minutes per session for improvements in VO2max in team sports athletes [3,12]. On reflection it was identified that the ses-
sions did not included enough training volume to allow sufficient T@92%VO2max in male professional cricket players. This is supported
by research that suggests a T@VO2max/exercise time ratio between 35% and 45% for identical work:rest ratios as used in the study [3,12].
When investigating the duration of a rope HIIT session in the current study, the ratio percentages identified is reflective of the values
identified with a T@92%HRmax in the study (4:22 ± 1.11 min). Future use of this training method should assess the individual response
to the rope HIIT training and adjust training volume in order to achieve the T@92%HRmax of five minutes and as a result the T@VO2max
recommended for improvements in VO2max.

In the upper body maximal test there were non-significant differences in HRmax and RER in both group pre- and post-test means iden-
tifying that similar effort was given in each test. Interestingly, in the study there was no specific training effect on the peak oxygen
consumption (VO2max) in the upper body maximal test following the rope HIIT intervention. Previous studies, such as that by Tordi et
al. [38], have shown a large improvement in VO2peak (+49%) in young subjects following arm crank training. Similarly, Pogliaghi et al.
[30] identified significant improvements in older subjects (+24%) following arm crank training. However, on further review, it becomes
clear that exercise volume, and as a result the time at or near VO2max, is likely to be a key factor in bringing about change. In the study by
Tordi et al. [38], subjects’ total exercise time amassed to 135 minutes a week for a duration of six weeks with a slightly lesser exercise
time of 90 minutes per week, but a greater duration of 12 weeks in the study by Pogliaghi et al. [30]. When comparison is made to the
current study, the total exercise time per week (17 minutes 45 seconds) is considerably lower than that reported by either Tordi et al. [38]
(-87%) or Pogliaghi et al. [31] (-80%). The absence of improvement in VO2peak may also be due to the subjects being from a professional
athlete population and having a considerably higher initial VO2peak on the upper body pre-test (36 ml kg-1 min-1) when compared to the
pre-test values of other studies that have shown improvements in VO2peak or in VO2max [2,30,38].

There was an increase of ~12% in maximal exercise capacity on the upper body test following the rope HIIT training. This improvement
highlights that a training rope was able to bring about improvements in upper body exercise capacity, like that of an arm crank ergometer
as previously reported in the literature in young (+66%), middle aged (+16%) and elderly (20%) subjects [2,30,38]. Although these three
previous studies found more substantial improvements in exercise capacity, it is likely to be due to very little previous training experi-
ence [2,38] and much longer training durations [30]. Interestingly, previous improvements in exercise capacity were associated with an
increase in VO2peak, whereas our study did not achieve such an improvement. An improvement in exercise performance with no change
in VO2peak is similar to that found in other studies that utilized short bouts of very intense exercise [4,19]. These studies have identified

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 8

Isamed Journals.com
aerobic exercise performance improvements associated with increased capacity to oxidise pyruvate, increased muscle glycogen content,
increased maximal activity of citrate synthase [4] and an expansion on skeletal muscle mitochondria [19]. In the current study, the
improvements in maximal exercise capacity are likely to have occurred due to one or more or the peripheral adaptations identified in
similar studies.

There was a significant improvement in the running distance achieved in the Yo-Yo IR1 test in the rope training HIIT group (~11%),
which identifies an improvement in lower body maximal exercise capacity following the training intervention. Additionally, there
was a non-significant improvement in the distance achieved in the Yo-Yo IR1 by the control group (~3%), identified by a large effect,
suggesting an improvement also occurred from the duration of resistance conditioning circuit training only. Previous studies that have
observed a transfer effect from arm training to the lower body have noted improvements in VO2max of greater than 30% in the trained
limbs and concluded that central improvements in cardiac output (Qmax) and stoke volume (SV) are responsible for the transfer [21,32].
In the current study, participants experienced minimal change in VO2peak on the arm maximal test following the training, which is likely
due to having a well-adapted central circulatory system to exercise stress and, therefore, the arm exercise did not influence Qmax or SV
[23]. However, in the current study, there was a significant improvement in lower body maximal exercise capacity following the rope
HIIT period, which is unlikely to be related to central improvements.

Rösler et al. [32] speculated that an increase in maximal exercise performance in the untrained limb is due to enhanced capacity for
lactate clearance with an increase in net oxidation of lactate. In their study, investigating leg exercise transfer, VO2peak improvements in
the trained leg muscle were associated with increased capillary to fiber ratio and volume density of mitochondria. In the untrained arm,
muscle VO2peak also increased despite no improvements in either markers associated with improvements. The improvement identified in
this study could explain the increase in lower body maximal exercise performance, although in the Yo-Yo IR1 test, no additional mea-
sures were taken, other than the distance achieved and maximum heart rate, to justify this potential adaptation. Blood lactate measures
were analyzed in the current study, but only for the submaximal running test, which indicated no significant change in end test BLA
concentration following the rope HIIT intervention.

As previously mentioned the control group exhibited a large effect in the distance achieved in the Yo-Yo IR1 test (~3%) and hence
demonstrated an improvement in lower body maximal exercise capacity following four weeks of resistance conditioning circuit training
only. Similar improvements in running performance have been identified in the literature, without changes in VO2max following resis-
tance training. Improvements in trained individuals have been associated with an improved economy of motion and neuromuscular
adaptations [25,28]. Paavolainen et al. [28] identified a reduction in 5 km running time (~3%) following a nine week plyometric resis-
tance-training program. This improvement was associated with an increase in running economy (~8%) and an associated increase in
muscle power (~7%). The work of Millet et al. [25] supports these findings by suggesting that resistance training may improve running
economy by increasing the stiffness of the muscle-tendon unit and hence increasing elastic energy return resulting in a decrease in
ground contact time.

In the current study, it was identified that upper body HIIT using a training rope is capable of producing both specific and transfer im-
provements in exercise performance in professional male cricket players. Initial VO2peak values in the study were higher than identified
by previous researchers and as a result, the training volume performed may be insufficient to provide a stimulus to improve VO2peakin this
population of subjects. Although there was no significant change in VO2peak in the upper body testing, an increase in maximal exercise
capacity in the lower body following the training suggests that a transfer effect has occurred, although the exact, underpinning mecha-
nism(s) for this adaptation remains unclear.

Conclusions

A training rope, as used in the present study, can provide a practical tool for performing HIIT with the upper body in males. In pro-
fessional male cricket players, rope training provides a useful tool for improving maximal exercise capacity in both the trained and
untrained limbs when performed in addition to a resistance training circuit program. It is not evident that the upper body HIIT rope
training used in this study is capable of stimulating central improvements in aerobic fitness in professional cricket players, however, it
does provide a training method to improve lower body aerobic exercise performance with the absence of specific lower body training.
Further research is needed to identify the exact mechanisms responsible for performance improvements in the lower body following a
period of HIIT using only the upper body.

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 9

Isamed Journals.com

References

1. Bangsbo, J, Iaia, FM and Krustrup, P. The Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test : a useful tool for the evaluation of physical performance
in intermittent sports. J Sport Med 38 (1): 37-51, 2008.

2. Bhambhni, YN, Eriksson, P and Gomes, PS. Transfer effects of endurance training with arm and leg. Med Sci Sport Exerc 23: 1035
– 1041, 1991.

3. Buchheit, M, Laursen, PB. High-intensity interval training, solutions to the programming puzzle. Part 1: Cardiopulmonary emphasis.
J Sport Med 43: 313 – 338, 2013.

4. Burgomaster, KA, Heigenhauser, GJF and Gibala MJ. Effect of short-term sprint interval training on human skeletal muscle carbohy-
drate metabolism during exercise and time trial performance. J Appl Physiol 100: 2041 – 2047, 2006.

5. Burgomaster, KA, Howarth, KR, Phillips, SM, Rakobowchuck, M, MacDonald, MJ, McGee, SL and Gibala, MJ. Similar metabolic
adaptations during exercise after low volume sprint interval and traditional endurance training in humans. J Physiol 1: 151 – 160, 2008.

6. Burnett, A, Elliott, B and Marshall, R. The effect of a12-over spell on fast bowling technique in cricket. J Sport Sci 13: 329 – 341,
1995.

7. Carter, H and Jones, AM. Effect of endurance training on parameters of aerobic fitness. J Sports Med 29(6): 373 – 386, 2000.

8. Christie, C, Todd, A and King, G. Selected physiological responses during batting in a simulated cricket work bout: A pilot study. J
Sci Med in Sport 11: 581 - 584, 2008.

9. Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). Routledge, OX: Taylor and Francis, 1988.

10. Crewther, BT, Cook, C, Cardinale, M, Weatherby, RP and Lowe, T. Two emerging concepts for elite athletes. The short-term effects
of testosterone and cortisol on the neuromuscular system and the dose-response training role of these endogenous hormones. J Sports
Med 41(2): 103 – 123, 2011.

11. Duffield, R and Drinkwater, E. Time-motion analysis of Test and One-Day international cricket centuries. J Sports Sci 26: 457– 464,
2008.

12. Dupont, G, Blondel, N, Lensel, G. and Serge, B. Critical velocity and time spent at a high level of VO2 for short intermittent runs at
supra-maximal velocities. Can J Appl Physiol 27: 103 – 115, 2002.

13. Field, A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th edition). London: Sage, 2013.

14. Gore, C, Bourden, P, Woolford, S and Pederson, D. Involuntary dehydration during cricket. J Sports Sci 26: 457 – 464, 1993.

15. Gormley, SE, Swain, DP, High, R, Spina, RJ, Dowling, EA, Kotipalli, US and Gandrakota, R. Effect of intensity of aerobic training
on VO2max. Med Sci Sports Exerc 11: 1336 – 1443, 2008.

16. Halson, SL and Jeukendrup, AE. Does overtraining exist? An analysis of overreaching and overtraining research. J Sports Med 34:
967 - 981, 2004.

17. Helgerud, J, Hoydal, K, Wang, E, Karlson, T, Berg, P, Bjerkaas, M, Simonsen, T, Helgesen, C, Hjorth, N, Bach, R and Hoff, J. Aer-
obic high-intensity intervals improves VO2max more than moderate training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 13: 665 – 671, 2007.

18. Hottenrott, K, Ludwyga, S and Schulze, S. Effect of high intensity training and continuous endurance training on aerobic capacity
and body composition in recreationally active runners. J Sports Sci Med, 11(3): 483 – 488, 2012.

19. Jacobs, RA, Fluck, D, Bonne, TC, Burgi, S, Christensen, PM, Toigo, M and Lundby, C. Improvements in exercise performance with
high-intensity interval training coincide with and increase in skeletal muscle mitochondrial content and function. J Appl Physiol 115:
785 – 793, 2013.
Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 10
Isamed Journals.com
20. Krustrup, P, Mohr, M, Amstrup, T, Rysgaard, T, Johansen, J, Steensberg, A, Pedersen, PK, and Bangsbo, J. The yo-yo intermittent
recovery test: Physiological response, reliability, and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35: 697-705, 2003.

21. Lewis, S, Thompson, P, Areskog, NH. Transfer effects of endurance training to exercises with untrained limbs. Eur J Appl Physiol
44: 25 – 34, 1980.

22. MacPherson, REK, Hazell, TJ, Oliver, TD, Paterson, DH and Lemon, PWR. Run sprint interval training improves aerobic perfor-
mance but not maximal cardiac output. Med Sci Sports Exerc 15: 115 – 122, 2010.

23. Magel, JR, Mcardel, WD, Michael, T and Delio, DJ. Metabolic and cardio- vascular adjustment to arm training. J Appl Physiol 45:
75 – 79, 1978.

24. Mikkola, H, Rusko, J, Izquierdo, M, Gorostiaga, EM and Hakkinen, K. Neuromuscular and cardiovascular adaptations during con-
current strength and endurance training in untrained men. Int J Sports Med 33(9): 702 – 710, 2012.

25. Millet, GP, Millet, GY, Hofmann, MD and Candau, RB. Alterations in running economy and mechanics after maximal cycling in
triathletes: Influence of performance level. Int J Sports Med 21 (2): 127 – 132, 2000.

26. Murias, JM, Kowalchuck, JM and Paterson, DH. Time course and mechanisims of adaptations in cardiorespiratory fitness with en-
durance training in older and young men. J Appl Physiol 108: 621 – 627, 2010.

27. Noakes, TD, Durandt JJ. Physiological requirements of cricket. J Sports Sci 18 (12): 919 – 929, 2000.

28. Paavolainen, L, Hakkinen, K, Hamalainen, I, Nummela, A and Rusko, H. Explosive-strength training improves 5-km running time
by improving running economy and muscle power. J Appl Physiol 86 (5): 1527 – 1533, 1999.

29. Peterson, C, Pyne, D, Portus, M and Dawson, B. Movement patterns in cricket vary by both position and game format. J Sports Sci
28: 45 – 52, 2010.

30. Pogliaghi, S, Terziotti, P, Cevese, A, Balestreri, F, Schena, F. Adaptations to endurance training in healthy elderly: arm cranking
versus leg cycling. Eur J Appl Physiol 97: 723 – 731, 2006.

31. Pollock, J, Miller, H, Linnerud, A, Laughridge, E, Coleman, E, Alexander, E. Arm pedaling as an endurance training regimen for the
disabled. Arch Phys Med Rehab 55: 418 - 424, 1974.

32. Rösler, K, Hoppeler, H, Conley, KE, Claassen, H, Gehr, P and Howald, H. Transfer effect in endurance exercise: adaptations in
trained and untrained muscles. Eur J Appl Physiol 54: 355 – 362, 1985.

33. Sloth, M, Sloth, D, Overgaard, K & Dalgas, U. Effects of sprint interval training on VO2max and aerobic exercise performance. A
systemic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Med Sci Sports 23(6): 341, 2013.

34. Smith, PM & Price MJ. Upper-Body Exercise. In: Sport and exercise Physiology testing guidelines. EM, Winter, AM, Jones, RCR,
Davidson, PD Bromley & TH, Mercer, eds. Routledge, Ox: Taylor & Francis, 2007. pp. 138-144.

35. Soultanakis, HN, Mandaloufas, MF and Plantanou, TI. Lactate threshold and performance adaptations to 4-weeks of training in
untrained swimmers: Volume Vs. Intensity. J Strength Cond Res 26(1): 131 – 137, 2012.

36. Stretch, R and Lambert, M. Heart rate response of young cricket fast bowlers while bowling a six-over spell. South Africa J Sports
Med 6: 15–19, 1999.

37. Swain, DP, Abernathy, KS, Smith, CS, Lee, SJ, and Bunn SA. Target heart rates for development of cardiorespiratory fitness. Med
Sci Sports Exerc 26 (1): 112-116, 1994.

38. Tordi, N, Belli, A, Mougin, F, Rouillon, JD, Gimenez, M. Specific and transfer effects induced by arm or leg training. Int J Sports
Med 22: 517 – 524, 2000.

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 11

Isamed Journals.com
39. Uth, Z. Gender differences in the proportionality factor between the mass specific VO2max and the ratio between HRmax and HRrest. Int
J Sports Med 26 (9): 763 – 767, 2005.

40. Zuniga, JM, Berg, K, Noble, J, Harder, J, Chaffin, ME and Hanumanthu, VS. Physiological responses during interval training with
different intensities and duration of exercise. J Strength Cond Res 25(5): 1279 – 1284, 20.

Cite This Article

Thomas D Turner. Effect of Upper-Body High Intensity Interval Training on Exercise Performance in Professional Cricket Players.
OAJ Exercise and Sports Medicine. 2018, 2(1): 010.

Open Access Journal of Exercise and Sports Medicine 12