Periodization and Block Periodization in Sports .39

Brief Review
Periodization and Block Periodization in Sports:

Emphasis on Strength-Power Training—A
Provocative and Challenging Narrative
Michael H. Stone,1 William G. Hornsby,2 G. Gregory Haff,3 Andrew C. Fry,4 Dylan G. Suarez,1 Junshi Liu,5
Jose M. Gonzalez-Rave,6 and Kyle C. Pierce7
1
Center of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education, SERK, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee;
2
College of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia; 3Center for Exercise and Sport
Sciences Research, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Washington, Australia; 4Jayhawk Athletic Performance Laboratory, University
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdtwnfKZBYtws= on 08/23/2021
of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas; 5Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China; 6Sports Training
Laboratory, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Castilla la Mancha, Spain; and 7Department of Kinesiology and Health Science,
Louisiana State University Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana
Abstract
Stone, MH, Hornsby, WG, Haff, GG, Fry, AC, Suarez, DG, Liu, J, Gonzalez-Rave, JM, and Pierce, KC. Periodization and block
periodization in sports: emphasis on strength-power training—a provocative and challenging narrative. J Strength Cond Res 35(8):
2351–2371, 2021—Periodization can be defined as a logical sequential, phasic method of manipulating fitness and recovery
phases to increase the potential for achieving specific performance goals while minimizing the potential for nonfunctional over-
reaching, overtraining, and injury. Periodization deals with the micromanagement of timelines and fitness phases and is cyclic in
nature. On the other hand, programming deals with the micromanagement of the training process and deals with exercise selection,
volume, intensity, etc. Evidence indicates that a periodized training process coupled with appropriate programming can produce
superior athletic enhancement compared with nonperiodized process. There are 2 models of periodization, traditional and block.
Traditional can take different forms (i.e., reverse). Block periodization has 2 subtypes, single goal or factor (individual sports) and
multiple goals or factors (team sports). Both models have strengths and weaknesses but can be “tailored” through creative
programming to produce excellent results for specific sports.
Key Words: athlete development, accumulation, transmutation, realization
Introduction addition, we address the basic criticisms of periodization that

have recently received attention in the coaching and scientific
Contribution to the Field
literature. Although the concepts and principles discussed in this
Although for many years the “concept” of periodization was well article can be useful at any level, the discussion primarily concerns
accepted by both coaches and sport scientists, several authors competitive athletes and the coaches training them.
have recently criticized and questioned several aspects of the The concept of periodization is a cyclical method of managing
paradigm including underlying mechanisms, room for in- training variables such that the adaptive process occurs in a log-
dividualization, and even the historical and evolutionary basis of ical developmental order. Furthermore, largely based on de-
its development (17,99–101). Although questioning of estab- scriptive and observational studies, this conceptual paradigm,
lished paradigms is an accepted method of serving to crystallize when appropriately programmed and carried through, allows the
thought and promote the evolution of a paradigm, it is not helpful coach and sport scientists to qualitatively predict when a per-
when the questions and criticisms are based on false premises, formance peak is most likely to occur. The development of this
basic misunderstandings, and incomplete or selective reviews of concept has a history going back millennia and, presently, is a
the existing literature. It is our contention that much of the criti- paradigm that is accepted by most coaches and sport scientists.
cism stems from a basic misunderstanding of the fundamental Indeed, periodization in some form has been used in various
definition, underlying concepts, mechanisms, and practical ap- sports, particularly track and field, for over 100 years (90).
plications of a periodized program, especially as it is associated However, recently several authors have attempted to high-
with block periodization (BP). This review is an extension of light the shortcomings in the conceptual paradigm of periodi-
previous commentaries addressing these criticisms (86,186). In zation for sport (17,99–101). We believe that the arguments
this narrative review, we discuss and provide evidence for the made by these authors are flawed and are the result of a series of
historical coaching and scientific development of periodization, misconceptions or incomplete reviews of the historic literature.
and the basic underlying mechanisms related to periodization. In These misconceptions include misunderstanding of the basic
conceptual nature of periodization, misunderstanding the un-
Address correspondence to Michael H. Stone, stonem@etsu.edu. derlying mechanisms driving adaptation, confusing pro-
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 35(8)/2351–2371 gramming with periodization, the use of inefficient and less
ª 2021 National Strength and Conditioning Association efficacious programming methods to drive the selected
2351
Copyright © 2021 National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Periodization and Block Periodization (2021) 35:8
periodization model, and failure to recognize the developmental periodization (and appropriate programming) represents a meth-
and evolutionary history of these factors. odological attempt to manage adaptation to training.
Programming drives the conceptual process of periodization.
Programming is the creation and development of the programs
Methods (exercises sets and repetitions, rest periods etc.) “inside” the fit-
For this narrative review, literature searches using PubMed, ness phases to produce the desired fitness effects. Although peri-
Google, Google Scholar, and Web of Science were performed. odization can be considered a macromanagement process,
The pertinent literature was included. programming deals with the micromanagement of training
(Figure 1).
Historical Development
Background: Periodization and Programming. The fundamental Historical Development and Evolution of Periodization
idea of periodization can be ascertained from the basic definitions
Interestingly, a common misconception concerning periodi-
of periodization found in dictionaries.
zation is that its development was solely a phenomenon of the
c “a round of time marked by the recurrence of some
old Soviet Union and a primary creation of L. Matveyev. Al-
phenomenon or occupied by some recurring process or
though Matveyev is often recognized as the “Father” of Peri-
action.”Wordreference.com
odization, the development of any reasonable conceptual
c “the attempt to categorize something (e.g. history) into
paradigm can usually be shown to have a long developmental
named periods.” Your Dictionary.com
period. Periodization is no different. Figures 2A–C present a
Note, from these definitions, that a larger process is being
partial historical time-line for the development and evolution
broken into phases or periods, and the periods are recurring
of periodization. As can be noted from Figures 2A–C, the de-
(cyclical and nonlinear) in nature. Indeed, periodization is
velopment of periodization has a long history and a rich legacy
marked by removing linearity (121). Thus, periodization for
of development.
sports is part of a management process that provides a founda-
Matveyev (along with Dyson, Pihkala, and Nadori etc.) was
tional mechanistic paradigm. Conceptually periodization in a
one of the first to present a formalized systematic model of peri-
sports context deals with:
odization around 1964 (107). Matveyev’s original model (from
c Timelines and fitness phases
his dissertation) was developed through the monitoring of Soviet
c Conceptually (for most sports): higher volume to lower and
athletes preparing for the 1952 and 1956 Olympic Games—
lower to higher intensity
particularly track and field (107). He was particularly interested
c Less task specific to more task specific.
in why some athletes achieved their best performances at the
We believe this paradigm is best reflected by the following
summer Olympics and others did not. In 1965, based on this
definition:
research, he published an annual training plan modeled on peri-
Periodization is a logical sequential, phasic method of manip-
odization concepts. English translations of this work and his later
ulating fitness and recovery phases to increase the potential for
writings eventually lead to the popularization and use of “peri-
achieving specific performance goals while minimizing the po-
odization” in the West (107,120,121). Matveyev is often credited
tential for nonfunctional over-reaching, overtraining, and injury
for creating the “traditional” model of periodization—however,
(40,41,190,194,195).
this is somewhat misleading as the foundations for this concept
A periodized training process is considered the principal planning
had already been laid. Nevertheless, Matveyev did formalize this
strategy for athlete development and preparation by most coaches
model. Matveyev used the mechanistic ideas of H. Selye,
and sport scientists. Considerable evidence (Table 1) indicates that
N.N.Yakovlev, and I.P. Pavlov to reason that the same stimulus
periodization is quite efficacious and can produce superior perfor-
can be beneficial or detrimental depending on the prevailing cir-
mance adaptations compared with traditional nonperiodized
cumstances and to provide an explanation of the accumulative
methods (32,40,41,47,52,82,83,87,141,163,166,167,233). Indeed,
effect of training coupled with the supplemental effects of addi-
tional “stressors” (107).
Table 1 Linearity is a mathematical function (relationship) that
Reviews of the literature comparing periodized training to graphically is represented by a straight line. Thus, a typical pro-
traditional methods (by ascending year). grammed incremental reduction in repetitions or workload over
time (particularly during a mesocycle) has been termed “linear
Review Sport and training activity
periodization” (168). Matveyev used Yakovlev’s concept of
Fleck et al. (52) Resistance training
“supercompensation” (237,238) as a basis for emphasizing
Plisk and Stone (164) Multiple (emphasis on strength-power)
nonlinearity and rhythmicity during training (107,230). Al-
Rhea et al. (168) Resistance training
Rhea et al. 2004 (169) Resistance training though, Matveyev’s model of periodization has provided great
DeWeese et al. (40,41) Track and field insight into the training process and the necessity of cycles, the
Issurin (87) Multiple “classical or traditional” model of periodization is often errone-
Issurin (90) Multiple ously termed a “linear” model of periodization. Indeed, Mat-
Williams et al. (234) Resistance training veyev noted that the removal of linearity and appropriate
Hellard et al. 2017 (82) Swimming variation in the form of repeating load oscillations provided a
Hellard et al. 2019 (83) Swimming superior method of training:
Cunanan et al. (32) Multiple “wave oscillations characterize load dynamics in both rela-
Mujika et al. (142) Multiple (emphasis on team sports)
tively small and more prolonged phases (stages and periods) of the
Evans (47) Resistance training
Molmen et al. (135) Endurance sports
training process.” Correspondingly, we can single out “waves” of
several categories: small characterizing load dynamics in the
2352
Periodization and Block Periodization (2021) 35:8 | www.nsca.com
Figure 1. Periodization (macromanagement) vs programming (micromanagement). Based on Cunanan

et al. (32).
training in microcycles, average, expressing a general tendency of fatigue but also injuries and perhaps most importantly the
loads in several microcycles, big, which are revealed when eval- emotional and psychological highs and lows of competition
uating the general tendencies of load dynamics in several average during preparation for competition. The order of phases and
cycles which make up the states of periods of training microcycles during the year should be performed in a manner that
cycles” (121). would help ensure that peak performance coincides with the
Using earlier developed ideas of subdividing the training process major competition that was the primary target for the athlete
into fitness phases and timelines (35,56,71,92,104,107,148,157,162), during the annual plan. A more detailed discussion of these
Matveyev further developed this idea in the 1960s–90 s. As noted phases can be found in the reviews of DeWeese et al. (40,41)
previously, timelines were divided into macrocycles, mesocyles, and Plisk and Stone (164).
and microcyles. Dyson’s, Kotov’s, and particularly Pihkala’s Although Matveyev originally dealt with elite and high-level
(56,104,107,162) ideas of the progression of more general fitness (less athletes, an advantage of Matveyev’s conceptual paradigm
specific) preparation to specialized to specific preparation, for athletic was that it could be applied to athletes of any level. Although
competition, was expanded into general preparation, special prepa- many coaches and athletes had been using a form or parts of
ration, competition (including a taper), and transition (active rest). Matveyev’s concept for some time, it was applied to all Soviet
Depending on specific sport training practices, Matveyev indicated athletes for the first time for the 1960 Olympic Games. As the
that many variations of the duration of fitness phases, macrocycles, USSR was a facile winner in the medal count, it seemed to work
and subdivisions are possible; so, specific phase timelines were not (107). As a result, in 1961, a Soviet Central Planning unit was
typically prescribed (107). However, Matveyev emphasized that a set up to assure that all of the Eastern Bloc countries could also
basic preparatory phase should be maintained at effective levels long profit from the periodization concept (107). As sport was (and
enough to enable an athlete to achieve desired results (107,122). As is) tied to politics, a substantial and impressive improvement in
Platonov indicated (111,112), Matveyev’s views correspond with the all aspects of the medal table seemed to indicate the superiority
preparation of most modern advanced and elite athletes, who are “not of the state planning system over the individualistic capitalist
aiming at immediate success in second-league competitions, but at system in maximizing human potential (107). In the German
planned and effective preparation for the most important competi- Democratic Republic (East Germany), Harre (79,80) was the
tions, most of all Olympic Games and World Championships.” Al- first to incorporate periodization theory outside of the Union
though Matveyev’s original model delineated one large macrocycle, of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (107). A common
however, as the competition calendar began to change, this “mono- criticism of Eastern Block success has been because of the likely
cycle” approach was expanded into 2 and later 3 macrocycles (89). (and in many cases confirmed) use of androgens. However, it
Thus, this expansion provided an increased frequency and distribu- is worth noting that androgen use was not confined to the
tion for re-establishing general preparation (accumulative) fitness German Democratic Republic and the USSR, in fact, far from
characteristics and qualities (89). Figure 3 provides a generalized it, as androgen use was commonplace in many countries
schematic representation of this paradigm over one macrocycle. during this time period (48,107,218). Thus, the idea that their
As Figure 3 shows, training proceeds toward a climax (peak) success was solely because of drug use is at best an
performance, which coincides with the most important com- oversimplification.
petition of the macrocycle. As can be noted from Figure 3, In the United States, J. Garhammer (66) published one of
training generally proceeds from less task specificity to greater the first articles dealing with periodization specifically for
and from higher volume to lower creating an inverse re- strength training in athletes, particularly for strength-power
lationship with training intensity. The transition or active rest events. About the same time, “Doc” Counsilman (30,31) de-
is a necessary phase to recover from peaking for an important scribed periodized training for swimmers that he had been
competition. This recovery not only deals with accumulated using for a number of years. The first experimental studies
2353
Figure 2. A) Timeline: ancient to middle ages. B) Timeline: middle ages to modern times. C) Timeline: modern times.
directly dealing with resistance training were those of Stone Traditional Periodization: Problems
and colleagues (191,192,204) some of which were part of the
Several sport scientists and coaches, including Bondarchuk
doctoral dissertation of H. O’Bryant (156). This proliferation
(10,11), Verkoshansky (220,221), and Issurin (89), noted po-
of theoretical concepts, practical observations, and objective
tential problems with the traditional periodization paradigm. A
studies eventually assured world-wide usage of the con-
contemporary of Matveyev, Y. Verkoshanky was a sport scien-
cept (107).
tist, working primarily with track and field, who developed the
2354
Figure 3. An example of Matveyev’s general plan for sport training over 1 macrocycle. T 5 technical
training (degree of task specificity), I 5 intensity of training, V 5 volume of training.
Conjugated Successive System of Training as an alternative to reduction in training volume (i.e., training taper). However, as the
traditional periodization models (220,222–224). Issurin, con- training load is reduced, fitness begins to decay. Because fatigue
temporary with both Matveyev and Verkoshanky also noted dissipates at a faster rate than fitness, preparedness is enhanced,
potential problems with the traditional concept and developed the thus producing a potential peak performance. However, as fitness
BP model. The potential problems with the traditional periodi- continues to decay, preparedness and performance begin to de-
zation concept included: cline. This interplay of fitness and fatigue leaves very little time for
the actual preparedness peak (and potential performance) to be
A Performance Peak Cannot be Maintained for Long Periods. If maintained.
fitness declines too much, then performance will suffer. The as- A change in International Olympic Committee international
sociation between fitness (positive effect) and fatigue (negative rules for amateur athletes in 1981, allowing athletes to accept
effect) has been described in the fitness-fatigue relationship par- money for competition, precipitated considerable discussion and
adigm (164). This paradigm (Figure 4) represents the expression debate as to whether an athlete should be in good shape over a
of fitness (underlying mechanisms) in relation to preparedness relatively long time or an excellent shape for a single major
(potential to perform). Essentially enhanced fitness factors are competition (216). Because of this change many athletes, partic-
related to enhanced preparedness. However, during training, ularly in track and field, started to modify their training according
fitness expression and therefore preparedness is inhibited or to “market” rules (106,107). Rather than trying to peak when it
masked by accumulated fatigue. The expression of fitness can be counted, athletes had to perform over relatively long terms, often
enhanced by reducing accumulated fatigue, as occurs with a to make a decent living (106,107). This alteration in rules and
Figure 4. Association of fitness and fatigue. Fitness 5 underlying mechanisms driving preparedness
and performance (e.g., strength, RFD, V̇O2max, etc.), fatigue 5 inability to maintain or repeat a given
force or power output. Accumulated fatigue can increase recovery time and inhibit adaptation to the
training stimulus, preparedness 5 the difference between fatigue and fitness; represents the po-
tential to perform (Based on DeWeese et al. (40,41), Plisk and Stone (164)). RFD 5 rate of force
development;
2355
Figure 5. Example of periodization for a team sport: American Football.
changes in the competition calendar of many sports began to alter few weeks of each other (38,108). These observations indicate
training considerations and methods. that maintaining a performance peak over several closely
Based on observation and some experimental evidence, it grouped important competitions without retraining would be
seems that a true performance peak can be maintained for ap- quite difficult.
proximately 3 weeks or less (12,44,141,145,151). Issurin (88)
proposed that although measures of fitness, such as maximum Simultaneous Increase in Training Factors. It was noted that
strength, can be maintained for up to 30 days, sports perfor- during training when various fitness and performance factors
mance is a multifactorial process and peak performance for were increased simultaneously, as occurred with traditional pe-
athletes in some sports can be maintained for only about 5–8 riodization programming, 3 major problems can occur:
days. The exact time period that a performance peak can be held c As training volume increases, all fitness factors can also
likely depends on factors such as trained state, the type, length, increase. As long as fatigue is very carefully managed
volume, and intensity factors related to the taper and outside through appropriate variation, training volume can remain
stressors. Thus, it seems that the time window for athletes relatively high, and typically fitness can be maintained.
maintaining a performance peak is quite narrow. Since the However, when volume decreases, all fitness factors can also
1950s and 60s, the competition calendar has become much more decrease simultaneously (220,222,224). Thus, all aspects of
complex, particularly for summer Olympic sports. Often several fitness often decline, potentially interfering with the
important contests, that may require the athlete to reach or beneficial alterations in preparedness, when the athlete tries
maintain a high level of performance or a peak, occur within a to taper and bring performance to a peak.
Figure 6. The interplay of detraining and residual effects. Based on (Issurin (91), Plisk and Stone (164), and Stone
et al. (201)).
2356
Table 2 recoverability or adaptation (65,95,96,125,135,161,174,187,190)

Residual effects: decay timelines with cessation of specific and promote nonfunctional over-reaching and overtraining (22,72).
training.*
Type Physiological adaptation Rate of loss‡ Team Sports. From the beginning, Matveyev himself and other
sport scientists and coaches had doubts as to whether his
Long-term† Musculoskeletal: hypertrophy and architecture No large
alteration
paradigm worked for all sports, particularly team sports
Transformations (muscle, skeleton, and joints), Until mid-old age (91,190). For example, soccer, volleyball, or basketball and
Increased body mass. other sports with a long season, in which each game was sup-
Neural: improved coordination and general y posed to be won, were difficult to reconcile with a concept that
Movement skills, general event specific skills allowed only a very few peaks in performance to win Olympic
Intermediate- Cardiovascular: resting bradycardia, enhanced mo or other major championships. Thus, it was suggested that an
term in-season maintenance phase should be used for these sports
Capillary density, resting and exercise SV, CO, with some type of periodized process leading up to the season
myocardial hypertrophy, and volume alterations and postseason (191,200). Figure 5 represents an example of
Neuromuscular: enhanced effort discrimination mo
periodized training for American Football. During the season,
Force modulation and sport-specific balance
Movement abilities
it was indicated that training volume in the weight room
Short-term Cardiovascular and bioenergetic: enhanced wk should be reduced, whereas intensity was held at moderate to
VȮ 2peak high levels. For some sports with very long competition periods
Enhanced lactate threshold (20–40 weeks), such as professional soccer and rugby, periodic
Type Performance alterations Rate of loss return to a brief accumulation period (1–3 weeks) is often
Short-term Strength: S . SE . power wks to days
necessary to re-establish specific aspects of fitness (e.g.,
strength and power) and must be carefully planned and mon-
*S 5 maximum strength, SE 5 strength endurance (high intensity exercise endurance), P 5 power itored. Furthermore, many teams compete in playoffs, con-
output (88,126,143,144).
ference championships, and regional and national
†Assumes no substantial alteration in training status.
‡Decay by 5%. competitions etc.; it is during these periods that team pre-
paredness and potential performance can be increased through
c Attempting to manipulate large volumes of work, as can occur appropriate volume and intensity manipulations. In addition,
with simultaneous increases in several or all aspects of fitness, in some sports, for example, professional soccer, there may be
requires very careful fatigue management. Thus, very large player rotations allowing some athletes to periodically “rest
volumes of work can (and often do) increase accumulated and recover” from competition for short periods (1–3 weeks).
fatigue to a point that it becomes difficult to recover, as a result During these periods, the rotated players may be able to re-
adaptation and performance suffer (18,19,49,102,200). establish specific fitness aspects through altered or increased
c Simultaneous increases of noncompatible fitness factors volumes of nonsoccer training. The issue of BP in relation to
during training for a few weeks or more can inhibit team sports has been further addressed by Issurin (91).
adaptation of one or more factors, including learning new
skills (14). For example, simultaneous increases in endur-
Block Periodization
ance factors, tends to favor endurance adaptations and can
inhibit development of strength associated factors, such as The BP training approach is an efficient and efficacious alterna-
muscle and connective tissue architecture (e.g., pennation tive to traditional training design.
angle, fascicle length, etc.) and especially explosive strength The basic premises of BP are:
(rate of force development [RFD]) and power c The primary premise of BP is the employment of highly
(7,15,46,64,65,68,93,119,128,170,171). concentrated training workload phases (periodization
It should be noted that the problematic effects of noncompatible blocks) and the resulting after and residual effects.
factors and higher volumes of training, resulting from non- c The blocks must be sequenced in a logical order to benefit
compatible fitness factors, may be compounded by ineffectual from the residual effects.
methods of training. These less productive methods include re- c The BP approach has been proposed in 2 variations: the
sistance training to failure or short interset rest periods that decrease concentrated unidirectional design (single goal or factor)
Table 3
Percent alterations in endurance-related factors across 8 weeks of resistance training.
T1–T2 T2–T3 T1–T3 Expected decrease (no strength training)
VȮ 2max (L 3 min21) 9.2% 21.1% 8.1% 3–4%
VȮ 2max (ml 3 kg21 x min21) 7.3% 21.0% 6.3% 3–4%
*Cycle endurance 5.0% 7.8% 12.2% 5–10%
*Incremental to exhaustion.
2357
Figure 7. Residual effects across a block periodization stage. Based on Issurin (91).
and the multitargeted version of the block training design characteristics training is dropped or decreased (143,144). Sev-
(multi goal or factor) eral studies have investigated the decay rate of fitness character-
istics among athletes. For example, even when strength training
was discontinued, maximum strength has been shown to decrease
Single Factor #2% after 3 weeks (126,143,144) and V̇ O2max approximately
As a result of the observed problems associated with the tradi- 3–5% over 4 weeks with substantial reductions in endurance
tional periodization paradigm, Verkoshansky (221,224) created training (126,143,144). As noted previously, residual effects de-
the concept of a concentrated load (CL) and developed the con- cay at different rates lasting for years to days. Table 2 shows the
jugated successive system of training for athletes, again focusing potential residual effects and relative decay rates (88,231). These
on nonteam sports. This concept laid the foundation for BP. A CL effects may persist for days to weeks depending on the systems
is a “block” of unidirectional training that emphasizes a single or being affected, the training state, and the extent and type of pre-
very few related characteristics, such as strength and rate of force ceding training.
development (221,224). Unidirectional refers to the de-emphasis Of importance, do residual effects, as the result of sequenced
of fitness characteristics other than the training of the primary training blocks, actually persist across subsequent blocks during
fitness characteristic. Issurin (91) noted that residual effects (ef- training? Although few studies have addressed this question,
fects lasting several weeks after the CL was completed) persisted Stone et al. (201) investigated the effects of a resistance training
and could potentiate the next phase (block) of training. Residual accumulation periodization block in which the first summated
effects must be considered within the context of “reversibility.” microcycle (5 weeks) emphasized strength endurance, and the
As training load is reduced or removed, improved fitness char- second (3 weeks) had a lower volume and greater emphasis on
acteristics return toward baseline (reversal), however, there are basic strength. They (201) found that among initially minimally
always residual effects of improved fitness characteristics that trained subjects, the increases in V̇ O2max and cycle endurance
persist for some period of time (Figure 6). It should be noted persisted through the second summated microcycle although the
(Figure 6) that the term “fitness” is used as a summation of all the volume was markedly decreased. Table 3 displays these results.
different fitness residual effects, and the decay rate for different Interestingly, although aerobic power plateaued after the first
aspects of fitness is different. summated microcycle, cycle endurance continued to improve al-
Potentially, the fitness characteristic that was emphasized in a though training volume decreased across the second summated
specific block would have a relatively long-lasting residual. Fur- microcycle, indicating a degree of disconnect between aerobic
thermore, decay rates can be influenced by the trained state, and power and cycle endurance. Nevertheless, it seems that although
sport training that continues after the primary fitness volume was reduced, endurance-related effects did persist and
Figure 8. Stage 5 periodization blocks sequenced to optimize power output.
2358
Table 4
Primary differences between block and traditional periodization.*
Traditional BPm BPs
Development of skills and fitness characteristics Simultaneous Mixture Consecutive
Training variable compatibility Low Moderate High
Training load concentration Low Moderate High
Relative difficulty for High High Low
Fatigue management
Focal emphasis Training periods Blocks Blocks
Background/framework Cumulative Cumulative 1 some residual effects Cumulative 1 residual effects
Potential compatibility with calendar Moderate High High
*BPm 5 multifactor block periodization; BPs 5 single factor block periodization.
even improved. So, based on available evidence, it seems that duration of which was 22–26 weeks (91,226,227). This 3-block
residual effects are sustainable and could potentiate a subsequent cycle became the basis of the 3 “periodization” blocks: accumu-
phase; this theoretical concept is shown in Figure 7 in which the lation, transmutation, and realization 5 stage. A stage roughly
goal is increased power. corresponds to a mesocycle. Because of continued alterations in the
Another important basis of the theoretical BP background are the competition calendar, specific needs of different sports and in-
phasic alterations of training magnitude and sport performances that dividual athlete, the exact length of these blocks have been further
often follow the execution of one or more blocks (3–12 weeks) of altered and blocks may range from 2—8 weeks
highly concentrated strength-endurance or strength-power training. (40,41,195–197,200). In addition, blocks may be aggregated
Among advanced athletes, these alterations typically show a decline (summed) such that 2 or more smaller blocks make up a BP block.
during the initial phase and subsequent enhancement of speed, RFD, For example, in strength-power sports, a 4 weeks block of strength
and related variables on return to “normal” training endurance may be combined with a subsequent 4 weeks block of
(91,205,222,224). In addition, achievement of peak performance in basic strength training to form an 8 weeks accumulation block. The
the targeted sport activity was often delayed and “super- individual blocks (3 6 2 weeks) have been termed summated
compensated” above baseline. Verkoshansky (222) proposed that microcycles as the fitness characteristic being emphasized is con-
these phasic alterations would have a deterministic effect and termed stant throughout (40,41,195–197,200).
this phenomenon the “long-term lagging training effect”—or A fundamental axiom of BP (and periodization in general) is
“delayed training effect” (DTE) (88,90,222). that within a stage, the blocks must be sequenced logically in
Based on these observations and after considerable experimen- order to produce the desired effects. For example, if explosive
tation with different types and numbers of concentrated loads, a 3- strength (RFD) and power output are the primary goals, the se-
block unidirectional training system was proposed (91,225). This quence typically proceeds as shown in Figure 8.
unidirectional system used a work-loading sequence that pro- In this example (Figure 8), during the realization phase, note
gressed from power and strength development (2–3 months) to that a short (1 week) planned overreaching (POR) period pre-
more training emphasizing specialized sport-specific power ori- cedes the taper. Some evidence and careful observation indicate
ented movements (2 months) and event-specific technique en- that a brief return to higher volume training with relatively high
hancement (along with a taper) with competitive performance loading will further enhance the accumulation phase adaptations
practice (3–5 weeks). Verkoshansky termed this 3-block se- and enhance the residual effects thus leading to greater realization
quence (blocks “A,” “B,” and “C”) the “big adaptation cycle,” the of performance (8,9,24,25,199,200).
Figure 9. Example of a multifactor/semi-unidirectional block periodization (BP) paradigm for colle-

giate (division 1) basketball. SE 5 strength endurance, PE 5 power endurance, OR 5 planned
overreaching (POR).
2359
Table 5
Unidirectional (single target) Block Periodized Program.*
Study Design Effects, mixed sports
Villani and Gesuale (228) 5 CL blocks vs trad mixed program (21 SEM Shoot boxing) (13 wk) BP .trad: endurance, HIT frequency, and HIT endurance
da Silva Mariho (34) 3 CL blocks: strength and power speed (3 EM swimmers) (18 wk) BP . anaerobic power and body comp (PhD dissertation)
Breil et al. (15) BP vs. trad mixed program (21 EMJ alpine Ski) (short overreach) Superior effect of BP program on VȮ 2max and anaerobic threshold
power
Strength athletes
Hartmann et al. (81) 2 blocks design: hypertrophy (10 wk) and strength-power vs DUP BP . DUP 1 Rm bench, IBP, and IRFD
(40 M trained strong and weak subjects) (14 wk)
Painter et al. (159,160) 3 CL blocks: (SE, strength, and power) (26 MF D-1T and F) (11 wk) BP . IMTP, IRFD, 1RM squat strength, and RFD gains/VL . trad;
BP , trad monotony and s strain, fewer negative hormonal
alterations
Carroll et al. (24,25) 3 CL blocks: (SE, strength, power) (15M well-trained) (10 wk) BP . trad IMTP PF, RFD jumps (50 ms); loaded and unloaded
jumps; BP . trad CSA gain, greater II:I CSA
Suarez et al. (205) Characterization of BP effects on advanced- 9 SEMF WL’s RFD increases and falls with alterations in volume and intensity.
Small to moderate increases in RFD and CSA over a stage
*CL 5 concentrated load.; CSA 5 cross-sectional area; EM 5 elite male; EMJ 5 elite male juniors; DUP 5 Daily Undulating Periodization; HIT 5 high intensity training; IBP 5 isometric bench press; IMTP 5
isometric mid-thigh pull; PF 5 peak force; RFD 5 rate of force development; VL 5 volume load; MF 5 male and female; SEMF 5 sub-elite male and female; WL’s 5 weightlifters.
Problems With Single Factor Block Periodization c Simultaneous multifactor training should be made to be as
compatible as possible
As previously noted for traditional periodization, single factor BP is c Multiple factors trained simultaneously can raise total
not always suitable for team sports requiring multiple fitness and volume of training, making fatigue management more
technical factors to be improved simultaneously (23,107,138). This challenging.
simultaneous improvement of various technical and fitness aspects is The primary differences between traditional and the 2 subtypes
particularly important for high-school and collegiate team sports in of BP are shown in Table 4.
the United States (and some other countries with similar systems). The primary challenge(s) using multifactor BP is reducing
This is related to the limited time periods from the end of an active noncompatibility and excessive training volume during
rest or holiday (such as summer break) and the first game of the training. For example, especially during an accumulation
season. Often this period of time is only 2–3 weeks. In any case, it phase, evidence indicates that simultaneously training for en-
became quite obvious that some aspects of training did not always durance, strength, explosiveness, and speed can mute the ad-
carryover or some important factor did not develop at the appro- aptations for strength and particularly for explosiveness and
priate time. Multiple factor periodization concepts were developed speed (29,62,64,76,84,130,131,154,180). Therefore, to re-
to help obviate these problems (89,90). Multiple factor (target) BP duce noncompatibility, the selection of exercise methods
can present challenges: should be critically appraised. For example, during accumu-
c Several factors—sometimes not completely compatible, lation phases, gaining endurance is often a goal; however,
must be trained early in process (win every game)— rather than long slow distance training, evidence indicates that
however, some types of multiple factor concentration must specific interval or intermittent training methods can offer less
take place to take advantage of residual effects—thus this compromise, are more time (and volume) efficient, and pro-
training paradigm is semiunidirectional duce equivalent or superior adaptation (36,85,98,173,217).
Table 6
Single Target—Sports with strong endurance component.*
Study Design Effects
Issurin et al. (93,94) T Program (1 season) vs. BP design using 3 block-types (2 seasons); Significant superiority of BP for power propulsive efficiency and
3 y, (23 EM kayak) performance time in 1000-m kayak
Garcia-Pallares et al. (64) BP vs trad using 3 block types (10 EM kayak) (2 y) Significant superiority of BP in kayak peak performance and peak
power; earned Olympic gold medal
Rønnestad et al. (170) BP program (1 wk HIT 3 wk LIT) vs. trad mixed Superiority of BP group in program (21 SEM cycling) VȮ 2max and
power output at (4 wk overreach) 2 mmol/L although volume and
intensity was similar to trad
Storen et al. (202) BP program (4 mo with 2 blocks HIT 9 and 10 d) vs. mixed trad BP . trad: VȮ 2max and time trial performance
program; 2 seasons; 1 EM cyclist, case study (4 mo)
Bakken (5) BP program: 5 wk with 2 weekly blocks of HIT vs. trad program; (10 BP . trad: VȮ 2max and time to exhaustion
SEM skiers) (5 wk overreach)
Alecu (1) BP annual program (5 stages, 3 block types) vs. trad program; (19 BP . trad: endurance trials multi-peak performances and training
SEMF Ski) (1 season) volume
Rønnestad et al. (171) BP vs mixed trad (7 SEM cyclist) (12 wk; 4 wk overreach) BP . trad: VȮ 2max, power output at 2 mmol/L and power output
during 40-min all-out trial
*EM 5 elite male; HIT 5 high intensity training; LIT 5 low intensity training; SEMF 5 sub-elite male and female.
2360
Table 7
Multifactor BP for strength-power sports.*
Characterization and comparison against previous training
Moreira et al. (138) BP: 3 blocks: strength-power, speed and intensity, game Significant gains in jump performance; game activities not
practice; 2 cycles (8 EM basketball)—no comparison group reported
(23 and 19 wks
Porta and Sanz (165) Annual plan based on 3 block types, single case study elite Outstanding performances of Carlos Moya in 2002–2004
M tennis player (3 y)
de Souza et al. (39) BP program (4 blocks: strength, power, speed, and Significant gains in jump performances, agility, anaerobic,
practice); (11 EM team handball) comparison group (16 and games activities not reported
wks)
Campeiz and de Oliveira (23) Seasonal program including blocks of highly concentrated Significant gains of anaerobic power, decreased body fat,
strength/power training (16 EM soccer) (1 y) and games activities not reported
Marques et al. (118) BP: 5-wk accumulation phase, 5-wk transmutation, 3-wk Statistical increase in SJFT
realization phase (21 EM and 11 NatM judo players (13 wk))
Comparisons vs traditional
Bartolomei et al. (6) BP vs. trad: 3 blocks (SE, S, and P) 25 strength and power BP . trad: 1 RM bench and bench power
athletes competing in track and field throwing events or in
rugby and American football in the Italian leagues (15 wk)
Pliauga et al. (163) BP vs trad (10 SEM Basketball) (8 wk preseason) BP . trad: CMJ, no sprint differences
Rønnestad et al. (172) BP (wks 1, 3,4,and 6 strength training; wks 2 and 5 HIT BP . trad: peak torque knee extension knee at 60˚ 3 s21,
aerobic) vs. trad mixed methods (Hockey) (6 wk) mean power output during a 30-s cycling sprint
*1 RM 5 1 repetition maximum; CMJ 5 countermovement vertical jump; EM 5 elite male; HIT 5 high intensity training; SJFT 5 static jump flight time.
Although various factors are being trained simultaneously, the using athletes or very well-trained subjects using sport training
degree of de-emphasis of noncompatible factors is not as sub- paradigms in which training was performed in addition to re-
stantial as in single factor paradigms. In this example (Figure 9), sistance training. The studies range from a few weeks to years.
note that in the accumulation phase, although basketball practice Although there have been a few comparisons which do not favor
is minimized, the other fitness variables increase and strength BP, we note that none of the studies we have been able to locate
training predominates. However, by the early transmutation indicated that BP was not at least equal in effecting performance
phase, basketball practice becomes dominate and the exercise (67,97). Tables 5–8 illustrate results of comparisons. These
selection during strength training and sprint agility exercise be- studies indicate that BP can be a very efficacious and typically
come considerably more task specific. Strength training again superior method of training.
briefly predominates during planned overreaching (POR) at the
beginning of realization. Exercises become more task specific and
power oriented as volume decreases during the taper portion of Programming Considerations: Details, Subtleties,
realization. and Nuances
As noted previously, programming drives periodization. This means
that to “cause” a periodization block to produce desired effects, sets,
Evidence of Block Periodization Efficacy
repetitions, exercise selection, etc., must be chosen so that the desired
This section will deal with evidence that BP produces superior result has a strong potential for success (32,206). Although this
performance alterations compared with other methods of train- section is not meant to be all inclusive of programming details and
ing. It should be noted that the programming of these compari- nuances, there are several important considerations:
sons would affect the outcome—a factor discussed later in this c Generally large multijoint (MJ) exercises typically affect
article. We are also limiting the evidence presented to studies greater physiological adaptations or more efficiently
Table 8
Multifactor BP—team sports with strong endurance component.*
Comparison with different methods
Stolen et al. (185) Aerobic block versus dribbling drills (20 SEM soccer) (10 d) BP . DD: VȮ 2max—favorable game activity?
Characterization/compare with previous training
Mallo et al. (115) BP annual plan based on 3 block types, 4 seasons, 77 elite Significantly better performances after realization block and
soccer players (4 y) mesocycle
Mallo (116) Annual plan divided into 5 stages with 3 block types; (22 E Significant gains in jumping performance, sprint, and Yo-Yo
soccer players (1 y)) test
Wahl et al. (232) Single block of aerobic HIT program; (12 SE soccer players) Significant gains in RSA (46%) and Yo-Yo endurance (24%)
(13 d)
*HIT 5 high intensity training; DD 5 dribbling drills; RSA 5 repeated sprint ability.
These studies were conducted in a variety of activities and sports requiring different physiological and performance characteristics.
2361
Table 9
Example of exercises used to create a strength emphasis, power emphasis, and power and explosive emphasis.§
Strength emphasis (Figure 10A)
Monday and Thursday Wednesday Saturday
Squats Power snatch (very light) Power snatch (very light)
Push press Snatch grip shrugs* Clean grip shrugs*
Bench press Snatch pulls (floor) Clean pulls (floor)
Dips† Bent over rows† Bent over rows†
Tuesday and Friday
Short (15–20 m) sprint build-ups
Heavy med ball (backward overhead throw)
Sit-ups (3 3 10)
Lying windshield wipers (3 3 10)
Stretching
Power emphasis (Figure 10B)
1/3 squats (power rack) Power snatch (very light) Power snatch (very light)
Push jerk Snatch grip shrugs* Clean grip shrugs*
Incline press Snatch pulls (mid-thigh pulls from blocks) Clean pulls (mid-thigh pulls from blocks)
Dips† Pull-ups Pull-ups
Tuesday and Friday
Incremental med ball (backward overhead throw)
Sit-ups (3 3 10)
Stretching
power and explosive emphasis (Figure 10C)
1/4 squats (power rack)‡ Power snatch (very light) Power snatch (very light)
Box jumps‡ Snatch grip shrugs* Clean grip shrugs*
100 incline press (dumbbells) Power snatch Power cleans
Tuesday and Friday
Incremental med ball (forward and side from 1/4 squat)
Sit-ups (3 3 10)
Stretching
*Pull first repetition from floor.
†Assistance exercises (volume not included).
‡Complex with 1/4 squats (vest: loaded up to 5% of 1 RM squat).
§Strength emphasis and power emphasis that the exercises do not always have to change substantially to change the programming emphasis (Figures 6A, B). Typically, major exercise alterations should be
made during the realization block to better ensure task specificity is being addressed. These task-specific alterations are not only movement pattern based but should also include an emphasis on explosive
strength (RFD) and power output. It should also be noted that combination training heavy and light days cannot be effectively accomplished when training to failure. Training to failure entails a consistent relative
maximum effort, resulting in poor fatigue management and inability to achieve a true loading spectrum (25,136).
produced performance alterations and typically provide c Although it is not clear, some evidence suggests that
greater transfer to sport-related variables and sport perfor- combining high intensities of training with low aerobic
mance (92,113,160,198,206). intensities or very low volumes creates less interference
c Exercise order during a session makes a difference—the most during typical long slow distance training (127,183).
important exercises should be programmed first. Typically, Importantly, very short bouts of high intensity interval
this requires large muscle mass, MJ exercises to be performed activity such as sprints also seem to minimize the effects of
first. There are 2 major reasons to use this order: first, the concurrent training interference from typically associated
intensity falls off as a session moves forward which can affect with endurance training and likely offer superior benefits for
the level of adaptation in more important exercises, and strength-power athletes (128).
second, it is possible that small muscle mass exercises first may c Within the microcycle, programming wave-like loading from
fatigue stabilizers increasing injury potential during large MJ day to day or week to week seems to enhance training out
exercises (3,4,42,77,177–179,190). comes (40,41,163,190,197). These findings encompass a
c The session order likely makes a difference, simultaneous variety of sports and resistance training (19,20,25,55,156,158).
endurance activities can interfere with strength-power c For resistance training, and likely other forms of training
adaptations, particularly explosive strength (RFD) and (55), combination training (heavy plus light loading)
high velocity movements (62). Especially for athletes creates a wave-like variation throughout a microcycle and
using multiple sessions per day, placing the strength makes a positive difference in performance adaptation,
training session first (or in some cases on a different day) particularly RFD and power output. This training method
may reduce or eliminate the interference effects can be combined into the same training session (208–210)
(43,45,146). or take the form of unload weeks and heavy and light days
2362
Figure 10. A) Microcycle variation: heavy and light days emphasizing maximum strength development for an advanced
strength-power athlete, such as a thrower. Note heavy-light day difference for primary exercise are 5–10%. Assistance exercise
are different by 0–5%. Relative intensity is based on sets and repetitions rather than 1 RM (25,40,41,190). Volume load includes
all sets (target sets 5 3 3 5). Examples of exercises used during a strength emphasis are shown in Table 6a. B) Microcycle
variation: heavy and light days emphasizing power development for an advanced strength-power athlete, such as a thrower.
Note heavy-light day difference for primary exercise are 15–20%. Assistance exercise are different by 0–5%. Relative intensity is
based on sets and repetitions rather than 1 RM (25,40,41,190). Volume load includes all sets (target sets 5 3 3 5). Examples of
exercises that can be used in a power emphasis are shown in Table 9. C) Microcycle variation: heavy and light days emphasizing
power and explosiveness development for an advanced strength-power athlete, such as a thrower, during a realization block.
Note heavy-light day difference for primary exercise are 15–25%. Assistance exercise have been dropped. Relative intensity is
based on sets and repetitions rather than 1 RM (25,40,41,190). Volume load includes all sets (target sets 5 3 3 5). Examples of
exercises that can be used in a power and explosive emphasis are shown in Table 6c. 1 RM 5 1 repetition maximum;
(19,20,25,156,158). Heavy and light resistance training Figures 10A–C provides examples of different emphases for ad-
days (24,158,159) typically consist of reduced loading vanced athletes (Table 9).
(10–20%) and volume load on the light day and not c Concentrated load: normally associated with single factor
training to failure as this would obviate the contrasting BP and individual sports but is often incorporated into team
effects (failure always produces a relative maximum). sport programs in the “off” season. Typically, one
This method (Table 9, Figure 10A–C) can also be summated microcycle (4 weeks) that takes advantage of
integrated such that combination training can take place unidirectional stimuli (concentration) and volume alter-
both within a training day and also across the microcycle ations. The final effect is due to the interplay of a
(heavy and light days) and is commonly used in resistance concentrated stimulus and volume manipulations. The
training (25,40,41,78,158). concentration can be one of any fitness characteristics
There seems to be 2 important aspects to this method of (e.g., strength endurance, strength, power etc.). Primary
training that may enhance performance adaptations. First is performance may decrease during the CL. After returning to
fatigue management (40,41,188,189). Indeed, programming more normal training, there can be a DTE causing an
paradigms using unload weeks and heavy and light days can increased performance (222).
reduce training strain and monotony compared with programs A type of CL referred to as POR is a short-term period of very
using less variation (25,158). The second aspect deals with high volume or intensity (1–2 weeks). Performance often shows a
providing a diverse loading scheme which results in a spectrum decrease during the POR phase. After returning to normal volume
of force, RFD, velocity, and power outputs across a training training, as with a CL, there can be a DTE causing a more stable
session and through each microcycle. By using a spectrum of or often an increased performance. The POR likely causes addi-
loading, it may be possible to substantially enhance 2 com- tional adaptations beyond normal training (8,188,203). The POR
patible aspects of training simultaneously, beyond that of only should be applied suddenly, represent a substantial increase in
training one aspect, for example, strength and velocity of loading, and result in a considerable perturbation in homeostasis.
movement (78,208–210). Among strength-power athletes, Some data indicate that well-trained and advanced athletes re-
weightlifters likely train more often with this type of combi- spond to the POR better than lesser trained athletes (58,82).
nation training and display marked enhancement of both Often a primary vehicle for the POR is an increase in basic
strength and power, typically higher than most other athletes strength training (8,82). When the POR precedes a taper, this may
(123,193). increase the performance enhancement effects of the taper
It should be noted that this concept of combined training does (8,82,200). Figure 11 shows the expected theoretical effects of a
not mean that one factor cannot be emphasized at specific times. POR coupled with a taper.
2363
Figure 11. Planned overreaching: volume load (usually accompanied by intensity) is substantially
increased above that of “normal training” loads. Combination heavy-light loading still occurs through
the planned overreaching (POR) phase (Figures 10A–C). Evidence indicates that in many cases, as
with a typical concentrated load, performance and the T:C ratio may decrease during this phase.
Evidence further indicates that there can be a performance “supercompensation” that occurs with a
return of the T:C ratio to normal or higher, especially if the POR is accompanied by a taper.
This section has summarized many of the most important aspects Periodization and Programming are Often Confused. From a
of programming that affect the outcome of periodization blocks, the conceptual paradigm, it is apparent that many authors are still con-
stage and the final outcome of a periodization process. We have not fusing periodization with programming (32,86,186). In brief, peri-
discussed several programming methods such as polarized training odization is a conceptual athlete management system dealing with
for endurance, cluster sets, complex sets, etc. because this is beyond periodic timelines and fitness phases; depending on the goal of the
the scope of this review. For strength-power training, and a more training process, it creates time direction of training volume, intensity,
detailed discussion of exercise selection, sets, and repetitions, etc., the and task specificity factors. For example, a goal for most sports is to
reader is referred to Carroll et al. (25); DeWeese et al. (40,41), Haff increase strength, power, and velocity of movement, generally the
et al. (74) and Haff and Nimphius (73). For endurance training and conceptual paradigm moves from higher to lower volume, lower to
accompanying strength training, the reader is referred to Shumann higher intensity, and less task specific to more task specific
and Ronnestad (175). (32,40,164). Programming “drives” the periodization phases as
properly applied programming creates the appropriate physiological
and psychological environment in order for the appropriate adaptions
during a specific phase to take place. Thus, programming includes
Criticisms of Periodization and Block Periodization and
exercise selections, loading parameters, rest periods, etc. (32). For
Factors Effecting the Mechanistic Paradigm
example, Buckner et al. (16) refer to induction of muscle size alter-
The following are criticisms of “periodization” often noted in the ations using a variety of intensities (30–80% 1 repetition maximum [1
literature (and unfortunately social media). We briefly address RM]) as rationale against periodization, when a specific reference in
these criticisms: this manner would actually be referencing a programming decision.
Periodization was Created for the Management of Resistance Periodization is Unnecessary, Particularly for Resistance
Training Along With Other Stressors. One common mis- Training. Kiely (99–101) and Buckner et al. (16,17) indicate
conception often encountered in the literature is the implication that that the periodization conceptual paradigm is flawed and does
periodization was developed to incorporate resistance training into not work, particularly for resistance training. Part of this
an overall training management structure (16). Although there is no criticism stems from the idea that periodization is not “flexi-
doubt that resistance training should be an essential component of ble” enough to meet athlete needs. Much of this type of criti-
human performance development, there is no evidence that we are cism usually stems from the often erroneously stated and very
aware of that indicates that periodization was created or developed typical confusion of periodization with programming (32,86).
As a result of this misunderstanding, several forms of pro-
to specifically incorporate resistance training into a periodized pro-
gramming such as “autoregulatory periodization” “flexible
gram, integrated, or stand alone. As noted in the introduction of this
periodization, “tactical/technical periodization, “agile peri-
article, periodization did not come into being with Matveyev as it
odization,” etc. have been created that are purported to offer
was developed and historically evolved as a concept for the in- increased flexibility and address the individual characteristics
tegration and management of all aspects of training, not specifically and attributes of athletes (86,100). However, none of these
resistance training (32,89,90). Furthermore, there have been several programming models adequately address the basic tenants of
studies that examine “periodization” (programming) simulta- periodization (86), particularly for long-term development. It
neously with other “stressors” (24,25,78,105,158,159). should be noted that substantial flexibility for
2364
Figure 12. Block periodization as part of the traditional paradigm (Matveyev’s terminology).
individualization, and thus a substantial degree of “autor- training phases. From a logical conceptual aspect, the paradigm of first
egulation” can be built into appropriate programming schemes increasing muscle CSA to potentiate strength (and power) gains have
(e.g., ranges of intensity and work within set-rep schemes), been around for a considerable length of time (137) and have sub-
individualized warm-up protocols, individualized relative in- stantial theoretical support (114,119,133,213,239). In brief, we be-
tensities, individualized rest periods, monitoring induced al- lieve that there is sufficient evidence indicating that resistance trained
terations, etc. (32,40,41). Furthermore, a substantial degree of hypertrophy, along with other factors, does in fact enhance maximum
flexibility can be built into the periodization paradigm itself. strength and related characteristics. CSA enhancement magnitude
Typically for most sports, the periodization paradigm proceeds depends on several factors including training methods and trained
from high to low volume. However, these phases can be re- state. Compared wi other factors such as neurological adaptations,
versed for some sports to produce somewhat different effects selective motor unit hypertrophy, tissue stiffness etc., it is likely that the
often enhancing specific endurance factors (69). In addition, whole muscle hypertrophy impact on maximum strength and related
the length of time that a phase lasts can be altered based on a factors is relatively small, particularly in early phases of training.
number of factors, including the competition calendar, the However, total hypertrophy (myofibrillar) resulting from long-term
trained state, or the level of accumulated fatigue carried over resistance training does substantially contribute to strength de-
from the previous stage. Using BP as an example, if the time velopment (114). We also note that there is evidence from both early
from the last active rest stage until the next important com- muscle activation and CSA studies (75,139) and later studies (33,37)
petition is 8 weeks then several variations of the block time indicating that the initial gains (up to 6–8 weeks) in hypertrophy
periods could occur, for example, (myofibrillar) are negligible to small and likely do not contribute
In underdeveloped athlete (based on monitoring): markedly to increased maximum strength because these hypertrophic
Accumulation (3 weeks), transmutation (3 weeks), and re- gains are largely edema or sarcoplasmic (169). However, this evidence
alization (2 weeks). also suggests that later alterations (after 8 weeks) in CSA (myofi-
In an elite athlete in good condition (based on monitoring): brillar) can begin to contribute to alterations in strength and related
Accumulation (1 week), transmutation (4 weeks), and re- characteristics (114,219). This idea is in concert with most studies with
alization (3 weeks). which we are familiar. Thus, there is (and has been) ample evidence to
In addition, if, based on monitoring, illness, injury etc., understand why initial resistance-trained increases in CSA do not al-
expected development is not occurring during a specific periodi- ways associate with gains in strength and related characteristics,
zation block (or a CL), a different block can be substituted such particularly among untrained and minimally trained subjects.
that appropriate development resumes. Thus, there can be con- Second, it has also been indicated that variation in training is
siderable individualization and flexibility within both the para- largely unnecessary and that there is little or no evidence to support
digm of periodization and the programming constructs. the need for variation in resistance training or in periodization pro-
For resistance training, there are 2 primary reasons underlying this gramming or for that matter periodization in general (16). However,
criticism: first, it is indicated (16) that increases in muscle cross- consider simple observation, subjects including athletes cannot typi-
sectional area (CSA [hypertrophy]) from resistance training do not cally tolerate constant high volume or heavy MJ exercise loading for
contribute to strength gains and thus an initial high-volume phase is extended periods without experiencing nonfunctional overreaching
unnecessary. Indeed, an initial alteration in body composition (in- or perhaps overtraining and certainly increased injury potential. In-
cluding myofibrillar hypertrophy) is conceptually (along with the deed, in pilot studies in our laboratory results (Auburn, Edith Cowen
more important increased work capacity) a tenet of resistance training University, East Tennessee State University, and West Virginia Uni-
periodization aimed at increased strength, RFD, power, etc. From a versity), we noted that subjects, from a spectrum of training back-
periodization and programming standpoint, the initial hypertrophic grounds, performing MJ, heavy loading (95–100% of 1 RM),
gains are not only related to strength gains but also likely potentiate constant heavy loading for the required set and repetition scheme (for
later gains in strength and related characteristics across subsequent example: 3 3 5 at 95–100%), or high-volume training could at best
2365
only increase or maintain performance (1 RMs, sprints, and jumps) movements may be different. Type II fibers produce somewhat
for about 4–5 weeks—longer periods resulted in performance de- greater specific tension, substantially higher rates of force de-
clines. This agrees with the observations of Fry et al. (60,61). In velopment, velocities, and power outputs (13,127,129). Although
addition, if Buckner et al. (16) are correct then rearranging the phases training to failure, as a result of fatigue, can recruit high threshold
of periodization would make no difference in the outcome; however, MU’s, recruitment seems to be incomplete and selective (110,132).
this does not seem to be the case. For example, in several studies, Training to failure, particularly with higher repetitions, tends to select
researchers have reversed the order of fitness phases (and therefore Type I MU and heavier loading and ballistic movements targeting
programming) from typical and found different outcomes, sometimes type II MU (24,57,152,153,229). In addition, evidence indicates that
subtle, nevertheless different (2,26–28,69). This evidence also in- endurance training can interfere with strength training adaptations
cludes resistance training (166,168). It should be noted that in many (62,236). Many athletes who depend on an endurance factor as well
of the early resistance training studies, researchers examined pro- as strength and speed-related factors (e.g., soccer) use training that
gramming using variation versus various constant repetition pro- relies heavily on both aspects of training. Of interests would be the
gramming schemes with high and low volumes, to failure and not to possibility that typical endurance training, increases the fiber type
failure (124,155,191,192,204,234,235). In each case, the variation selectivity of strength training to failure, particularly using higher
group produced superior results. A recent systematic review indicates repetitions, thus substantially altering the fiber type make-up of
that providing essentially the same training stimulus for “greater than muscle, especially the II:I ratio.
6 weeks could result in a plateau in maximal strength development, There is evidence from reviews of the literature (213) and both
necessitating training variation to elicit further improvement” (207). cross-sectional (59,127,129) and longitudinal studies (24,134,153)
In addition, there is evidence indicating that how the programming indicating that selective hypertrophy can result from different re-
variation is structured in a periodization and programming context sistance training programs with different loading schemes without
can also make a difference in maximum strength, power, motor unit training to failure. These observations likely play an important role
(MU) type selective hypertrophy, and fatigue management in the training outcomes and performance capabilities of athletes,
(24,25,134,158,159). Indeed, most reviews and meta-analyses have particularly strength-power athletes (127,129).
concluded that periodization and appropriate programming offer
advantages over other methodologies (47,164,167) (Table 1). There are No Long-Term Studies Dealing With Periodization.
One criticism that we do agree with (partially) is that few long-
Resistance Training Gains in Performance are the Result of term experimental studies have been performed, particularly for
Specificity and Neural Adaptation. It has also been suggested that resistance training. Although this is certainly true for typical ex-
gains in resistance-induced gains in strength are simply because of perimental studies for a number of reasons (e.g., time constraints,
“specificity” of training and is largely a nervous system phe- subject availability, athlete availability, adequate funding, eco-
nomenon (16). At best, this is an oversimplification of training logical validity versus internal validity, etc.), it has not been true
adaptation. Clearly the nervous system, muscle CSA and archi- for observational and descriptive studies. These observational
tecture, tissue stiffness, training with the “intent” to maximally studies, many of which lasted several years, included many of the
activate muscle(s) impact physiological and cognitive character- original studies of Matveyev (120), Nadori (149,150), Verkosh-
istics (54,63,103,119,184,186,214,215). However, adaptations ansky (220), etc. More recent long-term observational and de-
in each underlying mechanism are potentially affected by “spe- scriptive studies have dealt with a number of periodization related
cificity.p As “specificity” and the physiological (and likely psy- factors including performance-related variables, sport perfor-
chological) adaptation aspects also impact the “transfer of mance, and injuries and have included a variety of sports such as
training effect”; specificity becomes an extremely important fac- swimming (82), volleyball (181), orienteering (211), cross-
tor for appropriately training athletes. For example, from the country skiing and biathlon (147,176,182,212), and weightlift-
standpoint of mechanical specificity, appropriate manipulation of ing (21). These types of studies and observations are especially
exercises and other training variables (e.g., load, volume, etc.) important because they were performed observing athletes in
become paramount in optimizing transfer from training to per- their normal environment, thus maintaining ecological validity.
formance (138,140,198,206). Although attempting to measure
(only) nonspecific alterations in strength may be interesting, it
does not provide adequate insights into potential transfer. Addi-
tional insight into possible transferability can be examined by
A Final Thought
using exercise measurement specificity along with concurrent Classical periodization has been shown to produce superior results
calculation of alterations in appropriate performance variables. for many sports. One important criticism of BP is that by breaking up
the training process over a macrocycle into many small blocks,
Resistance Training to Failure is Necessary for Optimum Gains. attaining high levels of fitness and development of the athlete may
From a programming standpoint, it has been suggested that not be possible (107,111,112). Indeed, appropriate sequencing and
training to or near failure using a load (30–85% of 1RM) programming BP stages over a macrocycle often follow a more
largely determined by preference is sufficient for optimum hy- traditional pattern of periodization. Note in the example presented in
pertrophy (16,70) or for maximal strength (50,51). Figure 12, representing a process for an advanced athlete, there are 3
As a training concept, this suggestion is rather remarkable con- stages in a 34 weeks macrocycle. In keeping with traditional tenants,
sidering most well-conducted studies, and reviews have indicated that the greatest emphasis on developing “general” fitness occurs in the
training to failure is unnecessary, can be counterproductive, and first stage. Thus, the first accumulation and transmutation blocks
loading does make a difference for maximum strength and power contain the greatest volume of training relative to the same blocks
outcomes, particularly with MJ movements (24,25,53,70,95,96,- later in the macrocycle. After each active rest phase, there is a return
109,117,153,207). Although the degree of hypertrophy may be un- to the accumulation block, and high levels of general fitness are re-
clear, the type of hypertrophy produced as a result of low load and established. Note that after the initial block each accumulation and
high repetitions versus high load/low repetitions and ballistic transmutation block is smaller in extent as are the transmutation
2366
blocks. This is based on (a) there is sufficient loading during active 4. Avelar A, Nunes JP, Schoenfeld BJ, et al. Effects of order of resistance
rest that “fitness” does not decline to baseline and (b) residual effects training exercises on muscle hypertrophy in young adult men. Appl
Physiol Nutr Metab 44: 420–424, 2019.
and retaining a reasonable level of “general” and “specialized” fit- 5. Bakken TA. Effects of Block Periodization Training Versus Traditional
ness; thus, extensive accumulation and transmutation phases are not Periodization Training in Trained Cross Country skiers. Master Thesis.
needed, and more time can be spent on realization. Programming Liliehammer, France: Liliehammer University College, 2013.
additional “waves and oscillations” such as heavy and light days, 6. Bartolomei S, Hoffman JR, Merni F, et al. A comparison of traditional
and block periodized strength training programs in trained athletes.
unload weeks, etc. are still intact. Thus, in this context, BP can be
J Strength Cond Res 28: 990–997, 2014.
viewed as an integral part of traditional periodization. Indeed, both 7. Barzdukas A, Berning BM, et al. The training response of highly trained
single factor and multiple factor BP would be compatible with this swimmers. In: Studies by the International Center for Aquatic Research.
concept (Figure 12) as the programming for each phase could be Troup J, ed. Colorado Springs: US Swimming Press, 1990. pp. 45–51.
appropriately adjusted to accommodate team or individual sports. 8. Bazyler C, Mizuguchi S, Sato K, et al. Changes in muscle architecture,
explosive ability, and track and field throwing performance throughout a
competitive season and following a taper. J Strength Cond Res 31:
Summary 2785–2793, 2017.
9. Bazyler CD, Mizuguchi S, Sole CJ, et al. Jumping performance is pre-
Periodization is a logical phasic method of managing fitness phases served not muscle thickness in collegiate volleyball players after a taper.
and timelines for athletes. Through appropriate programming, alter- J Strength Cond Res 32: 1020–1028, 2018.
10. Bondarchuck AP. Constructing a training system. Track Tech 102:
ations in training variables can be made such that, qualitatively, pre-
254–269, 1988.
dictions can be made as to when peak preparedness and performance 11. Bondarchuk AP. Transfer of Training in Sports. Muskegon, MI: Ultimate
are likely to occur. As a concept periodization has a long and rich Athlete Concepts, 2007.
history of evolution into the 2 current paradigms of Traditional Pe- 12. Bosque T, Montpetit J, Arvisais D, et al. Effects of tapering on perfor-
riodization and BP. Block periodization has evolved and developed mance: A meta-analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39: 1358–1365, 2007.
13. Bottinelli R, Pellegrino M, Campari M, et al. Specific contributions of
into 2 sub-types, single-factor (one primary performance goal) and various muscle fibre types to human muscle performance: An in vitro
multi-factor (several primary goals). Block periodization is a process of study. J Electromyog Kinesiol 9: 87–95, 1999.
macromanagement and consists of 3 “periodization blocks, accu- 14. Branscheidt M, Kassavetis N, Anaya M, et al. Fatigue induces long
mulation, transmutation, and realization followed by an active rest lasting detrimental changes in motor skill learning. Elife 5–25, 2019.
Epub ahead of print.
phase; together these make up a stage. Evidence indicates that each
15. Breil F, Weber SN, Koller S, et al. Block training periodization in alpine
periodization block results in “residual effects” that persist and can skiing: Effects of 1-day HIT on VO2max and performance. Eur J Appl
potentiate the next block. Stages repeated throughout an annual plan Physiol 109: 1077–1086, 2010.
(calendar) providing a blueprint toward optimum performance de- 16. Buckner S, Jessee MB, Mouser JG, et al. The basics of training for muscle
velopment. Programming is a process of micromanagement and size and strength: A brief review on the theory. Med Sci Sports Exerc 52:
645–653, 2020.
consists of factors (e.g., exercise selection, sets, repetitions, etc.) that 17. Buckner SL, Mouser JG, Dankel SJ, et al. The general adaptation syn-
drive the periodization blocks toward completion. Considerable evi- drome: Potential misapplications to resistance exercise. J Sci Med Sport
dence indicates that periodization and proper programming can 20: 1015–1017, 2017.
produce superior results compared with other methods of training. 18. Burhus KA, Lettinichi JL, Casey ML, et al. The effects of two different
types of resistance exercise on post-exercise oxygen consumption. Med
No conceptual paradigm with which we are familiar is without
Sci Sports Exerc 24: S76, 1992.
problems. However, many of the criticisms leveled at periodiza- 19. Busso T, Candau R, Lacour JR. Fatigue and fitness modelled from the
tion are without merit. These criticisms have been addressed to effects of training on performance. Eur J Appl Physiol 69: 50–54, 1994.
ensure the reader and practitioner are not misled. 20. BussoT Benoit H, Bonnefoy R, et al. Effects of training frequency on the
dynamics of performance response to a single training bout. J Appl
Physiol 92: 572–589, 2002.
21. Byrd R, Pierce K, Reilly L, et al. Young weightlifters’ performance across
Practical Applications time. Sports Biomech 2: 133–140, 2003.
22. Cadegiani F. The underappreciated athlete: Overtraining syndrome in
This narrative review has presented evidence for the efficacy resistance training, high-intensity functional training (HIFT), and female
and efficiency of Periodization and appropriate programming. athletes. In: Overtraining Syndrome in Athletes. Cham, CH: Springer,
Periodization and programming has considerable means for 2020. pp. 131–154.
23. Campeiz JM, de Oliveira PR. Effects of concentrated changes of strength
variation and flexibility when properly integrated into the training on anaerobic variables and body composition of professional
training process. There are two different types of Periodiza- soccer players. J Sport Sci Med 10: 172, 2007.
tion: Traditional and Block. Block has 2 subtypes, Single and 24. CarrollBazyler KM, Bernards JR. Skeletal muscle fiber adaptations fol-
multiple goal. Coaches should carefully, and critically exam- lowing resistance training using repetition maximums or relative in-
ine the sports with which they are involved and integrate a tensity. Sports (Basel) 7: 168, 2019. Epub ahead of print.
25. Carroll KM, Bernards JR, Bazyler CD, et al. Divergent performance
periodization and programming model appropriate for these outcomes following resistance training using repetition maximums or
sports. relative intensity. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 29: 1–28, 2018.
26. Clemente- Suarez VJ, Fernandez RJ, Arroyo-Toledo JJ, et al. Autonomic
adaptations after traditional and reverse swimming training periodiza-
References tions. Acta Physiol Hung 102: 105–113, 2015.
27. Clemente-Suárez VJ, Dalamitros A, Ribeiro J, et al. The effects of two
1. Alecu A. Importance of using periodization in blocks in quality de- different swimming training periodization on physiological parameters
velopment in kayak biomotrics. Marathon 5: 127–133, 2013. at various exercise intensities. Eur J Sport Sci 17: 425–432, 2017.
2. Arroyo-Toledo JJ, Clemente VJ, Gonzalez-Rave JM, et al. Compar- 28. Clemente-Suárez VJ, Ramos-Campo DJ. Effectiveness of reverse vs.
ison between traditional and reverse periodization: Swimming per- Traditional linear training periodization in triathlon. Int J Environ Res
formance and specific strength values. Int J Swim Kinet 2: 87–96, Pub Health 16: 2807, 2019.
2013. 29. Coffey VG, Hawley JA. Concurrent exercise training: Do opposites
3. Assumpcao CO, Tibana RA, Viana LC, et al. Influence of exercise order distract? J Physiol 595: 2883–2896, 2017.
on upper body maximum and submaximal strength gains in trained men. 30. Counsilman JE. The Complete Book of Swimming. New York, NY:
Clin Physiol Functio Imaging 33: 359–363, 2013. Atheneum, 1979.
2367
31. Counsilman JE, Counsilman BE. The New Science of Swimming (2nd 57. Frobose I, Verdonck A, Duesberg F, et al. Effects of various load in-
ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1994. tensities in the framework of postoperative stationary endurance training
32. Cunanan AJ, DeWeese BH, Wagle JP, et al. The general adaptation on performance deficit of the quadriceps muscle of the thigh. Z Orthop
syndrome: A foundation for the concept of periodization. Sports Med 48: Ihre Grenzgeb 131: 164–167, 1993.
787–797, 2018. 58. Fry A, Kraemer WJ, Gordon S, et al. Endocrine responses to overreaching
33. Damas F, Libardi CA, Ugrinowitsch C. The development of skeletal before and after 1 year of weightlifting. Can J Appl Physiol 19: 400–410,
muscle hypertrophy through resistance training: The role of muscle 1994.
damage and muscle protein synthesis. Eur J Appl Physiol 118: 485–500, 59. Fry AC. The role of resistance exercise intensity on muscle fibre adap-
2018. tations. Sports Med 34: 663–679, 2004.
34. da Silva MP. Block Periodization Systems: Main Training Effects on the 60. Fry AC, Kraemer WJ, Lynch JM, et al. Does short-term near-maximal
Performance of High Level Swimmers. São Paulo: PhD Thesis. Uni- intensity machine resistance training induce overtraining?. J Strength
versidade Estadual de Campinas, 2008. Cond Res 8: 188–191, 1994a.
35. Day D. Geoff Dyson: Experience, the ’Coaching Eye’ and Learning ’on 61. Fry AC, Kraemer WJ, vanBorselen F, et al. Performance decrements with
the Job’. Manchester Metropolitan University Centre for Research into high-intensity resistance exercise overtraining. Med Sci Sports Exerc 26:
Coaching Biannual International Conference in conjunction with Sports 1165–1173, 1994b.
Coaching Review, Crewe, Cheshire, 9–10 September, 2015. (on-line)— 62. Fyfe JJ, Bishop DJ, Stepto NK. Concurrent training: A meta-analysis
based on Geoffrey Dyson, “Forty Years on: Some Thoughts on Coaching examining interference of aerobic and resistance exercises. Sports Med
and Development” (Paper Presented at the International Olympic 44: 743–762, 2014.
Academy Nineteenth Session, Olympia, July 6–19, 1979). 63. Gabriel DA, Kamen G, Frost G. Neural adaptations to resistive exercise:
36. de Aguiar RA, Lisbôa FD, Turnes T, et al. The effects of different training Mechanisms and recommendations for training practices. Sports Med
backgrounds on VO2 responses to all-out and supramaximal constant- 36: 133–149, 2006.
velocity running bouts. PLoS One 10, 2015. 64. Garcia-Pallares J, Garcia-Fernandez M, Sanchez-Medina L, et al.
37. DeFreitasBeck J, Stock MS. An examination of the time course of Performance changes in world-class kayakers following two differ-
training-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Eur J Appl Physiol 111: ent training periodization models. Eur J Appl Physiol 110: 99–107,
2785–2790, 2010. 2010.
38. Dellal A, Lago-Penas C, Rey E, et al. The effects of a congested fixture 65. Garcı́a-Pallarés J, Izquierdo. M Strategies to optimize concurrent train-
period on physical performance, technical activity and injury rate during ing of strength and aerobic fitness for rowing and canoeing. Sports Med
matches in a professional soccer team. Br J Sports Med 49: 390–394, 41: 329–343, 2011.
2015. 66. Garhammer J. Periodization of strength training for athletes. Track Tech
39. De Souza J, Gomes AC, Leme, et al. Changes in metabolic and motor 75: 2398–2399, 1979.
performance variables induced by training in handball players. Rev Bras 67. Gavanda S, Geisler S, Quittmann OJ, et al. The effect of block versus
Med Esporte 12: 118–122, 2006. daily undulating periodization on strength and performance in ado-
40. DeWeese BH, Hornsby G, Stone M, et al. The training process: Planning lescent Football players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 14: 814–821,
for strength–power training in track and field. Part 1: Theoretical as- 2019.
pects. J Sport Health Sci 4: 308–317, 2015a. 68. Gergley JC. Comparison of two lower-body modes of endurance training
41. DeWeese BH, Hornsby G, Stone M, et al. The training process: Planning on lower-body strength development while concurrently training.
strength–power training in track and field. Part 2: Practical and applied J Strength Cond Res 23: 979–987, 2009.
aspects. J Sport Health Sci 4: 318–324, 2015b. 69. Gomez-Martı́n JP, Clemente-Suárez VJ, Ramos-Campo DJ. Hemato-
42. Dias I. Influence of exercise order on maximum strength in untrained logical and running performance modification of trained athletes after
young men. J Sci Med Sport 13: 65–69, 2010. reverse vs. Block training periodization. Int J Environ Res Public Health
43. Eddens L, van Someren K, Howatson G. The role of intra-session exer- 17: 4825, 2020.
cise sequence in the interference effect: A systematic review with meta- 70. Gonzalez AM. Acute anabolic response and muscular adaptation fol-
analysis. Sports Med 48: 177–188, 2018. lowing hypertrophy-style and strength-style resistance exercise.
44. Edington PW, Edgerton VR. Biology of Physical Activity. Boston, MA: J Strength Cond Res 30: 2959–2964, 2016.
Houghton Mifflin, 1976. 71. Graham J. Periodizatión research and example application. Strength
45. Eklund D, Häkkinen A, Laukkanen JA, et al. Fitness, body composition Cond J 24: 52–70, 2002.
and blood lipids following 3 concurrent strength and endurance training 72. Grandou C, Wallace L, Coutts AJ, et al. Symptoms of overtraining in
modes. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 41: 767–774, 2016. resistance exercise: International cross-sectional survey. Int J Sports
46. Elliot M, Wagner PP, Chui L. Power athletes and distance training. Physiol Perform 16: 80–89, 2020.
Sports Med 37: 47–57, 2007. 73. Haff GG, Nimphius S. Training principles for power. Strength Cond J
47. Evans JW. Periodized resistance training for enhancing skeletal muscle 34: 2–12, 2012.
hypertrophy and strength: A mini-review. Front Physiol 2019. doi: 74. Haff GG, Whitley A, McCoy LB, et al. Effects of different set configu-
10.3389/fphys.2019.00013. Epub ahead of print. rations on barbell velocity and displacement during a clean pull.
48. Fair JD. Olympic weightlifting and the introduction of steroids: A sta- J Strength Cond Res 17: 95–103, 2003.
tistical analysis of world championship results, 1948–72. Int J Hist Sport 75. Häkkinen K, Komi PV. Electromyographic changes during strength
5: 96–114, 1988. training and detraining. Med Sci Sports Exerc 15: 455–460, 1983.
49. Farinatti P, Neto AGC, Amorim PR. Oxygen consumption and substrate 76. Häkkinen K, Alen M, Kraemer WJ, et al. Neuromuscular adaptations
utilization during and after resistance exercises performed with different during concurrent strength and endurance training versus strength
muscle mass. Int J Exerc Sci 9: 77–88, 2016. training. Eur J Appl Physiol 89: 42–52, 2003.
50. Fisher JP, Blossom D, Steele J. A comparison of volume-equated knee 77. Halperin I, Aboodarda SJ, Behm DG. Knee extension fatigue attenuates
extensions to failure, or not to failure, upon rating of perceived exertion repeated force production of the elbow flexors. Eur J Sport Sci 14:
and strength adaptations. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 41: 117–124, 2016. 823–829, 2014.
51. Fisher JP, Steele J. Heavier and lighter load resistance training to mo- 78. Harris G, Stone MH, O’Bryant HS, et al. Short term performance effects
mentary failure produce similar increases in strength with differing de- of high speed, high force or combined weight training. J Strength Cond
grees of discomfort. Muscle Nerve 56: 797–803, 2017. Res 14: 14–20, 2000.
52. Fleck SJ. Periodized strength training: A critical review. J Strength Cond 79. Harre D, ed. Trainingslehre: Einführung in Dieallgemeine Train-
Res 13: 82–89, 1999. ingsmethodik. Berlin (O), Sportverlag, 1969.
53. Folland JP. Fatigue is not a necessary stimulus for strength gains during 80. Harre D, ed. Einführung in die allgemeine Trainings—und Wettkamp-
resistance training. Br J Sports Med 36: 370–373, 2002. flehre: Anleitung für das Fernstudium. Leipzig: DHfK, 1964.
54. FollandIrish JP, Buckthorpe MW, Hannah R. Human capacity for ex- 81. Hartmann H, Bob A, Wirth K, et al. Effects of different periodization
plosive force production: Neural and contractile determinants. Scand J models on rate of force development and power ability of the upper
Med Sci Sports 24: 894–906, 2014. extremity. J Strength Cond Res 23: 1921–1932, 2009.
55. Foster C. Monitoring training in athletes with reference to overtraining 82. Hellard P, Avalos-Fernandes M, Lefort G, et al. Elite swimmers’ training
syndrome. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 1164–1168, 1998. patterns in the 25 Weeks prior to their season’s best performances: In-
56. Friel J. Periodization- the history, the terms, the principles. Perform Cycl sights into periodization from a 20-years cohort. Front Physiol 2019. doi:
Cond 2012. Available at: https://performancecondition.com/cycling/. 10.3389/fphys.2019.00363. Epub ahead of print.
2368
83. Hellard P, Scordia C, Avalos M, et al. Modelling of optimal training load load resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 2019. Epub ahead of
patterns during the 11 weeks preceding major competition in elite print.
swimmers. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 42: 1106–1117, 2017. 110. Looney DP, Kraemer WJ, Joseph MF, et al. Electromyographical and
84. Hennessy LC, Watson AWC. The interference effects of training for perceptual responses to different resistance intensities in a squat pro-
strength and endurance simultaneously. J Strength Cond Res 8: 12–19, tocol: Does performing sets to failure with light loads produce the same
1994. activity? J Strength Cond Res 30: 792–799, 2016.
85. Hoffmann JJ, Reed JP, Leiting K, et al. Repeated sprints, high intensity 111. Lyakh V, Mikołajec, Bujas P, et al. Review of platonov’s sports training
interval training, small sided games: Theory and application to field periodization. General theory and its practical application – Kiev:
sports. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 9: 352–357, 2014. Olympic literature, 2013 (part one). J Hum Kinet 44: 359–263, 2015a.
86. Hornsby WG, Fry A, Haff GG, Stone MH. Addressing the confusion 112. Lyakh V, Mikołajec K, Bujas P, et al. Review of platonov’s sports training
within periodization research. J Funct Morph Kinesiol 5: 68, 2020. Epub periodization. General theory and its practical application – Kiev: Olympic
ahead of print. literature, 2013 (part two). J Hum Kinet 46: 273–278, 2015b.
87. Issurin V. Block periodization versus traditional training theory: A re- 113. Luebbers PE, Fry AC. The Kansas squat test modality comparison: Free
view. J Sports Med Phys Fit 48: 65–75, 2008. weights vs. Smith machine. J Strength Cond Res 30: 2186–2193, 2016.
88. Issurin VB. Generalized training effects induced by athletic preparation. 114. Maden-Wilkinson TM, Balshaw TG, Massey GJ, et al. What makes
A review. J Sports Med Phys 49: 333–345, 2009. long-term resistance-trained individuals so strong? A comparison of
89. Issurin VB. New horizons for the methodology and physiology of skeletal muscle morphology, architecture, and joint mechanics. J Appl
training periodization. Sports Med 40: 189–206, 2010. Physiol 128: 1000–1011, 1985. 2020.
90. Issurin V. Periodization training from ancient precursors to structured 115. Mallo J. Effect of block periodization on performance in competition in a
block models. Kinesiology 46(Supplement 1): 3–9, 2014. soccer team during four consecutive seasons: A case study. Int J Perform
91. Issurin VB. Benefits and limitations of block periodized training ap- Anal Sport 11: 476–485, 2011.
proaches to athletes’ preparation: A review. Sports Med 46: 329–338, 116. Mallo J. Effect of block periodization on physical fitness during a com-
2016. petitive soccer season. Int J Perform Anal Sport 12: 64–74, 2012.
92. Issurin VB. Biological background of block periodized endurance 117. Mangine GT, Hoffman JR, Fukuda DH, et al. Improving muscle strength
training: A review. Sports Med 49: 31–39, 2019. and size: Importance of training volume, intensity and status. Kinesiol-
93. Issurin V, Sahrobajko IV. Proportion of maximal voluntary strength ogy 47: 131–138, 2015.
values and adaptation peculiarities of muscle to strength exercises in men 118. Marques L, Franchini E, Drago G, et al. Physiological and performance
and women. Hum Physiol Acad Sci USSR 11: 17–22, 1985. changes in national and international judo athletes during block peri-
94. Issurin V, Sharobajko I, Timofeyev V, et al. Particularities of Annual odization training. Biol Sport 34: 371–378, 2017.
Preparation of Top-Level Canoe-Kayak Paddlers during 1984–1988 119. Massey G, Evangelidis P, Folland J. Influence of contractile force on the
Olympic Cycle. Scientific Report. Leningrad, Russia:Leningrad Research architecture and morphology of the quadriceps femoris. Exp Physiol
Institute for Physical Culture, 1988. 100: 1342–1351, 2015.
95. Izquierdo M, Ibañez J, González-Badillo JJ, et al. Differential effects of 120. Matveyev L. Periodization of Sports Training. Moskow, Russia: Fiz-
strength training leading to failure versus not to failure on hormonal kultura i Sport, 1965.
responses, strength and muscle power. J Appl Physiol 100: 1647–1656, 121. Matveyev LP. Fundamentals of Sports Training. Moscow, Russia: Fiz-
2006. kultua i Sport, 1977.
96. Izquierdo-Gabarren M, Exposito RG, Garcia-Pallares J, et al. Concur- 122. Matveyev LP. Osnovy Obshchey Teorii Sporta I Sistemy Podgotovki
rent endurance and strength training not to failure optimizes perfor- Sportsmenov. Kyev, Ukraine, 1999.
mance gains. Sci Sports Exerc 42: 1191–1199, 2010. 123. McBride JM, Triplett-Mcbride T, Davie A, et al. A comparison of
97. Javaloyes A, Sarabia JM, Lamberts RP, et al. Training prescription strength and power characteristics between power lifters, Olympic lifters
guided by heart rate variability vs. Block periodization in well-trained and sprinters. J Strength Cond Res 13: 58–66, 1999.
cyclists. J Strength Cond Res 34: 1511–1518, 2020. 124. McGee D, Jessee TC, Stone MH, et al. Leg and hip endurance adaptations
98. Kelly DT, Tobin C, Egan B, et al. Comparison of sprint interval and to three weight-training programs. J Appl Sport Sci Res 6: 92–95, 1992.
endurance training in team sport athletes. J Strength Cond Res 32: 125. McKendry J, Pérez-López A, McLeod M, et al. Short inter-set rest blunts
3051–3058, 2018. resistance exercise-induced increases in myofibrillar protein synthesis and
99. Kiely J. New horizons for the methodology and physiology of training intracellular signaling in young males. Exp Physiol 101: 866–882, 2016.
periodization block periodization: New horizon or a false dawn?. Sports 126. McMaster DT, Gill N, Cronin J, et al. The development, retention and
Med 40: 803–807, 2010. decay rates of strength and power in elite rugby union, rugby league and
100. Kiely J. Periodization paradigms in the 21st century:evidence-led or American Football. Sports Med 43: 367–384, 2013.
tradition-driven?. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 7: 242–250, 2012. 127. Meijer JP, Jaspers RT, Rittweger J, et al. Single fiber contractile prop-
101. Kiely J. Periodization theory: Confronting an inconvenient truth. Sports erties differ between body-builders, power athletes and control subjects.
Med 48: 753–764, 2018. Exp Physiol 100: 1331–2141, 2015.
102. Knicker AJ, Renshaw I, Oldham AR, et al. Interactive processes link the 128. Methenitis S. A brief review on concurrent training: From laboratory to
multiple symptoms of fatigue in sport competition. Sports Med 41: the field. Sports (Basel) 6: 127, 2018.
307–328, 2011. 129. Methenitis S, Karandreas N, Spengot K, et al. Muscle fiber conduction
103. Komi PV. Training of muscle strength and power: Interaction of neu- velocity, muscle fiber composition, and power performance. Med Sci
romotoric, hypertrophic, and mechanical factors. Int J Sports Med 7: Sports Exerc 48: 1761–7171, 2016.
S10–S15, 1986. 130. Michalski RJ, LormesGrunert-Fuchs WM, et al. Leistungsentvicklung
104. Kotov BA. Olympic Sport. Guidelines for Track and Field. Sankt von Ruderen im Langsschnitt. In: Rudern. Steinnacker JM, ed. Berlin,
Petersburg, Russia: Majtov Publisher, 1916. Germany: Springer, 1988. pp. 307–312.
105. Kraemer WJ, Ratamess N, Fry AC, et al. Influence of resistance 131. Mikkola J, Rusko H, Izquierdo M, et al. Neuromuscular and Cardio-
training volume and periodization on physiological and performance vascular Adaptations during concurrent strength and endurance training
adaptations in collegiate women tennis players. Am J Sports Med 28: in untrained men. Int J Sports Med 33: 702–710, 2012.
626–633, 2000. 132. Miller JD, Lippman JD, Trevino MA, et al. Neural drive is greater for a
106. Krüger A. Prolegomena zum Zusammenhang zwischen Trainingslehre high-intensity contraction than for moderate-intensity contractions
und Sportökonomie. In: Pogranicza Edukacje. Festschrift für Joachim performed to fatigue. J Strength Cond Res 2020. Epub ahead of print.
Raczek Raciborz: Scriba. Bugdol M, Kaica M and Pospiech J, eds. 133. Minetti AE. On the mechanical power of joint extensions as affected by
Zurich, Switzerland: Scriba, 2004. pp. 180–188. the change in muscle force (or cross-sectional area), ceteris paribus. Eur J
107. Kruger A. From Russia with love? Sixty years of proliferation of L.P. Appl Physiol 86: 363–369, 2002.
Matveyev’s concept of periodisation? Staps 114: 51–59, 2016. 134. Mitchell CJ, Churchward-Venne TA, West DWD, et al. Resistance ex-
108. Lago-Penas C, Rey E, Lago-Ballesteros J, et al. The influence of a con- ercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in
gested calendar on physical performance in elite soccer. J Strength Cond young men. J Appl Physiol 113: 71–77, 2012.
Res 25: 2111–2117, 2011. 135. Mølmen KS, Øfsteng SJ, Rønnestad BR. Block periodization of endur-
109. Lasevicius T, Schoenfeld BJ, Silva-Batista C, et al. Muscle failure ance training – a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Med 10:
promotes greater muscle hypertrophy in low-load but not in high- 145–160, 2019.
2369
136. Morán-Navarro R, Pérez CE, Mora-Rodrı́guez R, et al. Time course of 167. Rhea MR, Alderman BL. A meta-analysis of periodized versus non-
recovery following resistance training leading or not to failure. Eur J periodized strength and power training programs. Res Q Exerc Sport 75:
Appl Physiol 117: 2387–2399, 2017. 413–422, 2004.
137. Morehouse LE, Miller AT. Physiology of Exercise. St. Loius, MO: C.V. 168. Rhea MR, Phillips WT, Burkett LN, et al. A comparison of linear and
Mosby, 1976. daily undulating periodized programs with equated volume and intensity
138. Moriera A, de Oliveira PR, AH Okano AH, et al. Dynamics of power for local muscular endurance. J Strength Cond Res 17: 82–87, 2003.
measure alterations and the posterior long-lasting training effect on 169. Roberts MD, Haun CT, Vann CG, et al. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy in
basketball players submitted to the block training system. Rev Bras Med skeletal muscle: A scientific “unicorn” or resistance training adaptation?
Esporte 10: 251–257, 2004. Front Physiol 11: 816, 2020. Epub ahead of print.
139. Moritani T, deVries HA. Neural factors versus hypertrophy in the time 170. Rønnestad BR, Hansen EA, Ellefsen S. Block periodization of high‐in-
course of muscle strength gain. Am J Phys Med 58: 115–130, 1979. tensity aerobic intervals provides superior training effects in trained cy-
140. Morrissey M, Harman EA, Johnson MJ. Resistance training modes: clists. Scand J Med Sci Sports 24: 34–42, 2014.
Specificity and effectiveness. Med Sci Sports Exerc 27: 648–660, 1995. 171. Rønnestad BR, Hansen EA, Raastad T. High volume of endurance
141. Mujika I. Tapering and Peaking. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2009. training impairs adaptations to 12 weeks of strength training in well-
142. Mujika I, Halson S, Burke LM, et al. An integrated, multifactorial ap- trained endurance athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol 112: 1457–1466, 2012.
proach to periodization for optimal performance in individual and team 172. Rønnestad BR, Øfsteng SJ, Ellefsen S. Block periodization of strength
sports. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 13: 538–561, 2018. and endurance training is superior to traditional periodization in ice
143. Mujika I, Padilla S. Detraining: Loss of training-induced physiological hockey players. Scand J Med Sci Sports 29: 180–188, 2019.
and performance adaptations. Part I. Sports Med 30: 79–87, 2000a. 173. Ross A, Leveritt M. Long-term metabolic and skeletal muscle adapta-
144. Mujika I, Padilla S. Detraining: Loss of training-induced physiological tions to short-sprint training: Implications for sprint training and ta-
and performance adaptations. Part II. Sports Med 30: 145–154, 2000b. pering. Sports Med 31: 1063–1082, 2001.
145. Mujika I, Padilla S, Pyne D, et al. Physiological changes associated with 174. Schoenfeld BJ, Pope K, Benik FM, et al. Longer inter-set rest periods
the pre-event taper in athletes. Sports Med 34: 891–927, 2004. enhance muscle strength and hypertrophy in resistance-trained men.
146. Murlasits Z, Kneffel Z, Thalib L. The physiological effects of concurrent J Strength Cond Res 30: 1805–1812, 2016.
strength and endurance training sequence: A systematic review and meta- 175. Schumann M, Ronnestad BR. Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Train-
analysis. J Sports Sci 36: 1212–1219, 2018. ing. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018.
147. Myakinchenko EB, Kriuchkov AS, Adodin NV, etal. The annual peri- 176. Schmitt L, Bouthiaux S, Millet GP. Eleven Years monitoring of the
odization of training volumes of international-level cross-country skiers world’s most successful male biathlete of the last decade. Int J Sports
and biathletes. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 15: 1181–1188, 2020. Physiol Perform 4: 1–6, 2020. Epub ahead of print.
148. Naclerio F, Moody J, Chapman M. Applied periodization: A methodo- 177. Sforzo GA, Touey PR. Manipulating exercise order affects muscular
logical approach. J Hum Sport Exerc 8: 350–366, 2013. performance during a resistance exercise training session. J Strength
149. Nadori L. Training and Competition. Budapest, Hungary: Sport, 1962. Cond Res 10: 20–24, 1996.
150. Nadori L. Theory of Training and Exercise. Budapest, Hungary: Sport, 1968. 178. Simao R, Figueiredo T, Leite RD, et al. Influence of exercise order on
151. Neary JP, Bhambhani YN, McKenzie DC. Effects of different stepwise repetition performance during low-intensity resistance exercise. Res
reduction taper protocols on cycling performance. Can J Appl Physiol Sports Med 20: 263–273, 2012a.
28: 576–587, 2003. 179. Simao R, de Salles BR, Figueiredo T, et al. Exercise order in resistance
152. Netreba A, Popov D, Bravyy Y, et al. Responses of knee extensor muscles training. Sports Med 42: 251–265, 2012b.
to leg press training of various types in human. Ross Fiziol Zh Im I M 180. Søgaard K, Gandevia SC, Todd G, et al. The effect of sustained low-
Sechenova 99: 406–416, 2013. intensity contractions on supraspinal fatigue in human elbow flexor
153. Nóbrega SR, Libardi CA. Is resistance training to muscular failure nec- muscles. J Physiol 573: 511–523, 2006.
essary? Front Physiol 7: 10, 2016. 181. Sole CJ, Kavanaugh AA, Stone MH. Injuries in collegiate women’s vol-
154. Nuhr M. Functional and biochemical properties of chronically stimu- leyball: A four-year retrospective analysis. Sports 5: 26, 2017.196.
lated human skeletal muscle. Eur J Appl Physiol 89: 202–208, 2003. 182. Solli GS, Tønnessen E, Sandbakk O. The training characteristics of the
155. O’Bryant HS. Periodization: A Hypothetical Training Model for World’s most successful female cross-country skier. Front Physiol 18:
Strength and Power. Baton Rouge, LA: LSU, 1982. 2017. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.01069. Epub ahead of print.
156. O’Bryant HS, Byrd R, Stone MH. Cycle ergometer performance and 183. Sousa AC, NeivaIzquierdo PM, et al. Concurrent training and detrain-
maximum leg and hip strength adaptations to two different methods of ing: Brief review on the effect of exercise intensities. Int J Sports Med 40:
weight-training. J Appl Sport Sci Res 2: 27–30, 1988. 747–755, 2019.197.
157. Osolin N. Das Training des Leichtathleten. Berlin, Germany: Sportver- 184. Sterczala AJ, Miller JD, Dimmick HL. Eight weeks of resistance training
lag, 1952. increases strength, muscle cross-sectional area and motor unit size, but
158. Painter KB, Haff GG, Ramsey MW, et al. Strength gains: Block versus does not alter firing rates in the vastus lateralis. Eur J Appl Physiol 20:
daily undulating periodization weight training among track and field 281–294, 2020.
athletes. Intern J Sport Physiol Perform 7: 161–169, 2012. 185. Stolen T, Chamari K, Castagna C, et al. Physiology of soccer: An update.
159. Painter KB, Haff GG, Triplett NT, et al. Resting hormone alterations and Sports Med 35: 501–536, 2005.
injuries: Block vs. DUP weight-training among D-1 track and field ath- 186. Stone MH, Adams K, Bazyler C, et al. On the basics of training for
letes. Sports 6, 2018. muscle size and strength (Letter to the Editor). Med Sci Sports Exerc 52:
160. Paoli A, Gentil P, Moro T, et al. Resistance training with single vs. multi- 2047–2050, 2020.
joint exercises at equal total load volume: Effects of body composition, 187. Stone MH, Chandler TJ, Conley M, et al. Training to muscular failure: Is
cardiorespiratory fitness, and muscle strength. Front Physiol, 2017. doi: it necessary?. Strength Cond 18: 44–51, 1996.
10.3389/fphys.2017.01105. Epub ahead of print. 188. Stone MH, Fry AC. Increased training volume in strength\power ath-
161. Peterson MD, Rhea MR, Alvar BA. Applications of the dose-response for letes. In: Overtraining in Sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1998.
muscular strength development: Are view of meta-analytic efficacy and pp. 87–106.Chapter 5.
reliability for designing training prescription. J Strength Cond Res 19: 189. Stone MH, Keith R, Kearney JT, et al. Overtraining: A review of the signs
950–958, 2005. and symptoms of overtraining. J Appl Sports Sci Res 5: 35–50, 1991.
162. Pihkala L. Allgemeine Richtlinien für das athletische Training. Krümmel 190. Stone MH, O’Bryant H. Weight Training: A Scientific Approach (2nd
G, ed. Athletik. Handbuch, der lebenswichtigen Leibesübungen ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Burgess Publishing, 1987.
München. Munich, Germany: Lehmann, 1930. 191. Stone MH, O’Bryant H, Garhammer J. A hypothetical model for
163. Pliauga V, Lukonaitiene I, Kamandulis S, et al. The effect of block and strength training. J Sports Med Phys Fit 21: 342–351, 1981.
traditional periodization training models on jump and sprint perfor- 192. Stone MH, O’Bryant H, Garhammer J, et al. A theoretical model of
mance in collegiate basketball players. Biol Sport 35: 373–382, 2018. strength training. Nat Strength Cond Assoc J 4: 36–39, 1982.
164. Plisk S, Stone MH. Periodization strategies. Strength Cond 25: 19–37, 2003. 193. Stone MH, O’Bryant HS, McCoy L, et al. Power and maximum strength
165. Porta J, Sanz D. Periodization in top level men’s tennis. ITF. Coach Sport relationships during performance of dynamic and static weighted jumps.
Sci Rev 36: 12–13, 2005. J Strength Cond Res 17: 140–147, 2003.
166. Prestes J, De Lima C, Frollini AB, et al. Comparison of linear and reverse 194. Stone MH, O’Bryant HS, Pierce KC, et al. Periodization: Effects of ma-
linear periodization effects on maximal strength and body composition. nipulating volume and intensity—Part 1. Strength Cond 21: 56–62,
J Strength Cond Res 23: 266–274, 2009. 1999a.
2370
195. Stone MH, O’Bryant HS, Pierce KC, et al. Periodization: Effects of ma- 215. Trezise J, Collier N, Blazevich AJ. Anatomical and neuromuscular var-
nipulating volume and intensity—Part 2. Strength Cond 21: 54–60, iables strongly predict maximum knee extension torque in healthy men.
1999b. Eur J Appl Physiol 116: 1159–1177, 2016.
196. Stone MH, Pierce KC, Sands WA, et al. Weightlifting Part 1: A brief 216. Tschiene P. Sportliche Form oder Topform? Disput um das Erbe von L. P.
overview. Strength Cond 28: 50–66, 2006a. Matvejev. Leistungssport 36: 7–8, 2011.
197. Stone MH, Pierce KC, Sands WA, et al. Weightlifting Part 2: Program 217. Tüzün N, Ergün M, Alioğlu E, et al. TEI Index in elite sprinters and
design. Strength Cond 28: 10–17, 2006b.191. endurance athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 55: 988–994, 2015.
198. Stone MH, Plisk S, Collins D. Training principles: Evaluation of modes 218. Ungerleider S, Bradley B. Faust’s Gold Inside the East German Doping
and methods of resistance training – a coaching perspective. Sport Bio- Machine. New York, NY: Thomas Dunne Books, 2001.
mech 1: 79–104, 2002. 219. Vann CG, Roberson PA, Osburn SC, et al. Skeletal muscle myofibrillar pro-
199. Stone MH, Potteiger J, Pierce K, et al. Comparison of the effects of three tein abundance is higher in resistance-trained men, and aging in the absence of
different weight training programs on the 1 RM squat. J Strength Cond training may have an opposite effect. Sports 8: 7. doi: 10.3390/
Res 14: 332–337, 2000. sports8010007. Epub ahead of print.
200. Stone MH, Sands WA, Stone ME. Principles and Practice of Strength- 220. Verkhoshansky YV. The Basics of Special Strength Training in Sport.
Power Training. Champaign, IL. Human Kinetics, 2007. Moscow, Russia: Fizkultura i Sport, 1977.
201. Stone MH, Wilson GD, Blessing D, et al. Cardiovascular responses to 221. Verkhoshansky Y. Principles of planning speed/strength training pro-
short term Olympic style weight training in young men. Can J Appl gram in track athletes. Legaya Athleticka 8: 8–10, 1979.
Sports Sci 8: 134–139, 1983. 222. Verkhoshansky YV. Programming and Organization of the Training
202. Støren O, Sanda SB, Haave M, et al. Improved VO2max and time trial Process. Moscow, Russia: Fizkultura i sport, 1985.
performance with more high aerobic intensity interval training and re- 223. Verkoshansky YV. Fundamentals of Special Strength Training in Sport.
duced training volume: A case study on an elite national cyclist. Livonia, MI: Sportivny Press, 1986.
J Strength Cond Res 26: 2705–2711, 2011.200. 224. Verkoshansky YV. Programming and Organization of Training. Livo-
203. Storey AG, Birch NP, Fan V, et al. Stress responses to short-term in- noia, MI: Sportivny Press, 1988.
tensified and reduced training in competitive weightlifters. Scand J Med 225. Verkoshansky YV. Organization of the training process. New Stud
Sci Sports 25: 29–40, 2016. Athlet 13: 21–31, 1998.
204. Stowers T, McMillan J, Scala D, et al. The short term effects of three 226. Verkhoshansky YV. Special Strength Training. A Practical Manual for
different strength power training methods. Nat Strength Cond Assoc J 5: Coaches. Muskegon, MI: Ultimate Athlete Concepts, 2006.
24–27, 1983. 227. Verkhoshansky YV, Siff M. Supertraining (7th ed.). Muskegon, MI:
205. Suarez DG, Mizuguchi S, Hornsby WG, et al. Phase specific changes in Ultimate Athlete Concepts, 2009.
rate of force development and muscle morphology throughout a block 228. Villani R, Gesuale D. Comparative Analysis of the Systems of Classic and
periodized training cycle in weightlifters. Sports 7: 129, 2019a. Block Periodization in the Shoot Boxing. Salzburg: 8th Annual Congress
206. Suarez DG, Wagle JP, Cunanan AJ, et al. Dynamic correspondence of of the European College of Sport Science, 2003.
resistance training to sport: A brief review. J Strength Cond 4: 80–88, 229. Vinogradova OL, Popov DV, Netreba AI, et al. Optimization of training:
2019b. Development of a new partial load mode of strength training. Fiziol
207. Thompson SW, Rogerson D, Ruddock A, et al. The effectiveness of two Cheloveka 39: 71–85, 2013.
methods of prescribing load on maximal strength development: A sys- 230. Viru A. Early contributions of Russian stress and exercise physiologists.
tematic review. Sports Med 50: 919–938, 2020. J Appl Physiol 92: 1378–1382, 2002.
208. Toji H, Kaneko M. Effect of multiple-load training on the force-velocity 231. Viru A, Viru M. Biochemical Monitoring of Sport. Champaign, IL:
relationship. J Strength Cond Res 18: 792–795, 2004. Human Kinetics, 2001.
209. Toji H, Suei K, Kaneko M. Effect of combined training programs on 232. Wahl P, Güldner M, Mester J. Effects and sustainability of a 13-day high-
force-velocity relation and power in human muscle. Jpn J Phys Fit Sports intensity shock microcycle in soccer. J Sports Sci Med 13: 259–265, 2014.
Med 44: 439–446, 1995. 233. Williams TD, Tolusso DV, Fedewa MV, et al. Comparison of periodized
210. TojiSuei HK, Kaneko M. Effect of combined training loads on relations and non-periodized resistance training on maximal strength: A meta-
among force, velocity and power development. Can J Appl Physiol 22: analysis. Sports Med 47: 2083–2100, 2014.
328–336, 1997. 234. Willoughby DS. A comparison of three selected weight training pro-
211. Tønnessen E, Svendsen IS, Ronnestad BR, Hisdal J, Haugen TA, Seiler S. grams on the upper and lower body strength of trained males. Ann J Appl
The annual training periodization of 8 world champions in orienteering. Res Coach Athlet: 124–146, 1992.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform 10: 29–38, 2015. 235. Willoughby DS. The effects of meso-cycle-length weight training pro-
212. Tønnessen E, Sylta O, Haugen TA, Hem E, Svendsen IS, Seiler S. The grams involving periodization and partially equated volumes on upper
road to gold: Training and peaking characteristics in the year prior and lower body strength. J Strength Cond Res 7: 2–8, 1993.
to a gold medal endurance performance. PLoS One 9: e101796, 236. Wilson JM, Marin PJ, Rhea MR, et al. Concurrent training: A meta-
2014. analysis examining interference of aerobic and resistance exercises.
213. Travis SK, Ishida A, Taber CB, Fry AC, Stone MH. Emphasizing task- J Strength Cond Res 26: 2293–2307, 2012.
specific hypertrophy to enhance sequential strength and power per- 237. Yakovlev NN. Biochemical foundations of muscle training (in Russian).
formance. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol 5: 1–25, 2020. Epub ahead of Uspekhi Sovr Biol 27: 257–271, 1949.
print. 238. Yakovlev NN. Biochemistry of sport in the Soviet union: Beginning,
214. Trezise J, Blazevich AJ. Anatomical and neuromuscular determinants of development and present status. Med Sci Sports Exerc 7: 237–247, 1975.
strength change in previously untrained men following heavy strength 239. Zamparo P, Minetti AE, di Prampero PE. Interplay among the changes of
training. Front Physiol, 2019. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2019.01001. Epub muscle strength, cross-sectional area and maximal explosive power:
ahead of print. Theory and facts. Eur J Appl Physiol 88: 193–202, 2002.
2371

Periodization and Block Periodization in Sports .39

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Periodization and Block Periodization in Sports .39

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Periodization and Block Periodization in Sports .39

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brief Review

Periodization and Block Periodization in Sports:

Introduction addition, we address the basic criticisms of periodization that

Figure 1. Periodization (macromanagement) vs programming (micromanagement). Based on Cunanan

Figure 5. Example of periodization for a team sport: American Football.

Table 2 recoverability or adaptation (65,95,96,125,135,161,174,187,190)

Figure 8. Stage 5 periodization blocks sequenced to optimize power output.

Figure 9. Example of a multifactor/semi-unidirectional block periodization (BP) paradigm for colle-

You might also like