Rolim R, Marques A, Maia J, Colaço P e Conceição F (2003). Training peridodization in young middle and long distance running. Empirical and comparative study between periodization models of best Portuguese senior athletes when youngsters and the current young athletes. 22nd Pediatric Work Physiology Meeting. Revista Portuguesa de Ciências do Desporto, 3 (2), suplemento.
In athletics and high competition, coaches and athletes are always searching for the best training system and the best periodization. However, the importance of training periodization has differentiated profiles, when it deals with children, young, or adult athletes. In adults, the training periodization is overwhelmed by competitive and economic reasons, a factor which may not occur in children and young athletes training. In these cases, it is claimed that periodization, when necessary, should be submitted to formative and educational values. Additionally, research on this subject is very scarce and we don’t know what occurs in the practice of youngsters’ training in Portugal. Therefore, we want to observe and compare the past [using a sample of success former athletes in middle and long distances running (MLD)] and the present (using a sample of MLD young athletes) training process, relating to periodization.
Methods. This study was carried out with two independent individual’s samples. Sample A was composed by 32 coaches which coach 84 young MLD talented athletes (ages between 10 and 19 years old); and sample B - circumscribed to 26 former elite athletes of both sexes that had participated in European and/or World Championships and/or Olympic Games (MLD running events).
Two open reply interviews, specially made and validated for this two samples, were used. All the collected information (samples A and B) was examined using content analysis techniques. In sample B the collected information referred to athlete’s past athletic lives, when youngsters.
Results The main obtained results were: at initial specialisation stage, the transition period duration was 32 days ±16,5 (7-63) for sample A elements and 79,5 days ±26 (31-122) for sample B athletes; at deepened specialisation stage, the transition period duration was 30,5 days ±30,7 (7-63) for current youngsters and 50,4 days ±30,7 (0-122) for former success athletes; in sample A athletes, the transition period duration from one preparation stage to another does not display statistically significant differences. The results showed that training periodization conducted by formative principles is not part of the coaches concerns (for sample A), and that it follows (in all the preparation stages studied) the logic of income and importance of the competitive events and competition calendars.