A swimming coach is designing training programs for two different athletes: a 1500-metre freestyle swimmer and a water polo player. Both athletes need improved aerobic capacity but have different performance requirements.
Discuss the use of continuous training versus aerobic interval training for these two athletes, considering their specific sport demands. (6 marks)
--- 20 WORK AREA LINES (style=lined) ---
Show Answers Only
For Continuous Training
- [P] Continuous training provides sustained aerobic development through uninterrupted effort lasting 20-30 minutes minimum.
- [E] This approach directly supports the 1500-metre swimmer’s race demands requiring steady-state aerobic capacity throughout the event.
- [Ev] Research demonstrates continuous training improves oxygen delivery efficiency and enhances cardiovascular endurance for prolonged swimming efforts.
- [L] Therefore continuous training effectively develops the aerobic base essential for distance swimming performance.
Against Continuous Training for Water Polo
- [P] Continuous training limitations become apparent when considering water polo’s intermittent high-intensity demands.
- [E] Water polo requires rapid acceleration, explosive movements and frequent direction changes rather than sustained steady effort.
- [Ev] Studies show continuous training alone fails to develop the anaerobic power and recovery capacity needed for repeated sprints.
- [L] Consequently continuous training provides insufficient preparation for water polo’s varied intensity requirements.
For Aerobic Interval Training
- [P] Aerobic interval training offers superior specificity for both athletes through work-rest manipulation.
- [E] The method allows coaches to target specific energy system development while maintaining aerobic stress through incomplete recovery.
- [Ev] Evidence indicates interval training improves both VO2 max and lactate threshold more effectively than continuous methods alone.
- [L] This versatility makes aerobic interval training suitable for both swimming disciplines despite different performance demands.
Show Worked Solution
For Continuous Training
- [P] Continuous training provides sustained aerobic development through uninterrupted effort lasting 20-30 minutes minimum.
- [E] This approach directly supports the 1500-metre swimmer’s race demands requiring steady-state aerobic capacity throughout the event.
- [Ev] Research demonstrates continuous training improves oxygen delivery efficiency and enhances cardiovascular endurance for prolonged swimming efforts.
- [L] Therefore continuous training effectively develops the aerobic base essential for distance swimming performance.
Against Continuous Training for Water Polo
- [P] Continuous training limitations become apparent when considering water polo’s intermittent high-intensity demands.
- [E] Water polo requires rapid acceleration, explosive movements and frequent direction changes rather than sustained steady effort.
- [Ev] Studies show continuous training alone fails to develop the anaerobic power and recovery capacity needed for repeated sprints.
- [L] Consequently continuous training provides insufficient preparation for water polo’s varied intensity requirements.
For Aerobic Interval Training
- [P] Aerobic interval training offers superior specificity for both athletes through work-rest manipulation.
- [E] The method allows coaches to target specific energy system development while maintaining aerobic stress through incomplete recovery.
- [Ev] Evidence indicates interval training improves both VO2 max and lactate threshold more effectively than continuous methods alone.
- [L] This versatility makes aerobic interval training suitable for both swimming disciplines despite different performance demands.