Compare how continuous aerobic training would be implemented differently for an individual sport (swimming) versus a team sport (water polo). In your response, consider training intensity, duration, and specific adaptations relevant to each sport. (8 marks)
--- 28 WORK AREA LINES (style=lined) ---
Show Answers Only
Keyword – “Compare”: Show how things are similar or different.
Sample Answer
- Swimming training utilises heart rate zones more precisely (typically 70-80% MHR for base aerobic development) compared to water polo, which often employs slightly higher intensities (75-85% MHR) to better simulate the elevated baseline aerobic demands of match play.
- Swimming continuous sessions prioritise technique efficiency throughout, with stroke mechanics remaining the primary focus even during aerobic development, whereas water polo emphasises position-specific movement patterns during continuous work.
- Swimming continuous training typically involves longer duration sessions (60-90 minutes) focusing on steady-state effort, while water polo continuous training is generally shorter (30-45 minutes) due to additional tactical and skill work requirements in their overall program.
- Recovery between continuous training sessions is typically shorter for swimmers (potentially training twice daily) compared to water polo players who require greater recovery due to the additional technical, tactical and contact elements of their sport.
- Swimmers typically incorporate more training variations within continuous sessions (changing strokes, pull/kick emphasis) to develop all muscle groups evenly, while water polo players focus on sport-specific continuous movement patterns that mimic game situations.
- Swimming continuous training creates direct performance-enhancing adaptations (increased heart efficiency, better oxygen use), while water polo uses aerobic training primarily to support the stop-start nature of game play.
- Swimming continuous training can more effectively simulate competition conditions (particularly for middle and long-distance events), whereas water polo uses continuous training primarily for foundational fitness rather than game simulation.
- The physiological adaptations for swimmers from continuous training directly transfer to competition performance, while water polo players require additional anaerobic training to develop the repeated sprint ability essential for high-level performance.
Show Worked Solution
Keyword – “Compare”: Show how things are similar or different.
Sample Answer
- Swimming training utilises heart rate zones more precisely (typically 70-80% MHR for base aerobic development) compared to water polo, which often employs slightly higher intensities (75-85% MHR) to better simulate the elevated baseline aerobic demands of match play.
- Swimming continuous sessions prioritise technique efficiency throughout, with stroke mechanics remaining the primary focus even during aerobic development, whereas water polo emphasises position-specific movement patterns during continuous work.
- Swimming continuous training typically involves longer duration sessions (60-90 minutes) focusing on steady-state effort, while water polo continuous training is generally shorter (30-45 minutes) due to additional tactical and skill work requirements in their overall program.
- Recovery between continuous training sessions is typically shorter for swimmers (potentially training twice daily) compared to water polo players who require greater recovery due to the additional technical, tactical and contact elements of their sport.
- Swimmers typically incorporate more training variations within continuous sessions (changing strokes, pull/kick emphasis) to develop all muscle groups evenly, while water polo players focus on sport-specific continuous movement patterns that mimic game situations.
- Swimming continuous training creates direct performance-enhancing adaptations (increased heart efficiency, better oxygen use), while water polo uses aerobic training primarily to support the stop-start nature of game play.
- Swimming continuous training can more effectively simulate competition conditions (particularly for middle and long-distance events), whereas water polo uses continuous training primarily for foundational fitness rather than game simulation.
- The physiological adaptations for swimmers from continuous training directly transfer to competition performance, while water polo players require additional anaerobic training to develop the repeated sprint ability essential for high-level performance.