L’entraînement dans les sports d’endurance à haut niveau passe traditionnellement par des périodes de très fortes charges visant à imposer de forts stress. La littérature suggère que ces périodes seront d’autant plus intéressantes si elles sont associées à un important niveau de fatigue et à une diminution de performance (surmenage fonctionnel, SF). Cependant, il n’a jamais été comparé à une surcharge d’entraînement sans diminution de performance (fatigue aigüe, FA). La première partie a montré que la surcompensation de performance au cours de l’affûtage peut répondre de façon Gaussienne à la charge d’entraînement imposée avant l’affûtage. Plus précisément, les résultats ont démontré que l’augmentation de la charge d’entraînement avant l’affûtage peut maximiser la réponse positive à l’entraînement, seulement à condition que le stress d’entraînement ne dépasse pas la capacité de récupération de l’athlète et ne précipite pas de SF. Par ailleurs, il s’avère que les réponses d’affûtage semblent individuelles et non influencées par le niveau de fatigue généré en amont. Ces différences de performance s’expliquent notamment par une bonne adaptation à l’entraînement après une période de surcharge sans SF, quand un état de SF sera à l’inverse associé à une moins bonne adaptation et à une plus grande survenue d’états de santé infectieux. La seconde partie a suggéré que la fatigue observée au sein du groupe SF pouvait également avoir été causée par un phénomène de fatigue cardiaque. En effet, le développement du SF chez l’athlète entraîné est associé à une réduction des valeurs de débit cardiaque à l’exercice / The purpose of this work is to examine whether performance supercompensation during taper is maximized in endurance athletes after experiencing overreaching during an overload training period. This first study showed that 1) greater gains in performance and V˙O2max can be achieved when higher training load is prescribed before the taper but not in the presence of functional overreaching (F-OR); 2) peak performance is not delayed during taper when heavy training loads are completed immediately prior; and 3) F-OR provides higher risk for training maladaptation, including increased infection risks. The second study confirms sleep disturbances and increased illness in endurance athletes who present with symptoms of F-OR during periods of high volume training. The third study shows a lower cardiac output and systolic blood pressure with greater arteriovenous O2 difference were reported in F-OR subjects at all exercising intensities, while no significant change was observed in the control and acute fatigue (AF) groups. A concomitant decrease in epinephrine excretion was reported only in the F-OR group. All values returned to baseline at Post. Following an overload endurance training program leading to F-OR, the cardiac response to exhaustive exercise is transiently impaired, possibly due to reduced epinephrine excretion. This finding is likely to explain the complex process of underperformance syndrome experienced by F-OR endurance athletes during heavy load programs

Introduction: College soccer begins in August and ends in November, allowing athletes less than 4 months to condition and play all regular season matches. A consistent consequence of this condensed season structure is an elevated risk of training distress. In turn, training distress can lead to impaired performance and an increased likelihood of injury. Thus, it is important to identify signs of symptoms of distress early so that appropriate adjustments to training volume can be made. Simple, noninvasive techniques, which can be implemented by coaching staff, are ideal. This study investigated whether heart rate recovery was effective as an indicator of training distress in collegiate soccer players. Methods: 26 women and 17 men were enrolled in the study. Data were collected at 4 time points, measuring shuttle run time, heart rate recovery time, resting heart rate values, and MTDS questionnaire score. Heart rate recovery time was defined as the duration it took an athlete to reach 60% heart rate maximum from peak heart rate following the shuttle run. Results: Shuttle run times were prolonged in the beginning and end of season compared to the two mid-season tests (p < 0.001); heart rate recovery times differed at each time period (p=0.003); freshmen deviation from baseline was greater compared to all other grades (p=0.001). Although not statistically significant, resting heart rate values trended up at the end of the season for both genders. Conclusions: Heart rate recovery did not detect training distress in athletes; shuttle run times and resting heart rate appeared to be possible variables that should be taken in to consideration for further research and possibly assist in tailoring training session for optimal performance.