© Nationai Strength and Conditioning AssociationVolume28,Number5,pages 56-66Keywords:periodization; training variation; team sports; strengthtraining:metabolic conditioningPeriodization of Training forTeam Sports AthletesPaul Gamble, PhD,CSCSHeriot Watt University,Edinburgh,United Kingdoms u m m a r yTraining variation and periodizationis widely acknowledgedascrucial tooptimizing training responses. Ap-plying periodized planning to teamsports poses unique challenges dueto the variety of training goals, vol-ume of concurrent training andpractices, and extended season ofcompetition. Practical suggestionsare offered in this article to addressthese considerations and applyperi-odization in training design for dif-ferent phases of physical prepara-tion for team sports athletes.introductionTraining variation is increasinglyacknowledged as serving a keyfunctionin successfultrainingprescriptions (13, 37, 40). Periodizationoffers a framework for planned and sys-tematic variation of training parameters,in a way that directs physiological adap-tations to the training goals required ofthe sport (6, 14, 28, 29, 34, 37). Accord-ingly, training studies typically find pe-riodized training to elicit improvedtraining responses in comparison totraining groups employing a constantload throughout the study period (13,37,40). Consensus has thus largely beenreached among researchers and practi-tioners that periodized training offerssuperiordevelopmentofstrength,power, body composition, and otherperformance variables (13, 14, 35-37,39,40).The original theoretical basis of peri-odization was the general adaptationsyndrome (GAS) proposed by HansSeyle (30), which described the genericresponse of an organism to a stressor(39).According to this model, the firstphase of response to any stressor is char-acterized as shock or alarm (6, 39). Fol-lowing this is a supercompensationphase, whereby the body adapts to in-crease the specific capabilities affectedby the particular stressor (6, 39). Overtime if the stressor continues the organ-ism may enter the terminal phase,termed maladaptation or exhaustion (6,39).Periodization was developed withaim of manipulating these adaptationeffects, and avoiding the maladaptationphase, which could place the athlete inan overtrained state (6, 34, 39).This GAS paradigm has since been re-fined and effectively superseded by thefitness fatigue model (7, 28). A key dis-tinction is that the fitness fatigue modeldifferentiates between the actions of agiven stressor on individual neuromus-cular and metabolic systems (7). Theother major advancement is that themodel describes a dual adaptive re-sponse resulting in both fitness and fa-tigue aftereffects, as opposed to the sin-gle commonresponse describedbyGAS.These fitness and fatigue respons-es essentially work in opposition and aredescribed as having defined characteris-tics,with distinct differences in bothmagnitude and duration (7). It is the neteffect ofthese2 opposing outcomes thatdetermine the state of the athlete's neu-romuscular and metabolic system at agiven time (7).
