Nutrition Periodization in Recreational Endurance Athletes During Training Camp – Case study

KUMSTÁT, Michal and Tomáš HLINSKÝ. Nutrition Periodization in Recreational Endurance Athletes During Training Camp – Case study. Studia sportiva. 2023, vol. 17, No 2, p. 16-29. ISSN 2570-8783. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.5817/StS2023-2-2.

Basic information

• Original name: Nutrition Periodization in Recreational Endurance Athletes During Training Camp – Case study
• Name (in English): Nutrition Periodization in Recreational Endurance Athletes During Training Camp – Case study
• Authors: KUMSTÁT, Michal (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution) and Tomáš HLINSKÝ (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution).
• Edition: Studia sportiva, 2023, 2570-8783.

Other information

• Original language: Czech
• Type of outcome: Article in a journal
• Field of Study: 30306 Sport and fitness sciences
• Country of publisher: Czech Republic
• Confidentiality degree: is not subject to a state or trade secret
• WWW: URL
• RIV identification code: RIV/00216224:14510/23:00134775
• Organization unit: Faculty of Sports Studies
• Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5817/StS2023-2-2
• Keywords in English: nutrient timing; nutritional strategy; energy intake; carbohydrates

Abstract

Both training and dietary practices used by athletes greatly vary. Current sports nutrition guidelines promote dietary manipulation of energy-yielding nutrients specific to the period of training. The study explores the ad libitum nutrition practices of four healthy adult recreational athletes during a 2-week cycling training camp (~100 km·d-1, ~240 min·d-1) with particular attention to the current sports nutrition recommendations. Based on evidence-based guidelines, peri-exercise carbohydrate (CHO) and protein (PRO) intake periodization cut-off levels were set for athletes. Training days were categorized as hard (HARD, two training units/day), middle (MID, one training unit/day), and easy (LOW, no training). Fourteen-day diet records were used and analyzed by nutritional software for energy intake (EI), carbohydrate (CHO), and protein (PRO) intake.Relative daily EI of 78.6±4.5, 73.3±6.4, 75.4±8.2 kcal·kg·d-1, and CHO 8.9±0.8, 7.8±1.0, 8.2±1.5 g·kg1 intakes were not different in HARD, MID and LOW days, respectively. The mean daily EI was 1.3× higher than the predicted total daily energy expenditure, irrespective of the training day category, resulting in ~500 kcal·d-1 energy surplus. In the 2h post-exercise period, PRO intake exceeded the current recommendations 4.6-fold, and CHO intake was significantly lower after a second training session on HARD days (0.7 g·kg·h-1) than a recommendation (1.2 g·kg·h-1). Mean in-exercise CHO intake (~11.5 g·h-1) was significantly under the moderate 30 g·h-1 recommendation.In conclusion, the dietary behaviours of recreational athletes are not consistent with current sports nutrition periodization guidelines. Energy intake throughout the training camp led to positive energy balance being highest on non-training days. Daily or during and post-exercise CHO and PRO intakes were not adjusted to the training sessions' volume, intensity, or duration.

Abstract (in English)

Both training and dietary practices used by athletes greatly vary. Current sports nutrition guidelines promote dietary manipulation of energy-yielding nutrients specific to the period of training. The study explores the ad libitum nutrition practices of four healthy adult recreational athletes during a 2-week cycling training camp (~100 km·d-1, ~240 min·d-1) with particular attention to the current sports nutrition recommendations. Based on evidence-based guidelines, peri-exercise carbohydrate (CHO) and protein (PRO) intake periodization cut-off levels were set for athletes. Training days were categorized as hard (HARD, two training units/day), middle (MID, one training unit/day), and easy (LOW, no training). Fourteen-day diet records were used and analyzed by nutritional software for energy intake (EI), carbohydrate (CHO), and protein (PRO) intake.Relative daily EI of 78.6±4.5, 73.3±6.4, 75.4±8.2 kcal·kg·d-1, and CHO 8.9±0.8, 7.8±1.0, 8.2±1.5 g·kg1 intakes were not different in HARD, MID and LOW days, respectively. The mean daily EI was 1.3× higher than the predicted total daily energy expenditure, irrespective of the training day category, resulting in ~500 kcal·d-1 energy surplus. In the 2h post-exercise period, PRO intake exceeded the current recommendations 4.6-fold, and CHO intake was significantly lower after a second training session on HARD days (0.7 g·kg·h-1) than a recommendation (1.2 g·kg·h-1). Mean in-exercise CHO intake (~11.5 g·h-1) was significantly under the moderate 30 g·h-1 recommendation.In conclusion, the dietary behaviours of recreational athletes are not consistent with current sports nutrition periodization guidelines. Energy intake throughout the training camp led to positive energy balance being highest on non-training days. Daily or during and post-exercise CHO and PRO intakes were not adjusted to the training sessions' volume, intensity, or duration.