When I was training hockey players during pre-season camp, we'd easily do a few weeks of daily or twice daily ' on-ice ' workouts - 5 days a week - where we would a mimimum of 30 minutes of ' up-tempo ' drills to simulate 45 second hockey shifts ( going flat out as possible ) followed by a simulated active recovery of being on the bench till the next shift for 2 minutes. In other words, we did some pretty heavy duty interval conditioning pre-season 5 days a week and also during the season with games and practices taking up 5 days a week.
Comparing athletes in full "pre-season training" swing to the average, dieting individual is not real practical. In general, athletes have better recovery capabilities than the average counterpart.
In the context of your example though, pending nutrition, recovery, and other intensive bouts of exercise that the players are exposed too, I could see it being "okay."
Okay assuming this level and frequency of intensity once the season starts is drastically reduced. But I certainly don't think you need me to tell you how to train your athletes. You probably have more hands on work with full teams than I do. Actually, I know you do.
However, I always felt that since HIIT really drains glycogen stores, and given glycogen is replaced at anywhere from 5%+ an hour, assuming sound nutrition protocols are used, there should be ample glycogen available for each day for back to back to back ( as an example ) HIIT sessions. So - at least on paper - glycogen issues wouldn't be the reason you couldn't do consecutive HIIT sessions.
It certainly isn't a matter of glycogen repletion. That is accomplished rather easily with proper nutrition, which I am sure you know. And this goes for the athlete or the average.
And, since the HIIT sessions only call on your muscles ( ie, legs ) to go really hard for maybe 6 minutes a session, I don't know if these HIIT sessions are overtaxing your muscles from an adaptation point of view such that muscle soreness etc would prevent back to back HIIT sessions. .
It's also not about local muscular fatigue.
It's about neural fatigue.
And for those reading this who don't understand that there is a neural component to training (especially energy intensive training). The neural component has to do with the short term changes in the firing characteristics of the nerves that connect to your muscles (including the brain) in order to create force very rapidly. The muscle tissue itself is only involved tangentially, as opposed to other types of action.
And remember the context of my advice, Wrangell. My advice is directed, again, toward the dieting individual. When someone is deficient in energy, their capacity to recover is drastically reduced, locally and neurally.
When dieting, IMO, intensive weight lifting is NEEDED if you are going to optimally reach your physique goals. I recommend at least 2-3 sessions per week of this.
Again, when dieting, you need some regulation of intensity. I will certainly cut this intensity in the cardio (HIIT included) side of things first, before the other forms of intensive exercise (weights). This only makes sense for the dieter though, looking for physique improvements. This would certainly not be the case for athletes such as the example you gave.
This is the meat of my advice here. There are other, more important, energy-intensive components in a fitness routine for the dieting individual. HIIT takes a back seat to these components (namely weights).
For your athletes, it's all about training specificity for your athletes, mentioned above. You are directly mimicking the work they will do in the real world (on the ice). As you know, specificity is a fundamental and required variable if real world progress and enhancement in performance is desired.
Your athletes are not trying to improve their physiques. They are trying to improve their conditioning. Two totally different scenarios. KWIM?
However, I would closely monitor how "hard" you push those athletes.... and you can take this advice for what it's worth.... which comparably speaking, isn't much. I have never worked with high level teams in totality. I have worked with numerous athletes though, with success via one-on-one training situations.
While you are building "fitness" in these athletes with high frequency HIIT, you are also accumulating a bunch of "fatigue." This fatigue MUST be managed for:
1. Optimal results (read: increased performance)
2. Recovery. Running (skating) athletes into the ground using energy intensive approaches such as HIIT is great, as long as you allow for recovery. "Over-reach" your athletes too far and injury is probable IMO. And this is general advice.... I have no clue exactly what you are doing with your athletes.
With regards to Alwyn, I love him. However, I've never been a fan of his ideologies when it comes to cardio and HIIT for the average person. I lost interest on this side of his theories when he wrote an article about steady state cardio actually making you fat. There were not his exact words, but it seemed like he was stretching the facts a good bit to write a neat article.
I am tired as sin. Sorry if I am babbling..... b/c it really feels like I am!!
If I didn't answer your question Wrangell, feel free to post more. Interesting discussion to say the least.
