Resistance Training Prescription During Planned Deloading Periods: A Survey of Strength and Conditioning Coaches Across Varying Sporting Codes

De Marco, K, Goods, PSR, Baldwin, KM, Hiscock, DJ, and Scott, BR. Resistance training prescription during planned deloading periods: A survey of strength and conditioning coaches across varying sporting codes. J Strength Cond Res 38(12): 2099-2106, 2024-The aim of this study was to investigate the resistance training (RT) prescription practices of strength and conditioning coaches throughout 4 common planned deloading periods (taper, competitive season, tournament, and travel). An anonymous online survey was shared globally to coaches, with data from 204 subjects included in analysis (current level of athlete coached: world class n = 68, elite/international n = 62, highly trained n = 64, trained n = 10). Coaches only provided answers about prescription for deloading periods, which they reported encountering. Where a coach indicated not prescribing RT for specific deloading periods, they detailed any barriers preventing RT prescription. Weekly deload RT prescription was typically reported as follows: 1-2 sessions, 30-60 minutes, 1-3 sets, 1-6 repetitions, and between 60 and 84% 1 repetition maximum. Most coaches reported decreasing volume during all deloading periods (taper: 89.1% [163/183 respondents], competitive season: 70.4% [133/189], tournament: 84.1% [74/88], travel: 74.6% [88/118]), with the most common reduction in RT volume reported as 0-25%. Most coaches also decreased intensity during a taper (52.9% [82/155]), tournament (54.8% [40/73]), and travel (53.6% [52/97]), with a 0-25% reduction the most common. Travel had the highest incidence of coaches not prescribing RT (38.5% [75/195]). The most cited barriers by these subjects were "scheduling/time" (60.0% [45/75]) and "lack of equipment and facilities" (57.3% [43/75]), which were also common in other periods. To address common barriers experienced by coaches, researchers should investigate time-efficient RT strategies requiring minimal equipment for periods of planned deloading to maintain training stimulus.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Published
2024-10-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000004932
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Sports Performance and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.48
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Resistance Training Prescription During Planned Deloading Periods: A Survey of Strength and Conditioning Coaches Across Varying Sporting Codes

Daniel J. Hiscock, Paul S.R. Goods, Brendan R. Scott, Kate M. Baldwin et al.
1 citations
The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Sports Performance and Training
0.48
article

Resistance Training Prescription During Planned Deloading Periods: A Survey of Strength and Conditioning Coaches Across Varying Sporting Codes

Daniel J. Hiscock, Paul S.R. Goods, Brendan R. Scott, Kate M. Baldwin, Kristen De Marco
article en
1 citations

Abstract

De Marco, K, Goods, PSR, Baldwin, KM, Hiscock, DJ, and Scott, BR. Resistance training prescription during planned deloading periods: A survey of strength and conditioning coaches across varying sporting codes. J Strength Cond Res 38(12): 2099-2106, 2024-The aim of this study was to investigate the resistance training (RT) prescription practices of strength and conditioning coaches throughout 4 common planned deloading periods (taper, competitive season, tournament, and travel). An anonymous online survey was shared globally to coaches, with data from 204 subjects included in analysis (current level of athlete coached: world class n = 68, elite/international n = 62, highly trained n = 64, trained n = 10). Coaches only provided answers about prescription for deloading periods, which they reported encountering. Where a coach indicated not prescribing RT for specific deloading periods, they detailed any barriers preventing RT prescription. Weekly deload RT prescription was typically reported as follows: 1-2 sessions, 30-60 minutes, 1-3 sets, 1-6 repetitions, and between 60 and 84% 1 repetition maximum. Most coaches reported decreasing volume during all deloading periods (taper: 89.1% [163/183 respondents], competitive season: 70.4% [133/189], tournament: 84.1% [74/88], travel: 74.6% [88/118]), with the most common reduction in RT volume reported as 0-25%. Most coaches also decreased intensity during a taper (52.9% [82/155]), tournament (54.8% [40/73]), and travel (53.6% [52/97]), with a 0-25% reduction the most common. Travel had the highest incidence of coaches not prescribing RT (38.5% [75/195]). The most cited barriers by these subjects were "scheduling/time" (60.0% [45/75]) and "lack of equipment and facilities" (57.3% [43/75]), which were also common in other periods. To address common barriers experienced by coaches, researchers should investigate time-efficient RT strategies requiring minimal equipment for periods of planned deloading to maintain training stimulus.

The Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchVol. 38(12)
Murdoch University (AU), Curtin University (AU), The University of Notre Dame Australia (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 36%
Sports Performance and Training
0.48
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.