• Mon espace de travail
  • Aide IRIS
  • Par Publication Par Personne Par Unité
    • English
    • Français
  • Se connecter
Logo du site

IRIS | Système d’Information de la Recherche Institutionnelle

  • Accueil
  • Personnes
  • Publications
  • Unités
  • Périodiques
UNIL
  • English
  • Français
Se connecter
IRIS
  • Accueil
  • Personnes
  • Publications
  • Unités
  • Périodiques
  • Mon espace de travail
  • Aide IRIS

Parcourir IRIS

  • Par Publication
  • Par Personne
  • Par Unité
  1. Accueil
  2. IRIS
  3. Publication
  4. Assessing the limitations of the Banister model in monitoring training.
 
  • Détails
Titre

Assessing the limitations of the Banister model in monitoring training.

Type
article
Institution
Externe
Périodique
Journal of Sports Sciences  
Auteur(s)
Hellard, P.
Auteure/Auteur
Avalos, M.
Auteure/Auteur
Lacoste, L.
Auteure/Auteur
Barale, F.
Auteure/Auteur
Chatard, J.C.
Auteure/Auteur
Millet, G.P.
Auteure/Auteur
Liens vers les personnes
Millet, Grégoire  
ISSN
0264-0414
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2006-05
Volume
24
Numéro
5
Première page
509
Dernière page/numéro d’article
520
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to carry out a statistical analysis of the Banister model to verify how useful it is in monitoring the training programmes of elite swimmers. The accuracy, the ill-conditioning and the stability of this model were thus investigated. The training loads of nine elite swimmers, measured over one season, were related to performances with the Banister model. First, to assess accuracy, the 95% bootstrap confidence interval (95% CI) of parameter estimates and modelled performances were calculated. Second, to study ill-conditioning, the correlation matrix of parameter estimates was computed. Finally, to analyse stability, iterative computation was performed with the same data but minus one performance, chosen at random. Performances were related to training loads for all participants (R(2) = 0.79 +/- 0.13, P < 0.05) and the estimation procedure seemed to be stable. Nevertheless, the range of 95% CI values of the most useful parameters for monitoring training was wide: t(a) = 38 (17, 59), t(f) = 19 (6, 32), t(n) = 19 (7, 35), t(g) = 43 (25, 61). Furthermore, some parameters were highly correlated, making their interpretation worthless. We suggest possible ways to deal with these problems and review alternative methods to model the training-performance relationships.
Sujets

Adult

Female

Humans

Male

Models, Biological

Physical Education an...

Physical Fitness/phys...

Rest/physiology

Swimming/physiology

Task Performance and ...

PID Serval
serval:BIB_B856E7BC297C
DOI
10.1080/02640410500244697
PMID
16608765
Permalien
https://iris.unil.ch/handle/iris/171830
Date de création
2008-09-25T07:01:29.695Z
Date de création dans IRIS
2025-05-21T00:15:58Z
  • Copyright © 2024 UNIL
  • Informations légales