109
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2001, 15(1), 109–115
q 2001 National Strength & Conditioning Association
A New Approach to Monitoring Exercise Training
CARL FOSTER, JESSICA A. FLORHAUG, JODI FRANKLIN,
LORI GOTTSCHALL, LAURI A. HROVATIN, SUZANNE PARKER,
PAMELA DOLESHAL, AND CHRISTOPHER DODGE
Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin–La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601.
ABSTRACT
The ability to monitor training is critical to the process of
quantitating training periodization plans. To date, no method
has proven successful in monitoring training during multi-
ple types of exercise. High-intensity exercise training is par-
ticularly difficult to quantitate. In this study we evaluate the
ability of the session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) meth-
od to quantitate training during non–steady state and pro-
longed exercise compared with an objective standard based
on heart rate (HR). In a 2-part design, subjects performed
steady state and interval cycle exercise or practiced basket-
ball. Exercise bouts were quantitated using both the session
RPE method and an objective HR method. During cycle ex-
ercise, the relationship between the exercise score derived
using the session RPE method and the HR method was high-
ly consistent, although the absolute score was significantly
greater with the session RPE method. During basketball,
there was a consistent relationship between the 2 methods
of monitoring exercise, although the absolute score was also
significantly greater with the session RPE method. Despite
using different subjects in the 2 parts of the study, the re-
gression relationships between the session RPE method and
the HR method were nearly overlapping, suggesting the
broad applicability of this method. We conclude that the ses-
sion RPE method is a valid method of quantitating exercise
training during a wide variety of types of exercise. As such,
this technique may hold promise as a mode and intensity-
independent method of quantitating exercise training and
may provide a tool to allow the quantitative evaluation of
training periodization plans.
Key Words: periodization, heart rate, perceived exer-
tion, interval training, prolonged exercise
Reference Data: Foster, C., J.A. Florhaug, J. Franklin, L.
Gottschall, L.A. Hrovatin, S. Parker, P. Doleshal, and
C. Dodge. A new approach to monitoring exercise
training. J. Strength Cond. Res. 15(1):109–115. 2001.
Introduction
M
any studies have stressed the importance of the
training load in enhancing athletic performance
and the changes in performance attributable to varying
periods of hard and easy training (2, 5, 6, 9, 11–15, 18–
20). These practicalities are reflected in the practice of
coaches who design highly detailed periodized train-
ing programs (10, 21). Unfortunately, although period-
ized training programs are in their essence quantita-
tive, there has been great difficulty in finding a way
to effectively quantitate training using a single term.
Endurance athletes have often used the training vol-
ume (kilometers per week) as an index of training
with reasonable effectiveness (13, 15). However, mea-
surement of training volume ignores the critical im-
portance of high-intensity training bouts (17). For ath-
letes training for strength and/or power, the use of
the volume of training is an inadequate tool because
of the overriding importance of intensity.
There have been several previous attempts at de-
veloping a single term for quantitating training. In the
late 1960s, Cooper (7) proposed the concept of ‘‘aero-
bics points,’’ which integrated exercise duration and
the absolute intensity of aerobic training activities. Al-
though this approach was highly successful in terms
of guiding the nonathletic public into fitness exercise,
the lack of an index of the relative training intensity
(which is much more critical as an index of how likely
a given exercise bout is to induce a training effect)
dictated that this method would lack the ability to ad-
equately describe the training load. Banister et al. (2,
9, 18) have developed the concept of the training im-
pulse (TRIMP) as a strategy for integrating the com-
ponents of training into a single term that allows a
systems analysis approach to training. This method
has shown great promise relative to understanding the
training response and has been extended by Busso et
al. (6), Foster et al. (11, 12, 14, 15), and Mujika et al.
(19, 20). There are at least 2 important limitations to
the TRIMP concept developed by Bannister et al. (2, 9,
18). First, although monitors with the capacity of in-
tegrating the heart rate (HR) responses over long pe-
riods of time are widely available, if an athlete forgets
to use his or her HR monitor or if the HR monitor has
a technical failure during the exercise bout, informa-
tion regarding that training session is lost. Second, HR

110 Foster, Florhaug, Franklin, Gottschall, Hrovatin, Parker, Doleshal, and Dodge
Table 1. Mean (6SD) characteristics of the subjects in
part 1.*
Men Women
Age (yr)
Height (cm)
Weight (kg)
Percent fat
Peak power output (W)
Peak power output (W·kg
21
)
Peak V
˙
O
2
(L·min
21
)
Peak V
˙
O
2
(ml·min
21
·kg
21
)
Peak HR (b·min
21
)
IAT power output (W)
IAT power output (W·kg
21
)
IAT HR (b·min
21
)
23.0 6 3.6
177 6 4
70.8 6 7.2
11.1 6 4.8
315 6 34
4.52 6 0.52
3.84 6 0.30
54.6 6 2.4
198 6 10
228 6 25
3.28 6 0.65
174 6 19
21.3 6 1.5
165 6 8
63.8 6 4.3
20.9 6 2.7
237 6 33
3.68 6 0.38
2.94 6 0.34
46.2 6 3.5
186 6 7
188 6 48
2.94 6 0.61
159 6 16
*HR5 heart rate; IAT 5 individual aerobic threshold.
Table 2. Mean (6SD) characteristics of the subjects in
Part 2.
Age (yr)
Height (cm)
Weight (kg)
Percent fat
Peak V
˙
O
2
(L·min
21
)
Peak V
˙
O
2
(ml·min
21
·kg
21
)
Ventilatory threshold (L·min
21
)
20.2 6 1.5
191.4 6 4.9
89.3 6 7.8
12.8 6 2.8
4.60 6 0.50
51.5 6 2.2
3.32 6 0.54
Respiratory compensation threshold
(L·min
21
) 3.71 6 0.44
HRpeak (b·min
21
)
HR at VT (b·min
21
)
HR at RCT (b·min
21
)
182 6 9
136 6 6
150 6 4
*HR5 heart rate.
is a comparatively poor method of evaluating very
high-intensity exercise such as weight training, high-
intensity interval training, and plyometric training.
Thus even with the most optimal HR monitoring strat-
egy, integration of the TRIMP does not translate well
to very high-intensity exercise training. We have de-
veloped a modification of the rating of the perceived
exertion method (the session RPE), which uses RPE as
a marker of training intensity within the TRIMP con-
cept (11, 12, 14, 15). This method has been shown to
be related to both HR and blood lactate markers of
exercise intensity (14). However, our previous evalua-
tion of the session RPE method has been based pri-
marily on responses during 30 minutes of steady state
exercise within a comparatively modest range of ex-
ercise intensities. Given the importance of both high-
intensity training and extensive training bouts within
the training plan of contemporary athletes, informa-
tion regarding the stability of the session RPE method
vs. HR methods of monitoring training during exer-
cise other than brief steady state exercise is important.
Accordingly, the intent of this study was to evaluate
the relationship of the session RPE- and HR-based
methods of monitoring training during different forms
of exercise training.
Methods
This study was conducted in 2 separate but related
parts. In the first part we chose a common condition-
ing activity that allowed good quantitative control of
the exercise performed (cycle ergometry). This allowed
an idealized approach to both steady state and interval
exercise that we felt would be generally representative
of a variety of conditioning activities. During this
phase of the study, the subjects were 12 well-trained,
recreational-level cyclists (m 5 6, F 5 6). In the second
part, the subjects were members of a collegiate men’s
basketball team (n 5 14). Each subject provided in-
formed consent prior to participation, and the study
protocol was approved by the university institutional
review board. Some descriptive characteristics of the
subjects are provided in Tables 1 and 2.
Part 1
Prior to the experimental protocol, each subject was
evaluated during maximal incremental exercise on an
electrically braked cycle ergometer (Lode, Gronningen,
Netherlands). The subjects pedaled at freely chosen
revolutions per minute (rpm’s) within the range of 60–
80. The test began at a power output of 50 W for men,
40 W for women over 60 kg body weight, and 30 W
for women under 60 kg body weight. The power out-
put was increased by the same increment every 3 min-
utes until the subject could no longer continue. The
peak power output was interpolated based on the pro-
portional time achieved during the terminal stage. Ox-
ygen uptake (V
˙
O
2
) was measured using open-circuit
spirometry (Quinton Q-Plex, Seattle, WA). Peak V
˙
O
2
was defined as the highest continuous full minute V
˙
O
2
observed during the test. HR was measured by radio-
telemetry (Polar Electro Oy, Port Washington, NY).
Blood lactate was measured in capillary blood ob-
tained from a fingertip at rest, at the end of each stage
of exercise, and at 1, 3, 5, and 10 minutes postexercise
using an enzyme electrode system (YSI Sport, Yellow
Springs, OH). The individual anaerobic threshold
(IAT) was calculated on the basis of the exercise and
recovery blood lactate concentrations according to
Stegmann et al. (22).
Subsequently, each subject performed 8 randomly
ordered exercise training bouts, which included a ref-
erence 30-minute steady state bout at a power output
equivalent to 90% of the IAT, 2 additional steady state
exercise bouts at the same power output but of 60- and
90-minutes duration, and 5 interval bouts at the same
mean power output. The interval bouts were 30 min-
utes in duration and included variations in interval