Physiological profile comparison between high intensity functional training, endurance and power athletes

INTRODUCTION High intensity functional trainings (HIFT), a recent development of high intensity trainings, includes in the same training session components of endurance exercises, elements of Olympic weightlifting and powerlifting, gymnastics, plyometrics and calisthenics exercises. Therefore, subjects practicing this type of activity are supposed to show physiological features that represent a combination of both endurance and power athletes. The aim of this study was to compare the physiological profile of three groups of age-matched endurance, HIFT and power athletes. METHODS A total of 30 participants, 18 to 38-year-old men were enrolled in the study. Participants were divided in three groups: HIFT (n = 10), endurance (END, n = 10), and power (POW, weightlifters, n = 10) athletes. All were evaluated for anthropometric characteristics, VO2peak, handgrip, lower limb maximal isometric and isokinetic strength, countermovement vertical jump and anaerobic power through a shuttle run test on the field. RESULTS VO2peak/kg was higher in END and HIFT than POW athletes (p = 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively), but there were no significant differences between the first two. POW and HIFT athletes showed significant greater strength at the handgrip, countermovement jump and leg extension/flexion tests than END athletes. HIFT athletes showed highest results at the dynamic isokinetic test, while there were no significant differences at the shuttle run test among groups. CONCLUSIONS As HIFT reach aerobic levels similar to END athletes and power and strength output similar to POW athletes, it appears that HIFT programs are effective to improve both endurance-related and power-related physical fitness components.