THE CONVERGENT VALIDITY BETWEEN TWO OBJECTIVE METHODS FOR QUANTIFYING TRAINING LOAD IN YOUNG TAEKWONDO ATHLETES

Haddad, M, Chaouachi, A, Castagna, C, Wong, DP, and Chamari, K. The convergent validity between two objective methods for quantifying training load in young taekwondo athletes. J Strength Cond Res 26(1): 206-209, 2012-Various studies used objective heart rate (HR)-based methods to assess training load (TL). The common methods were Banister's Training Impulse (TRIMP; weights the duration using a weighting factor) and Edwards' TL (a summated HR zone score). Both the methods use the direct physiological measure of HR as a fundamental part of the calculation. To eliminate the redundancy of using various methods to quantify the same construct (i.e., TL), we have to verify if these methods are strongly convergent and are interchangeable. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the convergent validity between Banister's TRIMP and Edwards' TL used for the assessment of internal TL. The HRs were recorded and analyzed during 10 training weeks of the preseason period in 10 male Taekwondo (TKD) athletes. The TL was calculated using Banister's TRIMP and Edwards' TL. Pearson product moment correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the convergent validity between the 2 methods for assessing TL. Very large to nearly perfect relationships were found between individual Banister's TRIMP and Edwards' TL (r values from 0.80 to 0.99; p < 0.001). Pooled Banister's TRIMP and pooled Edwards' TL (pooled data n = 284) were nearly largely correlated (r = 0.89; p < 0.05; 95% confidence interval: 0.86-0.91). In conclusion, these findings suggest that these 2 objective methods, measuring a similar construct, are interchangeable.