Advertisement

Bulletin of Mathematical Biology

, Volume 81, Issue 6, pp 1867–1884 | Cite as

An Improved Version of the Classical Banister Model to Predict Changes in Physical Condition

  • Marcos MatabuenaEmail author
  • Rosana Rodríguez-López
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we formulate and provide the solutions to two new models to predict changes in physical condition by using the information of the training load of an individual. The first model is based on a functional differential equation, and the second one on an integral differential equation. Both models are an extension to the classical Banister model and allow to overcome its main drawback: the variations in physical condition are influenced by the training loads of the previous days and not only of the same day. Finally, it is illustrated how the first model works with a real example of the training process of a cyclist.

Keywords

Mathematical models Functional differential equations Difference equations 

Mathematics Subject Classification

34K06 39A06 39A60 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the editor and anonymous referees for their interesting comments. This work has received financial support from the Consellería de Cultura, Educación e Ordenación Universitaria (accreditation 2016-2019, ED431G/08 and reference competitive group 2014-2017, GRC2014/030) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The second author is partially supported by AEI of Spain (Under Grant MTM2016-75140-P) and Xunta de Galicia (under Grants GRC2015/004 and R2016-022).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Achten J, Jeukendrup AE (2003) Heart rate monitoring. Sports Med 33(7):517–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avalos M, Hellard P, Chatard JC (2003) Modeling the training-performance relationship using a mixed model in elite swimmers. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35(5):838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banister E, Calvert T, Savage M, Bach T (1975) A systems model of training for athletic performance. Aust J Sports Med 7(3):57–61Google Scholar
  4. Banister E, Carter J, Zarkadas P (1999) Training theory and taper: validation in triathlon athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 79(2):182–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banister WE, Morton RH, Fitz-Clarke J (1992) Dose/response effects of exercise modeled from training: physical and biochemical measures. Ann Physiolog Anthropol 11(3):345–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Banyard HG, Nosaka K, Haff GG (2017) Reliability and validity of the load-velocity relationship to predict the 1 rm back squat. J Strength Cond Res 31(7):1897–1904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bassett DR (2002) Scientific contributions of av hill: exercise physiology pioneer. J Appl Physiol 93(5):1567–1582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bazaraa MS, Sherali HD, Shetty CM (2013) Nonlinear programming: theory and algorithms. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Borresen J, Lambert MI (2009) The quantification of training load, the training response and the effect on performance. Sports Med 39(9):779–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Busso T (2003) Variable dose-response relationship between exercise training and performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35(7):1188–1195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Busso T (2017) From an indirect response pharmacodynamic model towards a secondary signal model of dose-response relationship between exercise training and physical performance. Sci Rep 7:40422.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Busso T, Candau R, Lacour JR (1994) Fatigue and fitness modelled from the effects of training on performance. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 69(1):50–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cheung K, Hume PA, Maxwell L (2003) Delayed onset muscle soreness. Sports Med 33(2):145–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clark A, Mach N (2017) The crosstalk between the gut microbiota and mitochondria during exercise. Front Physiol 8:319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clarke DC, Skiba PF (2013) Rationale and resources for teaching the mathematical modeling of athletic training and performance. Adv Physiol Educ 37(2):134–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cohen JE (2004) Mathematics is biology’s next microscope, only better; biology is mathematics’ next physics, only better. PLoS Biol 2(12):e439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dufaux B, Assmann G, Schachten H, Hollmann W (1982) The delayed effects of prolonged physical exercise and physical training on cholesterol level. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 48(1):25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Essig DA, Alderson NL, Ferguson MA, Bartoli WP, Durstine JL (2000) Delayed effects of exercise on the plasma leptin concentration. Metabol Clin Exp 49(3):395–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fister I, Rauter S, Yang XS, Ljubič K (2015) Planning the sports training sessions with the bat algorithm. Neurocomputing 149:993–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fitz-Clarke JR, Morton R, Banister E (1991) Optimizing athletic performance by influence curves. J Appl Physiol 71(3):1151–1158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. González-Badillo JJ, Sánchez-Medina L (2010) Movement velocity as a measure of loading intensity in resistance training. Int J Sports Med 31(05):347–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hale JK, Infante EF, Tsen FSP (1985) Stability in linear delay equations. J Math Anal Appl 105(2):533–555MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Hale JK, Lunel SMV (2013) Introduction to functional differential equations, vol 99. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Kampakis S (2016) Predictive modelling of football injuries. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.07480Google Scholar
  25. Kenney WL, Wilmore J, Costill D (2015) Physiology of sport and exercise 6th edition. Human kineticsGoogle Scholar
  26. Kindermann W, Simon G, Keul J (1979) The significance of the aerobic-anaerobic transition for the determination of work load intensities during endurance training. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 42(1):25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. le Bris S, Ledermann B, Topin N, Messner-Pellenc P, Le Gallais D (2006) A systems model of training for patients in phase 2 cardiac rehabilitation. Int J Cardiol 109(2):257–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. MacArthur DG, North KN (2005) Genes and human elite athletic performance. Hum Genet 116(5):331–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mach N, Ramayo-Caldas Y, Clark A, Moroldo M, Robert C, Barrey E, López JM, Le Moyec L (2017) Understanding the response to endurance exercise using a systems biology approach: combining blood metabolomics, transcriptomics and mirnomics in horses. BMC Genom 18(1):187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Matabuena M, Vidal JC, Hayes PR, Huelin Trillo F (2018) A 6-minute sub-maximal run test to predict VO$_{2}$ max. J Sports Sci 36(22):2531–2536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miller BF, Olesen JL, Hansen M, Døssing S, Crameri RM, Welling RJ, Langberg H, Flyvbjerg A, Kjaer M, Babraj JA et al (2005) Coordinated collagen and muscle protein synthesis in human patella tendon and quadriceps muscle after exercise. J Physiol 567(3):1021–1033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mujika I, Busso T, Lacoste L, Barale F, Geyssant A, Chatard JC (1996) Modeled responses to training and taper in competitive swimmers. Med Sci Sports Exerc 28(2):251–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Noakes T (2000) Physiological models to understand exercise fatigue and the adaptations that predict or enhance athletic performance. Scand J Med Sci Sports Rev Artic 10(3):123–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pfeiffer M (2008) Modeling the relationship between training and performance-a comparison of two antagonistic concepts. Int J Comput Sci Sport 7(2):13–32Google Scholar
  35. Philippe AG, Borrani F, Sanchez AM, Py G, Candau R (2018) Modelling performance and skeletal muscle adaptations with exponential growth functions during resistance training. J Sports Sci 37(3):254–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Philippe AG, Py G, Favier FB, Sanchez AM, Bonnieu A, Busso T, Candau R (2015) Modeling the responses to resistance training in an animal experiment study. BioMed Res Int 2015:914860.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/914860 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stewart AM, Hopkins WG (2000) Seasonal training and performance of competitive swimmers. J Sports Sci 18(11):873–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Viru AA, Viru M (2001) Biochemical monitoring of sport training. Human Kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  39. Žákovská A, Knechtle B, Chlíbková D, Miličková M, Rosemann T, Nikolaidis PT (2017) The effect of a 100-km ultra-marathon under freezing conditions on selected immunological and hematological parameters. Front Physiol 8:638CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Mathematical Biology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centro de Investigación en Tecnoloxías da Información (CiTIUS)Universidade de Santiago de CompostelaSantiago de CompostelaSpain
  2. 2.Departamento de Estatística, Análise Matemática e Optimización, Facultade de MatemáticasUniversidade de Santiago de CompostelaSantiago de CompostelaSpain

Personalised recommendations