Advertisement

A Conceptual Framework for the Generation of Adaptive Training Plans in Sports Coaching

Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1058)

Abstract

Planning training sessions is one of the coaches’ main responsibilities in Sports Coaching. Coaches watch their athletes during training, identify key aspects of their performance that can be improved and plan training sessions to address the problems that they have observed. Limited work has been proposed and applied to the generation of training plans using technology. There is great potential for improving the generation of personalized training plans by using Machine Learning techniques. Recently, many methods and techniques were proposed in theory and practice in order to help athletes in sports training generally. Integrating some of these methods and techniques would result in the generation of automated, adaptive and personalized training plans. In this paper, we propose a conceptual framework for training plan generation in an adaptive and personalized way for athletes. This framework integrates performance indicators such as training load measures, physiological constraints, and behavior-change features like goal setting and self-monitoring. It provides a training plan, being adopted by the athlete, and its goal adapts to the athlete’s behavior.

Keywords

Sports training plan Training load Behavior-change features Physiological constraints 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Knowles, Z., Borrie, A., Telfer, H.: Towards the reflective sports coach: issues of context, education and application. Ergonomics 48, 1711–1720 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Farrow, D., Baker, J., MacMahon, C.: Developing Sport Expertise: Researchers and Coaches Put Theory into Practice, 1st edn. Routledge (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Althoff, T., Sosič, R., Hicks, J.L., King, A.C., Delp, S.L., Leskovec, J.: Large-scale physical activity data reveal worldwide activity inequality. Nature 547, 336–339 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Case, M.A., Burwick, H.A., Volpp, K.G., Patel, M.S.: Accuracy of smartphone applications and wearable devices for tracking physical activity. JAMA 313, 625–626 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fujiki, Y.: iPhone as a physical activity measurement platform. In: CHI 2010 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 4315–4320. ACM, Atlanta (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hekler, E.B., Buman, M.P., Grieco, L., Rosenberger, M., Winter, S.J., Haskell, W., King, A.C.: Validation of physical activity tracking via Android Smartphones compared to ActiGraph accelerometer: laboratory-based and free-living validation studies. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 3, e36 (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fister Jr., I., Fister, I.: Generating the training plans based on existing sports activities using swarm intelligence. In: Patnaik Srikanta, N.K., Xin-She, Y. (eds.) Nature-Inspired Computing and Optimization: Theory and Applications, pp. 79–94. Springer International Publishing (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhou, M., Mintz, Y.D., Fukuoka, Y., Goldberg, K.Y., Flowers, E., Kaminsky, P., Castillejo, A., Aswani, A.: Personalizing mobile fitness apps using reinforcement learning. In: Companion Proceedings of the 23rd International on Intelligent User Interfaces: 2nd Workshop on Theory-Informed User Modeling for Tailoring and Personalizing Interfaces (HUMANIZE) (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kumyaito, N., Yupapin, P., Tamee, K.: Planning a sports training program using Adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization with emphasis on physiological constraints. BMC Res. Notes 11, 9 (2018)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aswani, A., Kaminsky, P., Mintz, Y., Flowers, E., Fukuoka, Y.: Behavioral modeling in weight loss interventions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 272, 1058–1072 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mintz, Y., Aswani, A., Kaminsky, P., Flowers, E., Fukuoka, Y.: Behavioral Analytics for Myopic Agents (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Teodorescu, S., Urzeală, C.: Management tools in sports performance. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 81, 84–88 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Foster, C., Rodriguez-Marroyo, J.A., de Koning, J.J.: Monitoring training loads: the past, the present, and the future. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 12, 2–8 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wallace, L.K., Slattery, K., Coutts, A.J.: A comparison of methods for quantifying training load: Relationships between modelled and actual training responses. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 114, 11–20 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Amatori, S.: Training load: study and comparison of the main training load quantification methods used | A new proposal for triathlon (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lambert, M., Borresen, J.: Measuring training load in sports. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 5, 406–411 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hernández-Cruz, G., López-Walle, J., Chacón, J.T.Q., Sanchez, J.C.J., Rangel, B.R., Reynoso-Sánchez, L.F.: Impact of the internal training load over recovery-stress balance in endurance runners. Revista de Psicologia del Deporte 26, 57–62 (2017)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leo, P.: A contemporary approach of training load quantification in endurance athletes. BSc thesis, University of Innsbruck, Austria (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pyne, D., Martin, D.: Fatigue - insights from individual and team sports. Regulation of Fatigue in Exercise. In: Marino, F.E. (ed.) Regulation of Fatigue in Exercise, pp. 177–185. Nova Science, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Halson, S.: Monitoring training load to understand fatigue in athletes. Sports Med. (Auckland, N.Z.) 44, 139–147 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Foster, C., Florhaug, J.A., Franklin, J., Gottschall, L., Hrovatin, L.A., Parker, S., Doleshal, P., Dodge, C.: A new approach to monitoring exercise training. J. Strength Conditioning Res. 15, 109–115 (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wallace, L.K., Slattery, K.M., Coutts, A.J.: A comparison of methods for quantifying training load: Relationships between modelled and actual training responses. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 114, 11–20 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Racefox Homepage. https://racefox.se/. Accessed 13 May 2019
  24. 24.
    Garmin Homepage. https://explore.gar. Accessed 13 May 2019
  25. 25.
    Fitbit Homepage. https://www.fitbit.com. Accessed 13 May 2019
  26. 26.
    Coach’s role. https://www.topendsports.com/fitness/coach.htm. Accessed 13 May 2019

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.OptomaticaGizaEgypt
  2. 2.Faculty of Computers and InformationCairo UniversityGizaEgypt

Personalised recommendations

Cite paper

Buy options