Introduction
This paper talks about adding gamification to the recovery process for elite athletes.
Research has shown that peak performance is multidimensional with factors like stress, fatigue, and recovery all playing large roles. ((Smith, D.J., 2003. A framework for understanding the training process leading to elite performance. Sports medicine, 33(15), pp.1103-1126.))
Trainers, therapists and team staff members are expected to monitor individuals stress and fatigue states while maintaining a balance to help performance but without recovery, athletes will struggle to reach their full potential. ((Barnett, A., 2006. Using recovery modalities between training sessions in elite athletes. Sports medicine, 36(9), pp.781-796.))
The cause of reduced performance is often attributed to the accumulation of progressive fatigue moving from functional overreaching to overtraining syndrome. ((Budgett, R., 1998. Fatigue and underperformance in athletes: the overtraining syndrome. British journal of sports medicine, 32(2), pp.107-110.))
Methods
There were various recovery strategies brought up in this paper to go alongside nutrition:
- Compression garments ((Duffield, R., Edge, J., Merrells, R., Hawke, E., Barnes, M., Simcock, D. and Gill, N., 2008. The effects of compression garments on intermittent exercise performance and recovery on consecutive days. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 3(4), pp.454-468.))
- Contrast water therapy (hot/cold shower)
- Hydrotherapy (pool recovery session) ((Vaile, J., Halson, S., Gill, N. and Dawson, B., 2008. Effect of hydrotherapy on recovery from fatigue. International journal of sports medicine, 29(07), pp.539-544.))
- Hydration monitoring (changing in bodyweight)
- Athlete self-monitoring (Training/Recovery diary) ((Robson-Ansley, P.J., Gleeson, M. and Ansley, L., 2009. Fatigue management in the preparation of Olympic athletes. Journal of sports sciences, 27(13), pp.1409-1420.))
- Nutritional supplementation (Nutrient timing strategies) ((Wagner, D.R., 2009. Eating on the road: Practical nutrition strategies for the traveling athlete. International Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training, 14(5), pp.1-4.))
They developed a 100 point checklist for 16 Olympic Teams preparing for the Beijing Olympics Games.
An education process was also put in place for athletic trainers, strength and conditioning coaches, and athletes to help identify signs and symptoms of overtraining.
There were 20-minute interactive presentations on overtraining, athlete monitoring, and practical application of recovery strategies
Application
There were 4 main focus areas: ((Jeffreys, I., 2007. Post game recovery strategies for rugby. NSCA’s performance training journal, 6(4), pp.13-16.))
- Neural recovery: Massage and compression therapy
- Muscular recovery: Hydrotherapy and contrast water therapy
- Substrate recovery: Nutrition and hydration
- Psychological recovery: Athlete self-monitoring and lifestyle quality
Athletes were encouraged to pick 2 or more recovery strategies daily, focusing on different areas.
Each strategy was designated recovery points which at the end of the week needed to total more than 100.
Discussion
It was mentioned in the paper that the education process was found to be effective without mentioning how. Reading the paper I am not sure if it was the enforced application of the recovery as a measure of the educational effectiveness, or the knowledge the athletes were able to recite back to the coaches.
Regardless of how the effectiveness was measured, education is rarely a bad thing, especially coming from educated individuals like in this example.
This does bring up an interesting point about athlete education, when, how, and who to deliver that education. Not just for recovery, but for other elements of participation or performance.
The sample group of this paper was elite athletes, which means the application of education may not transfer as well to younger, less competitive, or less interested individuals in their performance.
On the other hand, it might be just as effective or even more effective but through a different medium. Issue 1 of the MOCS brought up technology as an assistance tool for retrieval practice which could contribute to athlete and coach education.
In addition to the education, this paper also mentioned the 100-point checklist was a useful tool for education, and promotion of self-initiated, proactive recovery strategies.
As a tool for surface education of fundamental tools for recovery, I can see how the checklist would be beneficial. The instruction-based approach to recovery training has obviously worked well in getting the athletes where they needed to be as this paper states.
A checklist of strategies paired with athlete autonomy seemed to encourage engagement which could hopefully be continued post-Olympics, which is where my curiosity lies.
Without the checklist and gamification aspects of recovery, how well does this transfer into training habits? I also wonder if the exploration of further and continued learning into recovery strategies would continue.
Conclusion
An educational program alongside an athlete autonomous checklist of strategies using aspects of gamification can help with application, consistency, and quality of recovery.
Future research could look into the lasting effects of education and gamification strategies when external influences are taken away.
