Postgraduate student V.I. Epanov¹
PhD, Associate Professor T.V. Fendel^1
1Tchaikovsky State Institute of Physical Culture, Tchaikovsky

Keywords: amateur sports, marathon race, marathon runner, marathon training model, questionnaire survey

Background. The global sports community has lately shown a growing interest in marathon race sports including their amateur domain, with the progress encouraged by the active marathon race promotion initiatives and new marathon race events – both traditional and commercial ones. National sports communities give a growing priority in this context to the new efficient marathon training methods, models and tools [1-3], with the demand for them being particularly high in the amateur marathon groups.

Objective of the study was to analyze the key amateur marathon training and competiive models based on questionnaire survey data.

Methods and structure of the study. We sampled for the purposes of the study amateur marathon runners (n=127) from the Perm Territory and neighboring regions of the Russian Federation, and surveyed them using an adapted version of the S.M. Struganov Questionnaire Survey [4] with its 46 questions grouped into the following 3 modules:

• Personal information: age, qualification; residence; sporting experiences including the marathon race periods; competitive accomplishments in the marathon race events; motivations for marathon race etc.
• Practical data, including the marathon race training systems: competitions per annum; training system with the timeframes, intensities and priorities in the precompetitive, competitive and rehab periods; training methods and tools; etc.
• Associating data: factors of influence on the competitive progress; diets and rehab methods; technical provisions for the trainings etc.

Results and discussion. The sample was classified as follows: 30-plus year-olds making up 67.7% (n=86) of the sample; 49 people (38.6%) reporting 15-plus years-long sporting experiences (skiing, swimming, tourism, cycling); 24 people (18.9%) reporting the athletics-only experiences, including 2 WCMS (1.6%) and 5 MS (3.9%). By the marathon race experiences, 52.8% (n=67) reported 3-plus years in the marathon race. Most of the sample (56.7%, n=72) reported preferring the coach-assisted trainings, and the rest (43.3%, n=55) self-reliant trainings.

Motivations for the marathon race were found to vary widely from the purely practical (awards, popularity, appreciation of the beloved ones) to sporting (self-assertion; competitive progress; sport qualifications etc.) and even the experimental ones (meet challenges; explore own resource; ‘statistically, only 1% of the global population have run a full marathon race distance, and I wanted to test if I could do the same’).

The practical module of questions on the marathon race experiences and qualifications was responded as follows. Most (n=105, 82.7%) reported 2-3 competitions per year preferably in spring/ fall in good weather conditions followed by long (at least monthly) rehab periods (n=63, 49.6%). The training timeframes were found to differ widely: 44 people (34.6%) prefer evenly managed annual trainings; 74 people (58.3%) opt for 15-18-week intense precompetitive trainings; and 9 people (7.1%) reported no special precompetitive marathon race trainings as they are happy with their sport fitness secured by the other favorite sports.

As for the training workloads, 68 people (53.5%) reported up to 150 km/ week (600 km/ month or about 6000 km/ year); 35 people (27.6%) reported even higher workloads; 21 people (16.6%) consider such workloads excessive/ unreasonable; and 3 respondents (2.3%) reported keeping no accounts of the training workloads (‘do what the coach tells’). In terms of the training styles, the sample reported a mix of continuous (jogging with the HR up to 120-140 bpm) and interval styles (including fartlek with the HR coming to 150-170 bpm). The interval cycling style was reported by the whole sample in both versions: standard repetitions (rhythmic accelerations and repeated runs with the HR up to 160–180 bpm) and variable intervals (uphill 400m+ runs with the HR up to 170-190 bpm). Furthermore, the sample reported the trainings being complemented by cross-country runs (36.2%), water/ sand/ deep snow runs (30.7%), fartlek (22%) and trails (11.1%).

The associating data were also found widely variable. The respondents reported the following internal factors of influence on the competitive success: maximal oxygen consumption (MOC, 54.3%); anaerobic metabolic threshold (AMT, 33.1%); leg-muscle glycogen rates (9.4%); and the fat oxidation rates in the marathon race events (3.2%). The external factors of influence on the marathon race success were reported as follows: weather conditions (air temperature, humidity, wind, precipitation, 91.3%); supporters, competitors, pacemakers (11%); terrain (4.8%); and the organizers’ service quality (food, water supply etc., 3.9%). The dietary preferences were the following: 87 people (68.5%) reported carbohydrate diets; 22 people (17.3%) mixed protein-carbohydrate diets; 12 people (9.5%) protein-only diets; and 6 people (4.7%) reported fasting in the marathon race events.

We were pleased to find that 100% of the amateur marathon race sample is examined by doctors 4-6 times a year in precompetitive and other periods. Technical training tools reported by the sample are dominated by wrist watches (100%) and heart rate monitors (79.5%). The post-competitive rehab methods were found dominated by sauna (59.1%), massage (50.4%), swimming (36.2%) and jogging (18.9%). And majority (81.9%) of the sample ranked the informational support and practical instructions on top of the amateur marathon race resource mobilizing, facilitating and encouraging mechanisms.

Conclusion. The amateur marathon race questionnaire survey data and analysis showed the need for a sound universal amateur marathon race training service concept. The amateur marathon runners reported a wide and inconsistent variety of the preferred training workloads, timeframes, methods and tools. Knowing that the modern marathon race is ranked among the most extreme health-risk sports, the national amateur marathon race community needs to be supported by a systemic theoretical and practical research provisions for progress.

References

1. Groshev V.V., Fatyanov I.A. New approaches to organization of pre-competition training for marathon runners. Uchenye zapiski universiteta im. P.F. Lesgafta. 2019. no. 2 (168). pp. 103-106.
2. Petrov N.Yu., Savatenkov V.A., Groshev V.V. Training program for amateur marathon runners. Fizicheskoe vospitanie i sportivnaya trenirovka. 2016. no. 1 (15). pp. 31-34.
3. Sinitsyna Yu.Yu. et al. Medical support for amateur athlete with burdened somatic history in pre-marathon training. Pros and cons. Sportivnaya meditsina: nauka i praktika. 2016. no.1. pp. 91-96.
4. Struganov S.M. Rational planning of training process at special training stage of highly qualified marathon runners. PhD dis.. Ulan-Ude, 2007. 195 p.
5. Fatyanov I.A. Risk management technology in system of regular pre-marathon training. Uchenye zapiski universiteta im. P.F. Lesgafta. 2016.no. 3 (133). pp. 244-249.

Corresponding author: vladimirepanov@yandex.ru

Abstract

Objective of the study was to analyze the key amateur marathon training and competiive models based on questionnaire survey data.

Methods and structure of the study. We sampled for the purposes of the study amateur marathon runners (n=127) from the Perm Territory and neighboring regions of the Russian Federation, and surveyed them using an adapted version of the S.M. Struganov Questionnaire Survey.

Results and conclusions. The survey results showed that more than half the amateur athletes were 30+ years of age and, by the time of the experiment, had been engaged in marathon running for at least 3 years. A little more than half of them (56.7%) preferred to train under the guidance of their coach; the rest (43.3%) trained independently. There is a broad list of motives for participating in marathon races: from strictly pragmatic to research-related. The amount and intensity of physical loads, as well as the training and rehabilitation means included in the content of the training programs were quite diverse as well. The vast majority of respondents (81.9%) emphasized the importance of information support, including methodological one.

The amateur marathon race questionnaire survey data and analysis showed the need for a sound universal amateur marathon race training service concept. The amateur marathon runners reported a wide and inconsistent variety of the preferred training workloads, timeframes, methods and tools. Knowing that the modern marathon race is ranked among the most extreme health-risk sports, the national amateur marathon race community needs to be supported by a systemic theoretical and practical research provisions for progress.