Weekly training patterns during different phases throughout the season.

<p>Values are mean ± SD and represent training hours per week in different phases. A non-parametric Friedman test indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in all variables across the GP, SP and CP (P&lt;.05 level). A pairwise post-hoc test (Wilcoxon Signed Rank) was used to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between the GP, SP or CP, as well as pre-peaking and peaking phases (P&lt;.01 level).</p><p>*P&lt;.01, GP vs. SP;</p>#<p>P&lt;.01, GP vs. CP, pre-peaking or peaking;</p>β<p>P&lt;.01, SP vs. CP, pre-peaking or peaking;</p>†<p>P&lt;.01, pre-peaking vs. peaking.</p

Annual training characteristics.

<p>A: Total training time (h) distributed into endurance training (zones 1–5), strength and sprint (bars, y-axis), and total training frequency (sessions) (line, z-axis) during each month and divided into phases. B: HIT frequency (sessions) distributed into zones 3, 4 and 5 (bars, y-axis) during each month and divided in phases. There was a statistically significant difference (P&lt;.05) in total HIT sessions and zones 3, 4 and 5 respectively across the GP, SP and CP. Pairwise post-hoc tests showed: * Difference in total HIT sessions across phases (P&lt;.01). # Difference between zone 5 sessions vs. GP (P&lt;.01).</p

General characteristics of athletes included in the study.

<p>Values are reported from the analyzed year in the current study.</p

Training phases in annual cycle, including peaking phases.

<p>Training phases in annual cycle, including peaking phases.</p

Annual organization of specific and non-specific activity forms.

<p>Endurance and sprint training time (h) distributed into specific (ski and roller ski) and non-specific (running, cycling and other) activity forms during each month and divided in phases. # Difference in specific training time vs. GP (<i>P</i>&lt;.01).</p

Taper comparison.

<p>Schematic representation of the actual taper observed in current study compared to recommended volume reduction. Adapted from Mujika &amp; Padilla <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0101796#pone.0101796-Mujika1" target="_blank">[4]</a>.</p

Peaking characteristics.

<p>A: Weekly training time (h) distributed into endurance training (zones 1–5), strength and sprints (bars, y-axis), and total training frequency (sessions) (line, z-axis) during GP, and during the last 6 weeks prior championship title. B: HIT frequency (sessions) distributed into zones 3, 4 and 5 (bars, y-axis) during GP, and during the last 6 weeks prior to championship title. There was a statistically significant difference (<i>P</i>&lt;.05) in total HIT sessions and zones 3 and 5 respectively across GP, pre-peaking phase and peaking phase. Pairwise post-hoc tests showed: * Difference in total HIT sessions across phases (<i>P</i>&lt;.01). There were no statistically significant differences in zones 3, 4 or 5 across phases.</p

The 5-zone, 3-zone, and binary intensity scales used in the current study.

A<p>Measured with Lactate Pro LT-1710. Reference values presented are derived from the average self-reported zone-cut offs of 29 elite XC-skiers <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0101796#pone.0101796-Sylta1" target="_blank">[43]</a>, and individual adjustments are required.</p

Peaking phase.

<p>Number of athletes (of 11) who performed HIT sessions (line) and number of athletes who took a rest day from training (bars) during the final 14 days prior to peak performance.</p

Individual peaking characteristics.

<p>Individual (lines) and average (dotted bold line) total weekly training volume during GP, and the last 6 weeks prior to championship title.</p