Scholarship Artifact I

Periodization provides a way to organize training across a competitive season, but how that training is organized may need to change based on the athlete and the demands of the season. Although several periodization models have been developed, current evidence does not show that one model is best for every athlete or situation. This review examines research on periodization models, autoregulation, training volume, and selected training methods to evaluate what the evidence supports, where limitations exist, and how those findings can inform programming decisions. Research indicates that different periodization models can improve physical performance, but findings do not consistently establish one approach as superior. Autoregulation may help guide training adjustments, while lower training volumes may be appropriate during the competitive season, although the certainty of some evidence remains limited. Assessments can help identify what an athlete needs to improve, while readiness, recovery, training response, and competitive demands can help determine how training should progress. During the off-season, there may be more opportunity to develop strength and other physical qualities. During the competitive season, the emphasis generally shifts toward maintaining those qualities while managing training demands and recovery. Periodization provides the structure, but the plan may need to change when there is a reason to adjust. Research should guide programming decisions, while professional judgment helps determine how the evidence applies to the individual athlete.