REF-103 · Galán-Rioja, González-Ravé, González-Mohíno & Seiler, 2023 · International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, · Paper

Block Periodization in Trained Cyclists: VO2max Gains vs Traditional Training

B+moderate evidenceMeasured on trained to highly trained athletesWritten before October 2026, being re-checked

Systematic review of seven studies in trained road cyclists.

Block periodization (1-8-week concentrated blocks of high-, medium- or low-intensity work, 8.75-11.68 h/wk, pyramidal or polarized TID) improved VO2max, peak aerobic power and lactate and ventilatory thresholds; traditional periodization (a high-volume/low-intensity period first, then less volume and more high-intensity work, 7.5-10.76 h/wk, pyramidal TID, cyclic progressive load) improved VO2max, peak aerobic power and lactate thresholds; a day-by-day programming approach improved VO2max and ventilatory thresholds.

The review's conclusion: no evidence currently favours a specific periodization model over 8-12 weeks in trained road cyclists, and few studies have examined a whole season. The block-advantage figures that circulate (+8.8% vs +3.7% VO2max) come from a single 12-week trial (Rønnestad 2014 REF-136), not from this review.

Key Findings (key figures)

Block periodization: 1-8-week blocks, 8.75-11.68 h/wk, pyramidal or polarized TID
Traditional periodization: 7.5-10.76 h/wk, pyramidal TID, cyclic progressive increase in load
Both models improved VO2max and peak aerobic power; no head-to-head evidence favours either over 8-12 weeks
Withdrawn 2026-09-08: the "+4.6-8.8% vs +3.7%" and "load-matched: both +3.7%" figures formerly listed here were not from this review. The 8.8% vs 3.7% contrast is Rønnestad 2014 REF-136, where HIT volume WAS matched and the block still won — so the old "load-matched, no difference" claim contradicted its own source.

Practical Application

Over an 8-12-week horizon the review found no outcome basis for choosing block over traditional periodization; choose the structure the athlete can execute consistently.
If a block structure is used, the trials it rests on (REF-136, REF-150) concentrate HIT into a loading week and follow it with lower-HIT weeks — a redistribution of the same HIT dose, not extra HIT.
Keep a large low-intensity base under either model: the reviewed programmes ran 7.5-11.7 h/wk with pyramidal or polarized distributions.

Limitations

Seven small studies, 8-12 weeks, trained (not elite) road cyclists; no pooling; seasonal effects unexamined.
Source note (2026-09-08): the entry was written under a phantom byline; its figures were replaced with what the review's abstract states, the full text was not re-read.

---

How this entry was checked and changed
Content correction 2026-09-27
Cross-reference pointed at an entry whose content does not match the label (checked against the cited entry); repointed or relabelled.
Resync 2026-09-28: REF-136 listed twice in Cross-References -> duplicate removed.