"Living High-Training Low" for Olympic Medal Performance: What Have We Learned 25 Years After Implementation?

BACKGROUND

Altitude training is often regarded as an indispensable tool for the success of elite endurance athletes. Historically, altitude training emerged as a key strategy to prepare for the 1968 Olympics, held at 2300 m in Mexico City, and was limited to the "Live High-Train High" method for endurance athletes aiming for performance gains through improved oxygen transport. This "classical" intervention was modified in 1997 by the "Live High-Train Low" (LHTL) model wherein athletes supplemented acclimatization to chronic hypoxia with high-intensity training at low altitude.

PURPOSE

This review discusses important considerations for successful implementation of LHTL camps in elite athletes based on experiences, both published and unpublished, of the authors.

APPROACH

The originality of our approach is to discuss 10 key "lessons learned," since the seminal work by Levine and Stray-Gundersen was published in 1997, and focusing on (1) optimal dose, (2) individual responses, (3) iron status, (4) training-load monitoring, (5) wellness and well-being monitoring, (6) timing of the intervention, (7) use of natural versus simulated hypoxia, (8) robustness of adaptative mechanisms versus performance benefits, (9) application for a broad range of athletes, and (10) combination of methods. Successful LHTL strategies implemented by Team USA athletes for podium performance at Olympic Games and/or World Championships are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

The evolution of the LHTL model represents an essential framework for sport science, in which field-driven questions about performance led to critical scientific investigation and subsequent practical implementation of a unique approach to altitude training.