Little Thomas, Williams Alun G
Sport, Health, and Exercise, Staffordshire University, UK.
J Strength Cond Res. 2007 May;21(2):367-71. doi: 10.1519/R-19445.1.
Recent evidence supports the use of certain soccer drills for combined technical and physical training. Therefore, it is important to be able to accurately monitor training intensity during soccer drills intended for physical development to allow the optimization of training parameters. Twenty-eight professional soccer players were assessed for heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) responses to 5 commonly used soccer training drills (2v2 to 8v8 drills). The responses of both HR and RPE differed significantly (p < 0.05) between the drills, generally showing an elevated response to drills involving lower player numbers. However, the 2v2 drill showed a significantly (p < 0.05) lower HR response (mean +/- SD: 88.7 +/- 1.2% HRmax) than 3v3 (91.2 +/- 1.3% HRmax) and 4v4 drills (90.2 +/- 1.6% HRmax). There was no significant correlation between the HR and RPE responses to the various drills (r = 0.60, p = 0.200). This poor relationship is probably because during the 2v2 drill, RPE was higher than during any of the other 6 drills, whereas HR was only fourth highest of the 6 drills. This demonstrates that HR and RPE are only poorly related during the intense drills used in this study, and that HR underestimates the intensity of the 2v2 drill. Heart rate demonstrated lower intersubject variability (1.3-2.2%) than RPE (5.1-9.9%). However, unlike HR, Borg 15-point RPE appears to be a valid marker of exercise intensity over a wide range of soccer training drills by maintaining validity in all drills and demonstrating acceptable intersubject variability. A combination of both HR- and RPE-based training load calculations appears optimal for use in soccer training.
近期证据支持使用某些足球训练方法进行技术与体能综合训练。因此,在旨在促进体能发展的足球训练中,能够准确监测训练强度以优化训练参数非常重要。对28名职业足球运动员进行了评估,以了解他们对5种常用足球训练方法(2对2至8对8训练)的心率(HR)和主观用力程度分级(RPE)反应。不同训练方法之间的HR和RPE反应存在显著差异(p < 0.05),一般来说,涉及球员人数较少的训练方法反应较高。然而,2对2训练的HR反应(平均值±标准差:88.7±1.2% HRmax)显著低于3对3训练(91.2±1.3% HRmax)和4对4训练(90.2±1.6% HRmax)(p < 0.05)。各种训练方法的HR和RPE反应之间无显著相关性(r = 0.60,p = 0.200)。这种不良关系可能是因为在2对2训练中,RPE高于其他6种训练中的任何一种,而HR仅在6种训练中排第四高。这表明在本研究使用的高强度训练中,HR和RPE之间的相关性较差,且HR低估了2对2训练的强度。心率的受试者间变异性(1.3 - 2.2%)低于RPE(5.1 - 9.9%)。然而,与HR不同,Borg 15分制RPE在所有训练中均保持有效性,并显示出可接受的受试者间变异性,似乎是广泛足球训练方法中运动强度的有效指标。基于HR和RPE的训练负荷计算相结合似乎最适合用于足球训练。