Institute of Sport Science and Innovations, Lithuanian Sports University, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Mechatronic Centre for Research, Studies and Information, Kaunas Technology University, Kaunas, Lithuania.
J Sports Sci. 2020 May;38(9):1018-1025. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2020.1738702. Epub 2020 Mar 13.
This study aimed to investigate between- and within-team changes in workload [PlayerLoad (PL), training impulse (TRIMP) and session rate of perceived exertion training load (sRPE-TL)], readiness [heart rate variability (HRV)], and physical performance [20-m sprint test (including 10-m split time), countermovement jump (CMJ) and yo-yo intermittent recovery test level 1 (YYIR1)] during 3-week intensified preparation periods in female, national Under18 (n = 12, age = 18.0 ± 0.5y, stature = 180.4 ± 7.5 cm, body mass = 72.7 ± 9.3 kg) and Under20 (n = 12, age = 19.6 ± 0.8y, stature = 178.6 ± 6.4 cm, body mass = 68.0 ± 5.9 kg) basketball teams. Under18 team revealed small-to-moderate statistically significantly higher values in workload [PL: p = 0.010; ES = Small; TRIMP: p = 0.004; ES = Moderate; sRPE-TL: p < 0.001; ES = Moderate] and moderately lower readiness values (p = 0.023; ES = Moderate) compared to Under20. Within-team analysis showed no differences in workload in Under20 and statistically significant reduction (p < 0.05) in Week3 (taper period) in Under18. Pre- and post-preparation changes showed Under18 increasing only YYIR1 performance (p < 0.001; ES = Very large). Differently, Under20 statistically improved in 10-m split time (p = 0.003; ES = Moderate), CMJ (p = 0.025; ES = Moderate) and YYIR1 (p < 0.001; ES = Large). A constant adequate workload positively benefits players' readiness and physical performances during short intensified preparation periods. Conversely, using high workload with periodization strategies encompassing short overload and taper phases induced positive changes on players' aerobic performance, lower readiness values and no changes in anaerobic performances.
本研究旨在调查 3 周强化准备期间,女,国家 U18(n=12,年龄=18.0±0.5 岁,身高=180.4±7.5cm,体重=72.7±9.3kg)和 U20(n=12,年龄=19.6±0.8 岁,身高=178.6±6.4cm,体重=68.0±5.9kg)篮球队内和队间的工作负荷[运动员负荷(PL)、训练冲动(TRIMP)和训练负荷感觉比(sRPE-TL)]、准备状态[心率变异性(HRV)]和身体表现[20 米冲刺测试(包括 10 米分段时间)、纵跳(CMJ)和 yo-yo 间歇恢复测试 1 级(YYIR1)]的变化。U18 队的工作负荷[PL:p=0.010;ES=小;TRIMP:p=0.004;ES=中;sRPE-TL:p<0.001;ES=中]和准备状态值(p=0.023;ES=中)略高于 U20,具有统计学意义。与 U20 相比,U18 队的队内分析显示工作负荷没有差异,U18 队在第 3 周(调整期)的工作负荷有统计学意义的降低(p<0.05)。准备前和准备后的变化显示 U18 仅提高了 YYIR1 表现(p<0.001;ES=非常大)。相反,U20 在 10 米分段时间(p=0.003;ES=中)、CMJ(p=0.025;ES=中)和 YYIR1(p<0.001;ES=大)方面有统计学上的提高。在短期强化准备期间,持续的适量工作负荷有利于运动员的准备状态和身体表现。相反,使用高工作量和包含短期超负荷和调整阶段的阶段性策略会导致运动员的有氧表现提高、准备状态值降低和无氧表现无变化。