Thomakos Pierros, Spyrou Konstantinos, Katsikas Christos, Geladas Nikolaos D, Bogdanis Gregory C
School of Physical Education and Sports Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 17237 Dafne, Greece.
UCAM Research Center for High Performance Sport, UCAM Universidad Catόlica de Murcia, 30005 Murcia, Spain.
Sports (Basel). 2023 Mar 6;11(3):59. doi: 10.3390/sports11030059.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate two different intervention programs applied during a 4-week pre-season period. Twenty-nine players participated in this study and were divided into two groups. One group (Ball, = 12, age: 17.8 ± 0.4 years, body mass: 73.9 ± 7.6 kg, height: 178 ± 0.1 cm, body fat: 9.6 ± 5.3%) performed a higher percentage of aerobic training with ball and strength training using plyometrics and exercises with body weight. The other group (HIIT, = 17, age: 17.8 ± 0.7 years, body mass: 73.3 ± 5.0 kg, height: 179 ± 0.1 cm, body fat: 8.0 ± 2.3%) trained with high-intensity interval training (HIIT) without the ball and performed resistance training with weights in the same session. Both groups trained for strength (two times/week) and performed aerobic-anaerobic fitness without the ball, passing games, and tactical and small-sided games. Lower limb power (CMJ) and aerobic fitness (Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1-IR1) were evaluated before and after the four-week training program. Yo-Yo IR1 performance was improved in both groups, but the improvement was greater for the HIIT than Ball group (468 ± 180 vs. 183 ± 177 m, = 0.07). CMJ showed a non-significant improvement in the Ball group (5.8 ± 8.8%, = 0.16), but it decreased by 8.1 ± 9% ( = 0.001), in the HIIT group. In conclusion, we have shown that a short pre-season period of training results in improvements in aerobic fitness in both groups, with high-intensity interval training showing superior adaptations than training with the ball. However, CMJ performance was reduced in this group, possibly suggesting higher fatigue levels and overload, and/or showing the effects of concurrent HIIT and strength training in soccer.
本研究的目的是评估在为期4周的季前赛期间应用的两种不同的干预方案。29名运动员参与了本研究，并被分为两组。一组（球类组，n = 12，年龄：17.8±0.4岁，体重：73.9±7.6 kg，身高：178±0.1 cm，体脂：9.6±5.3%）进行了更高比例的有球有氧训练以及使用增强式训练和自重训练的力量训练。另一组（高强度间歇训练组，n = 17，年龄：17.8±0.7岁，体重：73.3±5.0 kg，身高：179±0.1 cm，体脂：8.0±2.3%）进行无球的高强度间歇训练（HIIT），并在同一时段进行负重抗阻训练。两组都进行力量训练（每周两次），并进行无球的有氧-无氧体能训练、传球游戏以及战术和小型比赛。在为期四周的训练计划前后评估下肢功率（纵跳）和有氧体能（Yo-Yo间歇恢复测试第1级-IR1）。两组的Yo-Yo IR1表现均有改善，但高强度间歇训练组的改善幅度大于球类组（468±180米对183±177米，p = 0.07）。纵跳在球类组显示出不显著的改善（5.8±8.8%，p = 0.16），但在高强度间歇训练组下降了8.1±9%（p = 0.001）。总之，我们已经表明，短时间的季前训练会使两组的有氧体能都得到改善，高强度间歇训练比有球训练显示出更好的适应性。然而，该组的纵跳表现下降，这可能表明疲劳水平和负荷更高，和/或显示了足球运动中同时进行高强度间歇训练和力量训练的影响。
