Beato Marco, de Keijzer Kevin L, Costin Andrew J
School of Health and Sports Sciences, University of Suffolk, Ipswich, United Kingdom.
Department of Sport Science, Ipswich Town FC, Ipswich, United Kingdom.
Front Sports Act Living. 2023 Apr 4;5:1150461. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2023.1150461. eCollection 2023.
This study aims to quantify and compare the external and internal training load demands of sided-game drills in professional team players during the competitive season. Twenty-four male professional soccer players of the same club were enrolled in this study. Drills were categorized as large-sided games (LSG): 10vs10 (84 × 60 m or 72 × 60 m), Hexagon possession 9vs9 + 3 (36 × 48 m), Possession gate 8vs8 + 2 (36 × 44 m), Possession 7vs7 + 3 (30 × 32 m) or as Small-sided games (SSG): 6vs6 (48 × 42 m), and Possession 6vs4 (30 × 60 m). A total of 7 drills and 279 individual data points were included in this analysis. Distance covered, high-speed running (HSR), and sprinting distance were all calculated in meters per minute (m.min) while total accelerations (>3 m.s) and total decelerations (- < 3 m.s) were calculated in number of actions per minute (n.min). All external load was measured with global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) STATSports Apex units. Players' internal load was quantified using their rating of perceived exertion (RPE). We found that distance covered ( < 0.01, ), HSR ( < 0.01, ), and sprinting distance ( < 0.01, ) changed between drills (e.g., greater in LSG formats), acceleration ( < 0.01, ) and deceleration ( < 0.01, ) demands were greater in smaller formats (e.g., SSG 6vs6, and Possession 6vs4), while RPE was lower in the Possession gate 8vs8 + 2 format ( < 0.01, ). This study found that sided-games can replicate and sometimes exceed some match-specific intensity parameters, however, HSR and sprinting were consistently lower compared to official matches.
本研究旨在量化和比较职业球队球员在赛季期间双边比赛训练的外部和内部训练负荷需求。来自同一俱乐部的24名男性职业足球运动员参与了本研究。训练分为大场地比赛（LSG）：10对10（84×60米或72×60米）、六边形控球9对9 + 3（36×48米）、控球门8对8 + 2（36×44米）、控球7对7 + 3（30×32米），或小场地比赛（SSG）：6对6（48×42米）以及控球6对4（30×60米）。本分析共纳入7次训练和279个个体数据点。跑动距离、高速奔跑（HSR）和冲刺距离均以每分钟米数（m.min）计算，而总加速（>3 m.s）和总减速（-<3 m.s）以每分钟动作次数（n.min）计算。所有外部负荷均使用全球导航卫星系统（GNSS）STATSports Apex设备进行测量。球员的内部负荷通过其主观用力感觉等级（RPE）进行量化。我们发现，不同训练之间的跑动距离（<0.01，）、HSR（<0.01，）和冲刺距离（<0.01，）有所变化（例如，在LSG形式中更大），加速（<0.01，）和减速（<0.01，）需求在较小形式（如SSG 6对6和控球6对4）中更大，而在控球门8对8 + 2形式中RPE较低（<0.01，）。本研究发现，双边比赛可以复制甚至有时超过一些特定比赛的强度参数，然而，与正式比赛相比，HSR和冲刺始终较低。
