Department of Sport Games, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, Prague 6, Czech Republic.
Department of Social Science Foundation in Kinanthropology, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, Prague 6, Czech Republic.
J Sports Sci Med. 2024 Mar 1;23(1):107-113. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2024.107. eCollection 2024 Mar.
Research on the external physical load on elite youth soccer players during the weekly training microcycle in competitive periods and official matches is limited. The aims of this study were twofold: a) investigate possible differences in external physical load (PL) across player positions in U17 elite youth soccer players during official matches; b) determine the weekly training to match physical load ratio (WTMLr) across player positions. The sample included 20 outfield players from an elite soccer academy (mean age 15.94 ± 0.25 years) playing in four positions: central defender (CD), full-back (FB), central midfielder (CM) and Striker (S). Data were collected during the spring in-season period for 17 official matches played in a 4-3-3 game format. Indicators of external physical load monitored were: total distance (TD); total distance in high-speed running (HSR; > 16.1 km.h); total distance in sprint running (SPR; > 21.6 km.h); and relative physical load intensity (%HSR). The WTMLr was calculated for TD, HSR, SPR and %HSR as the ratio of the average weekly sum of training PL to the average sum of PL in an official match for a given players' position. Collectively, the training intensity during a one-week microcycle (%HSR in WTMLr) achieved only 76 % of match demands. CD performed significantly lower in all measured indicators of external PL during the official match than all other positions (p < 0.05; g > 0.80) except for TD in S. S achieved significantly higher SPR during official matches compared to CD (p < 0.05; g > 0.80), CM, and FB (g > 0.80). In contrast, CD reported higher WTMLr (medium-large effect size) in HSR and SPR indicators than all other positions. CM performed significantly higher %HSR in WTMLr than S and FB (p < 0.05; g > 0.80). Results revealed insufficient training intensity relative to match demands and, at the same time, weekly training PL did not meet match demands (especially in HSR and SPR) for players across the different positions. Therefore, practitioners should select appropriate training methods (drills and games) to ensure sufficient training intensity (HSR and SR metrics) and consider using the WTMLr, which can be used to help optimise and individualise training PL for different player positions.
关于精英青年足球运动员在比赛期和正式比赛中的每周训练微周期的外部物理负荷的研究是有限的。本研究的目的有两个:a)调查 U17 精英青年足球运动员在正式比赛中不同球员位置的外部物理负荷(PL)是否存在差异;b)确定不同球员位置的每周训练与比赛物理负荷比(WTMLr)。该样本包括来自精英足球学院的 20 名外场球员(平均年龄 15.94 ± 0.25 岁),他们在四个位置上踢球:中后卫(CD)、边后卫(FB)、中场(CM)和前锋(S)。数据是在春季比赛期间收集的,共进行了 17 场 4-3-3 比赛格式的正式比赛。监测的外部物理负荷指标包括:总距离(TD);高速跑动总距离(HSR;> 16.1 km.h);冲刺跑动总距离(SPR;> 21.6 km.h);相对物理负荷强度(%HSR)。WTMLr 是根据给定球员位置的每周训练 PL 的平均总和与正式比赛中 PL 的平均总和计算得出的,用于计算 TD、HSR、SPR 和 %HSR 的比值。总的来说,一周微周期的训练强度(WTMLr 中的%HSR)仅达到比赛需求的 76%。CD 在正式比赛中所有外部 PL 测量指标上的表现都明显低于其他所有位置(p<0.05;g>0.80),除了 S 中的 TD。S 在正式比赛中的 SPR 明显高于 CD(p<0.05;g>0.80)、CM 和 FB(g>0.80)。相比之下,CD 在 HSR 和 SPR 指标的 WTMLr 中报告了更高的训练强度(中到大的效应量)。CM 在 WTMLr 中的%HSR 明显高于 S 和 FB(p<0.05;g>0.80)。结果表明,相对于比赛需求,训练强度不足,同时,不同位置的球员每周训练 PL 都未达到比赛需求(尤其是 HSR 和 SPR)。因此,从业者应选择适当的训练方法(训练和比赛),以确保足够的训练强度(HSR 和 SR 指标),并考虑使用 WTMLr,这可以帮助优化和个性化不同球员位置的训练 PL。