Thomakos Pierros, Tsekos Prokopis, Tselios Zacharias, Spyrou Konstantinos, Katsikas Christos, Tsoukos Athanasios, Bogdanis Gregory C
School of Physical Education and Sports Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
UCAM Research Center for High Performance Sport, UCAM Universidad Católica de Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
J Sports Sci Med. 2024 Dec 1;23(4):812-821. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2024.812. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Supplementary high-intensity interval training (HIIT) programs, focusing on different aspects of fitness, are commonly used in soccer practice. This study examined the impact of two different HIIT formats applied during the competitive season on aerobic and neuromuscular performance. Twenty-six young players from two youth amateur soccer teams (aged 18.1 ± 0.7 and 18.7 ± 1.1 years) participated. In a randomized design, Team A served as an experimental group, performing either a 10s/10s linear running HIIT or a 15s/15s HIIT with changes of direction, both at 100% of maximum aerobic speed, twice per week for six weeks. In that period, team B acted as a control group, maintaining their usual training soccer regimen. Following two weeks of lower volume and frequency training, team B added the two HIIT formats in their training for six weeks, while team A acted as control. Before and after each 6-weeks period, aerobic fitness and neuromuscular performance was evaluated by the countermovement jump (CMJ). The 3-way ANOVA showed that both HIIT formats significantly enhanced Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 1 (Yo-YO IR1) performance compared to the respective control periods. However, the main finding was that the 10s/10s compared with the 15s/15s HIIT format induced 45-50% greater improvements in Yo-YO IR1 (total distance: 18.5 ± 11.7% vs. 9.0 ± 8.5%, V̇O2max: 5.6 ± 3.2% vs. 3.0 ± 2.7%, and vV̇Omax: (3.3 ± 1.9% vs. 1.8 ± 1.7%, all p = 0.39, d = 0.85). Countermovement jump performance remained unchanged across both groups (p > 0.68). During HIIT rating of perceived exertion was higher in the 15s/15s vs. the 10s/10s format (6.4 ± 0.5 vs. 4.7 ± 1.2 a.u., p < 0.001). These findings suggest that while both HIIT formats effectively enhance aerobic performance during the season, the 10s/10s format offers superior benefits with less perceived exertion, while the 15s/15s format induces higher internal load.
补充性高强度间歇训练（HIIT）计划，专注于体能的不同方面，常用于足球训练。本研究考察了在赛季期间应用的两种不同HIIT形式对有氧和神经肌肉性能的影响。来自两支青年业余足球队的26名年轻球员（年龄分别为18.1±0.7岁和18.7±1.1岁）参与了研究。采用随机设计，A队作为实验组，进行10秒/10秒的直线跑步HIIT或15秒/15秒的变向HIIT，均以最大有氧速度的100%进行，每周两次，共六周。在此期间，B队作为对照组，维持其常规的足球训练方案。在进行了两周训练量和频率较低的训练后，B队在接下来的六周训练中加入了这两种HIIT形式，而A队作为对照组。在每六周的训练期前后，通过纵跳（CMJ）评估有氧体能和神经肌肉性能。三因素方差分析表明，与各自的对照期相比，两种HIIT形式均显著提高了Yo-Yo间歇恢复测试1级（Yo-YO IR1）的成绩。然而，主要发现是，与15秒/15秒的HIIT形式相比，10秒/10秒的HIIT形式使Yo-YO IR1有45%-50%更大的提升（总距离：18.5±11.7%对9.0±8.5%，最大摄氧量：5.6±3.2%对3.0±2.7%，以及最大摄氧量速度：3.3±1.9%对1.8±1.7%，所有p=0.39，d=
