Abstract

This study investigated differences in external training load between microcycle lengths and its variation between microcycles, players, and head coaches. Commonly used external training load variables including total-, high-speed- (5-7 m∙s-1), and sprint-distance (> 7 m∙s-1) alongside combined high acceleration and deceleration distance (> 2 m∙s-2). Which were also expressed relative to time were collected using microtechnology within a repeated measures design from 54 male rugby league players from one Super League team over four seasons. 4337 individual observations across ninety-one separate microcycles and six individual microcycle lengths (5 to 10 day) were included. Linear mixed effects models established the differences in training load between microcycle-length and the variation between-microcycles, players and head coaches. The largest magnitude of difference in training load was seen when comparing 5-day with 9-day (ES = 0.31 to 0.53) and 10-day (ES = 0.19 to 0.66) microcycles. The greatest number of differences between microcycles were observed in high- (ES = 0.3 to 0.53) and sprint-speed (ES = 0.2 to 0.42) variables. Between-microcycle variability ranged between 11% to 35% dependent on training load variable. Training load also varied between players (5-65%) and head coaches (6-20%) with most variability existing within high-speed (19-43%) and sprinting (19-65%). Overall, differences in training load between microcycle lengths exist, likely due to manipulation of session duration. Furthermore, training load varies between microcycle, player and head coach.

Highlights

  • ObjectivesThe primary aim of this study was to quantify and compare commonly used external training load metrics between different between-match microcycle lengths

  • Rugby league is played professionally in England and France in the Super League (SL) and in Australia and New Zealand in the National Rugby League (NRL)

  • Comparison of weekly training load during different microcycle lengths are presented in Fig 1 as forest plots of effect size (ES)

Read more

Summary

Objectives

The primary aim of this study was to quantify and compare commonly used external training load metrics between different between-match microcycle lengths

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.