Abstract
This study investigated the effect of training mode on the relationships between measures of training load in professional rugby league players. Five measures of training load (internal: individualized training impulse, session rating of perceived exertion; external-body load, high-speed distance, total impacts) were collected from 17 professional male rugby league players over the course of two 12-wk preseason periods. Training was categorized by mode (small-sided games, conditioning, skills, speed, strongman, and wrestle) and subsequently subjected to a principal-component analysis. Extraction criteria were set at an eigenvalue of greater than 1. Modes that extracted more than 1 principal component were subjected to a varimax rotation. Small-sided games and conditioning extracted 1 principal component, explaining 68% and 52% of the variance, respectively. Skills, wrestle, strongman, and speed extracted 2 principal components each explaining 68%, 71%, 72%, and 67% of the variance, respectively. In certain training modes the inclusion of both internal and external training-load measures explained a greater proportion of the variance than any 1 individual measure. This would suggest that in training modes where 2 principal components were identified, the use of only a single internal or external training-load measure could potentially lead to an underestimation of the training dose. Consequently, a combination of internal- and external-load measures is required during certain training modes.
Highlights
Rugby league players engage in a diverse range of training modes in order to induce adaptations needed to succeed in competition.[1]
There was a single principal component identified for small-sided games and conditioning, whereas two principal components were identified for skills, speed, strongman, and wrestle training modes
During skills training, the highest loadings for the first principal component are for BodyloadTM (0.86) and total impacts (0.87), both external load measures, whereas the highest loadings for the second principal component are for individualised TRIMP (iTRIMP) (0.88) and sRPE (0.77), both internal load measures
Summary
Rugby league players engage in a diverse range of training modes in order to induce adaptations needed to succeed in competition.[1]. The validity of the criterion measures of internal load used to validate sRPE in previous studies has been questioned as they may not reflect the individualised physiological response to high-intensity intermittent activity.[4,5] As a result, the individualised TRIMP (iTRIMP) was developed to alleviate the limitations of previous
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
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.