Discrepancies Exist between Exercise Prescription and Dose in Elite Women's Basketball Pre-Season.

Craig Staunton,Brett Gordon,Michael Kingsley,Daniel Wundersitz

doi:10.3390/sports8050070

Craig Staunton, Brett Gordon + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/sports8050070

Copy DOI

Abstract

This study assessed the influence of exercise prescription on the objectively measured exercise dose in basketball. Intensity (RPE) and volume (sRPE) were prescribed by a professional coach on a drill-by-drill basis during pre-season training for nine elite basketball players. Training drills were classified by prescribed intensity (easy-moderate, moderate-hard, hard–very hard, and very hard-maximal) and type (warm-up, skill-development, offensive- and defensive-technical/tactical, or match-simulation). Exercise intensity was objectively quantified using accelerometry-derived average net force (AvFNet) and time spent in accelerometry-derived relative intensity zones. The volume of exercise (exercise dose) was objectively quantified using accumulated impulse (AvFNet × duration). Relationships between prescribed volume and exercise dose were explored by correlations between sRPE and drill-by-drill accumulation of sRPE (dRPE) with impulse. Very hard-maximal drill intensity was greater than hard-very hard (p = 0.011), but not moderate-hard (p = 0.945). Very hard-maximal drills included the most time performing Supra-maximal intensity (>100% O2R) efforts (p < 0.001), suggesting that intensity prescription was based upon the amount of high-intensity exercise. Correlations between impulse with sRPE and dRPE were moderate (r = 0.401, p = 0.197) and very-large (r = 0.807, p = 0.002), respectively, demonstrating that the coach misinterpreted the accumulative effect of drill volume over an entire training session. Overall, a mismatch existed between exercise prescription and exercise dose. Objective monitoring might assist coaches to improve precision of exercise prescription.

Highlights

Differences between coaches’ and players’ perceptions of effort are widely acknowledged in a range of sports [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
Where average FNet (AvFNet) was greater for very hard-maximal compared to hard-very hard (323 ± 12 N vs. 287 ± 14 N; p = 0.011), but not different to moderate-hard (312 ± 13 N; p = 0.945)
Althoughthe thecoach’s coach’s prescription prescription of volume similartotothe theexercise exercise dose completed players when accumulated a drill-by-drill was similar dose completed by by players when accumulated on aon drill-by-drill basis,basis, the the misinterpreted the accumulation of drillover volume over an entire training session when coachcoach misinterpreted the accumulation of drill volume an entire training session when providing providingofanthe assessment of theintensity

Summary

Introduction

Differences between coaches’ and players’ perceptions of effort are widely acknowledged in a range of sports [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. These differences suggest that discrepancies might exist between the volume of prescribed exercise and the exercise dose that players receive. Previous research has identified that different intensities and/or different training drills can influence the mismatch between perceptions of effort [4,6,7].

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion