Abstract

We examined the within-player correlation between external training load (ETL) and perceptual responses to training in a professional male football team (n = 13 outfield players) over an eight-week competitive period. ETL was collected using 10-Hz GPS, whereas perceptual responses were accessed through rating of perceived exertion (RPE) questionnaires. Moderate-speed running (MSR), high-speed running (HSR) and sprinting were defined using arbitrary (fixed) and individualised speed zones (based on maximal aerobic speed and maximal sprinting speed). When ETL was expressed as actual distance covered within the training session, perceptual responses were moderately correlated to MSR and HSR quantified using the arbitrary method (p < 0.05; r = 0.53 to 0.59). However, the magnitude of correlations tended to increase when the individualised method was used (p < 0.05; r = 0.58 to 0.67). Distance covered by sprinting was moderately correlated to perceptual responses only when the individualised method was used (p < 0.05; 0.55 [0.05; 0.83] and 0.53 [0.02; 0.82]). Perceptual responses were largely correlated to the sum of distance covered within all three speed running zones, irrespective of the quantification method (p < 0.05; r = 0.58 to 0.68). When ETL was expressed as percentage of total distance covered within the training session, no significant correlations were observed (p > 0.05). Perceptual responses to training load seem to be better associated with ETL, when the latter is adjusted to individual fitness capacities. Moreover, reporting ETL as actual values of distance covered within the training session instead of percentual values inform better about players’ perceptual responses to training load.

Highlights

  • Training load monitoring is extensively employed by football practitioners to enhance performance and reduce injury risk

  • Total distance covered within the training session, rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and s-RPE were (Mean ± standard deviation (SD)) 105 ± 23 min, 6384 ± 1593 m, 3.6 ± 1.8 AU and 411.0 ± 266.9 AU

  • When external training load (ETL) was expressed as percentage of total distance covered within the training session, no significant correlations were observed (p > 0.05)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Training load monitoring is extensively employed by football practitioners to enhance performance and reduce injury risk. Common parameters for quantifying training load in professional football include rating of perceived exertion (RPE), distance covered in given speed zones derived from microtechnology incorporating global positioning systems (GPS) and exposure time to training [1]. Despite the amount of activity performed (external training load) is the main determinant of individual. RPE is an easy, low-cost tool for measuring the perceived intensity of training sessions or matches. Despite being questionable for its subjective assessment, RPE has shown positive correlations with percentage of distance covered at high intensity [5] and with HR-based parameters such as Edwards’. Training load or training impulse during practice sessions [5,6]. Akenhead and Nassis [1]

Objectives
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