Abstract
Training load monitoring in team sports is important in order to plan and evaluate training strategies and ensure optimal performance. Integration of internal and external training load measures into a single training efficiency metric reduces the effect of confounding variables on training loads. The purpose of this study was to generate a training efficiency metric to evaluate in-season field hockey training. Further, the relationship between players’ perceived wellness the training efficiency metric was determined. Internal (training impulse and session rating of perceived exertion; TRIMP and sRPE) and external (total distance, high-speed distance, acceleration load, high-power distance, metabolic work, mechanical work, and impulse) training load was collected over a 6-week period for 11 male national level field hockey players (21.1 ± 1.2 years, 178.7 ± 8.6 cm, 4.6 ± 6.3 kg). The relationships between internal and external training load were assessed, and two training efficiency models were generated through mixed model analyses using sRPE and TRIMP. Subsequently, the relationships between training efficiency and perceived wellness were examined. The statistical analyses determined that total distance, high-speed distance, high-power distance, and metabolic work (r = 0.311-0.573) were included in the TRIMP training efficiency model. The sRPE training efficiency model included total distance, high-speed distance, high-power distance, metabolic work, and mechanical work (r = 0.329-0.757). Moreover, neither of the training efficiency models were related to daily cumulative wellness scores (TRIMP: r = -0.046; p = 0.336; sRPE: r = -0.034; p = 0.370). The study showed that the sRPE training efficiency model provided a better reflection of in-season field hockey training demands than the TRIMP model. Additionally, practitioners are not advised to adjust training based on acute changes in players’ perceived wellness.
Highlights
Appropriate training loads are necessary to successfully maintain and improve performance in sports [32, 41]
Training load (TL) can be described as occurring externally or internally relative to each individual player [23]. Advances in microtechnology, such as global positioning system (GPS) units have made measuring a large variety of external TL variables possible [29]. Individual responses to this training stimulus differ between players and is better reflected by internal TL [2, 8, 53], such as heart rate (HR) and session rating of perceived exertion
A daily training efficiency score was calculated from the function of the relationship between internal and external TL
Summary
Appropriate training loads are necessary to successfully maintain and improve performance in sports [32, 41]. Poorly planned training cycles with inappropriately high training loads may have the opposite effect and limit performance improvements and increase the risk of injury and non-functional overreaching [20, 23, 37]. Training load (TL) can be described as occurring externally or internally relative to each individual player [23]. Advances in microtechnology, such as global positioning system (GPS) units have made measuring a large variety of external TL variables possible [29].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callMore From: International Journal of Strength and Conditioning
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.
