教练员与青少年足球运动员在不同训练阶段的训练负荷感知

Q4 Medicine
D. H. Figueiredo, D. H. Figueiredo, F. Manoel, H. R. Gonçalves, Antônio C. Dourado
{"title":"教练员与青少年足球运动员在不同训练阶段的训练负荷感知","authors":"D. H. Figueiredo, D. H. Figueiredo, F. Manoel, H. R. Gonçalves, Antônio C. Dourado","doi":"10.33155/J.RAMD.2019.05.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To our Knowledge, information about the agreement between coaches’ and the young soccer players’ session rating of perceived exertion is not consistent during specific periods of training (intensification and taper) and has not been established. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare the internal training load and session rating of perceived exertion between coaches’ and young soccer players’ during three weeks in different training phases. \nMethod: Participants were 16 male elite Under19 soccer players and their coaches. Before each training session, the coaches reported a session rating of perceived exertion using the Borg CR-10 scale as well as the planned duration (min) of the training based on prior planning, while the athletes responded the scale after each training session. \nResults: No differences in intensity session rating of perceived exertion (t = 0.49; p = 0.62) and training load (t = 0.18; p = 0.86) were observed between coaches and players during the training period analyzed. During different training phases, no significant differences were found during intensification (t = 0.18; p = 0.85) and taper (t = -0.19; p = 0.85) in training loads and in the session rating of perceived exertion prescribed by coaches and perceived by players. A very large correlation was observed between coaches training load (r= 0.84) and players training load. However, a trivial correlation was found between players training load and changes in the Yo-yo IR1 performance (r= -0.09), age (r= -0.06) and years of competitive experience (r= -0.08). Stepwise linear regression revealed that coaches training load (F1; 238= 582.7; R2= 0.710; p<0.001) explained 71% of the variance in players training load. \nConclusion: The results suggest that the session rating of perceived exertion and training load prescribed during three weeks in different training phases (by coaches) was not different from perceived by young soccer players. Moreover, coaches training load seem to be effective to predict the training load in soccer players.","PeriodicalId":39297,"journal":{"name":"Revista Andaluza de Medicina del Deporte","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coaches’ and Young soccer players' training load perceptions during different training phases\",\"authors\":\"D. H. Figueiredo, D. H. Figueiredo, F. Manoel, H. R. Gonçalves, Antônio C. Dourado\",\"doi\":\"10.33155/J.RAMD.2019.05.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To our Knowledge, information about the agreement between coaches’ and the young soccer players’ session rating of perceived exertion is not consistent during specific periods of training (intensification and taper) and has not been established. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare the internal training load and session rating of perceived exertion between coaches’ and young soccer players’ during three weeks in different training phases. \\nMethod: Participants were 16 male elite Under19 soccer players and their coaches. Before each training session, the coaches reported a session rating of perceived exertion using the Borg CR-10 scale as well as the planned duration (min) of the training based on prior planning, while the athletes responded the scale after each training session. \\nResults: No differences in intensity session rating of perceived exertion (t = 0.49; p = 0.62) and training load (t = 0.18; p = 0.86) were observed between coaches and players during the training period analyzed. During different training phases, no significant differences were found during intensification (t = 0.18; p = 0.85) and taper (t = -0.19; p = 0.85) in training loads and in the session rating of perceived exertion prescribed by coaches and perceived by players. A very large correlation was observed between coaches training load (r= 0.84) and players training load. However, a trivial correlation was found between players training load and changes in the Yo-yo IR1 performance (r= -0.09), age (r= -0.06) and years of competitive experience (r= -0.08). Stepwise linear regression revealed that coaches training load (F1; 238= 582.7; R2= 0.710; p<0.001) explained 71% of the variance in players training load. \\nConclusion: The results suggest that the session rating of perceived exertion and training load prescribed during three weeks in different training phases (by coaches) was not different from perceived by young soccer players. Moreover, coaches training load seem to be effective to predict the training load in soccer players.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Andaluza de Medicina del Deporte\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Andaluza de Medicina del Deporte\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33155/J.RAMD.2019.05.005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Andaluza de Medicina del Deporte","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33155/J.RAMD.2019.05.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:据我们所知,关于教练和年轻足球运动员在特定训练阶段(强化和减量)对感知用力的评分一致性的信息并不一致,也尚未确定。本研究的目的是检验和比较在不同训练阶段的三周内,教练和年轻足球运动员的内部训练负荷和感知用力的会话评分。方法:受试者为16名19岁以下足球运动员及其教练。在每次训练前,教练们使用博格CR-10量表报告了对感知用力的训练评分,以及基于先前计划的训练计划持续时间(分钟),而运动员在每次训练后对该量表做出了回应。结果:在分析的训练期间,教练和球员在感觉用力的强度等级(t=0.49;p=0.62)和训练负荷(t=0.18;p=0.86)方面没有观察到差异。在不同的训练阶段,在强化训练(t=0.18;p=0.85)和减量训练(t=-0.19;p=0.85。教练员训练负荷与运动员训练负荷之间存在很大的相关性(r=0.84)。然而,在球员训练负荷与Yo-Yo IR1成绩(r=-0.09)、年龄(r=-0.06)和比赛经验(r=-0.08)的变化之间发现了微不足道的相关性。逐步线性回归显示,教练训练负荷(F1;238=582.7;R2=0.710;p<0.001)解释了71%的球员训练负荷变化。结论:研究结果表明,在三周的不同训练阶段(教练)对运动和训练负荷的感知评分与年轻足球运动员的感知评分没有差异。此外,教练训练负荷似乎可以有效预测足球运动员的训练负荷。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Coaches’ and Young soccer players' training load perceptions during different training phases
Objective: To our Knowledge, information about the agreement between coaches’ and the young soccer players’ session rating of perceived exertion is not consistent during specific periods of training (intensification and taper) and has not been established. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare the internal training load and session rating of perceived exertion between coaches’ and young soccer players’ during three weeks in different training phases. Method: Participants were 16 male elite Under19 soccer players and their coaches. Before each training session, the coaches reported a session rating of perceived exertion using the Borg CR-10 scale as well as the planned duration (min) of the training based on prior planning, while the athletes responded the scale after each training session. Results: No differences in intensity session rating of perceived exertion (t = 0.49; p = 0.62) and training load (t = 0.18; p = 0.86) were observed between coaches and players during the training period analyzed. During different training phases, no significant differences were found during intensification (t = 0.18; p = 0.85) and taper (t = -0.19; p = 0.85) in training loads and in the session rating of perceived exertion prescribed by coaches and perceived by players. A very large correlation was observed between coaches training load (r= 0.84) and players training load. However, a trivial correlation was found between players training load and changes in the Yo-yo IR1 performance (r= -0.09), age (r= -0.06) and years of competitive experience (r= -0.08). Stepwise linear regression revealed that coaches training load (F1; 238= 582.7; R2= 0.710; p<0.001) explained 71% of the variance in players training load. Conclusion: The results suggest that the session rating of perceived exertion and training load prescribed during three weeks in different training phases (by coaches) was not different from perceived by young soccer players. Moreover, coaches training load seem to be effective to predict the training load in soccer players.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Revista Andaluza de Medicina del Deporte
Revista Andaluza de Medicina del Deporte Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: El Centro Andaluz de Medicina del Deporte edita la Revista Andaluza de Medicina del Deporte (RAMD) desde 2008 con periodicidad trimestral. Esta revista científica publica artículos originales de investigación, previamente sujetos a un proceso de selección y evaluación por pares, y constituye un foro para los científicos, especialistas y profesionales cuyas actividades están relacionadas con la actividad física, el deporte y la salud. Debido a la naturaleza multidisciplinaria de esta área, la revista cubre diferentes disciplinas relacionadas todas con la Medicina del Deporte, lo que la convierte en una publicación con un altísimo grado de interés para todos los profesionales relacionados con las Ciencias del Deporte.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信