短距离与长距离短跑训练对青少年足球运动员短跑和敏捷表现的影响。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Biology of Sport Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-30 DOI:10.5114/biolsport.2024.127384
Ezequiel Rey, Samuel Carrera, Alexis Padrón-Cabo, Pablo B Costa
{"title":"短距离与长距离短跑训练对青少年足球运动员短跑和敏捷表现的影响。","authors":"Ezequiel Rey, Samuel Carrera, Alexis Padrón-Cabo, Pablo B Costa","doi":"10.5114/biolsport.2024.127384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of short sprint-distance training (SST) compared with long sprint-distance training (LST), matched for the total session training volume, on short-, medium- and long-distance sprint performance and agility in young soccer players. Eighteen U19 male players (age: 17.1 ± 0.7 years; height: 178.0 ± 6.3 cm, body mass: 69.4 ± 6.6 kg) were randomly assigned to SST (<i>n</i> = 9) or LST (<i>n</i> = 9) group. The intervention programs were performed 2 times a week over 6 weeks. Before and after training period, 5 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint, and agility were assessed. Within-group analysis showed significant improvements (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.001) in 5 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint from pretest to posttest in SST (9.2%, 6.6%, 5.3%, 2.9%, and 2.5%, respectively) and LST (10.5%, 8.5%, 6.5%, 5.1%, and 4.7%, respectively). Players in both SST and LST also showed significant enhancements in agility from pretest to posttest. In the between-groups analysis, there were no differences between the sprint training groups (SST vs. LST) in any variable (<i>p</i> > 0.05). In conclusion, the findings of this study indicate that both sprint training distances used seem to be effective to improve soccer-specific performance measures. However, due to the better percentage changes obtained by LST group in all fitness variables, this method could be considered as preferred method.</p>","PeriodicalId":55365,"journal":{"name":"Biology of Sport","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10765434/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of short vs. long-distance sprint training on sprinting and agility performance in young soccer players.\",\"authors\":\"Ezequiel Rey, Samuel Carrera, Alexis Padrón-Cabo, Pablo B Costa\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/biolsport.2024.127384\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of short sprint-distance training (SST) compared with long sprint-distance training (LST), matched for the total session training volume, on short-, medium- and long-distance sprint performance and agility in young soccer players. Eighteen U19 male players (age: 17.1 ± 0.7 years; height: 178.0 ± 6.3 cm, body mass: 69.4 ± 6.6 kg) were randomly assigned to SST (<i>n</i> = 9) or LST (<i>n</i> = 9) group. The intervention programs were performed 2 times a week over 6 weeks. Before and after training period, 5 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint, and agility were assessed. Within-group analysis showed significant improvements (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.001) in 5 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint from pretest to posttest in SST (9.2%, 6.6%, 5.3%, 2.9%, and 2.5%, respectively) and LST (10.5%, 8.5%, 6.5%, 5.1%, and 4.7%, respectively). Players in both SST and LST also showed significant enhancements in agility from pretest to posttest. In the between-groups analysis, there were no differences between the sprint training groups (SST vs. LST) in any variable (<i>p</i> > 0.05). In conclusion, the findings of this study indicate that both sprint training distances used seem to be effective to improve soccer-specific performance measures. However, due to the better percentage changes obtained by LST group in all fitness variables, this method could be considered as preferred method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biology of Sport\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10765434/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biology of Sport\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2024.127384\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology of Sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2024.127384","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是考察短距离冲刺训练(SST)与长距离冲刺训练(LST)相比对青少年足球运动员短、中、长距离冲刺表现和敏捷性的影响。18 名 U19 男子球员(年龄:17.1 ± 0.7 岁;身高:178.0 ± 6.3 厘米;体重:69.4 ± 6.6 千克)被随机分配到 SST 组(9 人)或 LST 组(9 人)。干预计划每周进行 2 次,为期 6 周。训练前后,分别对 5 米、10 米、20 米、30 米和 40 米短跑以及敏捷性进行了评估。组内分析显示,从测试前到测试后,SST(分别为9.2%、6.6%、5.3%、2.9%和2.5%)和LST(分别为10.5%、8.5%、6.5%、5.1%和4.7%)的5米、10米、20米、30米和40米短跑成绩均有明显提高(P≤0.001)。从测试前到测试后,SST 和 LST 运动员的敏捷性也有显著提高。在组间分析中,短跑训练组(SST 与 LST)之间在任何变量上都没有差异(P > 0.05)。总之,本研究结果表明,两种短跑训练距离似乎都能有效提高足球专项成绩。然而,由于 LST 组在所有体能变量中获得了更好的百分比变化,这种方法可被视为首选方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of short vs. long-distance sprint training on sprinting and agility performance in young soccer players.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of short sprint-distance training (SST) compared with long sprint-distance training (LST), matched for the total session training volume, on short-, medium- and long-distance sprint performance and agility in young soccer players. Eighteen U19 male players (age: 17.1 ± 0.7 years; height: 178.0 ± 6.3 cm, body mass: 69.4 ± 6.6 kg) were randomly assigned to SST (n = 9) or LST (n = 9) group. The intervention programs were performed 2 times a week over 6 weeks. Before and after training period, 5 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint, and agility were assessed. Within-group analysis showed significant improvements (p ≤ 0.001) in 5 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint from pretest to posttest in SST (9.2%, 6.6%, 5.3%, 2.9%, and 2.5%, respectively) and LST (10.5%, 8.5%, 6.5%, 5.1%, and 4.7%, respectively). Players in both SST and LST also showed significant enhancements in agility from pretest to posttest. In the between-groups analysis, there were no differences between the sprint training groups (SST vs. LST) in any variable (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the findings of this study indicate that both sprint training distances used seem to be effective to improve soccer-specific performance measures. However, due to the better percentage changes obtained by LST group in all fitness variables, this method could be considered as preferred method.

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
Biology of Sport
Biology of Sport 生物-运动科学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biology of Sport is the official journal of the Institute of Sport in Warsaw, Poland, published since 1984. Biology of Sport is an international scientific peer-reviewed journal, published quarterly in both paper and electronic format. The journal publishes articles concerning basic and applied sciences in sport: sports and exercise physiology, sports immunology and medicine, sports genetics, training and testing, pharmacology, as well as in other biological aspects related to sport. Priority is given to inter-disciplinary papers.
×
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