Search

Sprint performance is commonly assessed via discrete sprint tests and analyzed through kinematic estimates modeled using a mono-exponential equation, including estimated maximal sprinting speed (MSS), relative acceleration (TAU), maximum acceleration (MAC), and relative propulsive maximal power (PMAX). The acceleration-velocity profile (AVP) provides a simple summary of short sprint performance using two parameters: MSS and MAC, which are useful for simplifying descriptions of sprint performance, comparison between athletes and groups of athletes, and estimating changes in performance over time or due to training intervention. However, discrete testing poses logistical challenges and defines an athlete's AVP exclusively from the performance achieved in an isolated testing environment. Recently, an in situ AVP (velocity-acceleration method) was proposed to estimate kinematic parameters from velocity and acceleration data obtained via global or local positioning systems (GPS/LPS) over multiple training sessions, plausibly improving the time efficiency of sprint monitoring and increasing the sample size that defines the athlete's AVP. However, the validity and sensitivity of estimates derived from the velocity-acceleration method in relation to changes in criterion scores remain elusive. To assess the concurrent validity and sensitivity of kinematic measures from the velocity-acceleration method, 31 elite youth basketball athletes (23 males and 8 females) completed two maximal effort 30 m sprint trials. Performance was simultaneously measured by a laser gun and an LPS (Kinexon), with kinematic parameters estimated using the time-velocity and velocity-acceleration methods. Agreement (%Bias) between laser gun and LPS-derived estimates was within the practically significant magnitude (±5%), while confidence intervals for the percentage mean absolute difference (%MAD) overlapped practical significance for TAU, MAC, and PMAX using the velocity-acceleration method. Only the MSS parameter showed a sensitivity (%MDC95) within practical significance (<5%), with all other parameters showing unsatisfactory sensitivity (>10%) for both the time-velocity and velocity-acceleration methods. Thus, sports practitioners may be confident in the concurrent validity and sensitivity of MSS estimates derived in situ using the velocity-acceleration method, while caution should be applied when using this method to infer an athlete's maximal acceleration capabilities.

Objectives: To evaluate the criterion and longitudinal validity of field- and laboratory-derived heart rate (HR) indices of resting and submaximal fitness tests (SMFTs) as measures of cardiorespiratory fitness., Design: Observational, repeated measures., Methods: Twenty-nine semi-professional footballers participated. Laboratory assessments took place at the start and end of a preseason training period, whereby resting, SMFT HR-derived indices, and criterion measures of cardiorespiratory fitness (running economy [RE], maximal oxygen uptake [V̇O 2 max] and aerobic speed [MAS]) were collected. Throughout this training period, two field-based SMFT protocols, prescribed at different intensities, were administered weekly. Individual slopes were calculated from the analysis of within-athlete change scores. Associations between laboratory and field measures were assessed via Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) and linear regression models., Results: Relationships between SMFT HR-derived indices from laboratory and field were very-large for exercise HR (r = 0.74 to 0.87) and moderate to very-large for HR recovery (0.43 to 0.76). Moderate to very-large inverse relationships were observed between exercise HR and HR recovery with V̇O 2 max and MAS (-0.41 to -0.78), whereas resting HR showed no substantial relationships. Changes in exercise HR showed large and very-large inverse correlations with preseason changes in V̇O 2 max (-0.54 to -0.60) and MAS (-0.64 to -0.83). Relationships between changes in HR recovery and maximal cardiorespiratory criterion measures were moderate to large (-0.32 to -0.63)., Conclusion: SMFT exercise HR is a valid proxy measure of cardiorespiratory fitness irrespective of test setting, whereas the validity of HRR remains elusive and appears to vary between exercise intensities., Competing Interests: Declaration of interest statement None., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To examine associations between exercise heart rate (HRex) during a continuous-fixed submaximal fitness test (CF-SMFT) and an intermittent-variable protocol (semistandardized kicking drill [SSD]) in Australian Football athletes, controlling for external intensities, within-session scheduling, and environmental conditions., Methods: Forty-four professional male Australian Football athletes (22.8 [8.0] y) were monitored over 10 sessions involving a 3-minute CF-SMFT (12 km·h-1) as the first activity and a SSD administered 35.7 (8.0) minutes after the CF-SMFT. Initial heart rate and HRex were collected, with external intensities measured as average velocity (in meters per minute) and average acceleration-deceleration (in meters per second squared). Environmental conditions were sampled. A penalized hierarchical linear mixed model was tuned for a Bayesian information criterion minima using a 10-fold cross-validation, with out-of-sample prediction accuracy assessed via root-mean-squared error., Results: SSD average acceleration-deceleration, initial heart rate, temperature, and ground hardness were significant moderators in the tuned model. When model covariates were held constant, a 1%-point change in SSD HRex associated with a 0.4%-point change in CF-SMFT HRex (95% CI, 0.3-0.5). The tuned model predicted CF-SMFT HRex with an average root-mean-squared error of 2.64 (0.57) over the 10-fold cross-validation, with 74% and 86% of out-of-sample predictions falling within 2.7%-points and 3.7%-points, respectively, from observed values, representing the lower and upper limits for detecting meaningful changes in HRex according to the documented typical error., Conclusions: Our findings support the use of an SSD to monitor physiological state in Australian Football athletes, despite varied scheduling within session. Model predictions of CF-SMFT HRex from SSD HRex closely aligned with observed values, considering measurement imprecision.

Caffeine is a psycho-active stimulant that can improve physical and cognitive performance. We systematically reviewed the evidence on the effects of acute caffeine ingestion on physiological parameters, physical and technical-skill performance during high-performance team-sport match-play. Following PRISMA guidelines, studies were identified using scientific databases (PubMed, Web-of-Science, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus) in February 2021. Of 281 results, 13 studies met inclusion, totalling 213 participants. Included studies adopted the randomised double-blinded cross-over design, involving caffeine and control conditions. In studies reporting physiological variables, responses to caffeine included higher peak (n=6/ 8 [n/ total studies measuring the variable]) and mean (n=7/ 9) heart rates, increased blood glucose (n=2/ 2) and lactate (n=2/ 2) concentrations. Improvements in physical performance were widely documented with caffeine, including greater distance coverage (n=7/ 7), high-speed distance coverage (n=5/ 7) and impact frequencies (n=6/ 8). From three studies that assessed technical-skills, it appears caffeine may benefit gross-skill performance, but have no effect, or negatively confound finer technical-skill outcomes. There is compelling evidence that ingesting moderate caffeine doses (~3 to 6 mg·kg-1) ~60 minutes before exercise may improve physical performance in team-sports, whereas evidence is presently too scarce to draw confident conclusions regarding sport-specific skill performance.