Search

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to explore the training-related knowledge, beliefs, and practices of athletes and the influence of lockdowns in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: Athletes (n = 12,526, comprising 13% world class, 21% international, 36% national, 24% state, and 6% recreational) completed an online survey that was available from 17 May to 5 July 2020 and explored their training behaviors (training knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and practices), including specific questions on their training intensity, frequency, and session duration before and during lockdown (March-June 2020). RESULTS: Overall, 85% of athletes wanted to "maintain training," and 79% disagreed with the statement that it is "okay to not train during lockdown," with a greater prevalence for both in higher-level athletes. In total, 60% of athletes considered "coaching by correspondence (remote coaching)" to be sufficient (highest amongst world-class athletes). During lockdown, < 40% were able to maintain sport-specific training (e.g., long endurance [39%], interval training [35%], weightlifting [33%], plyometric exercise [30%]) at pre-lockdown levels (higher among world-class, international, and national athletes), with most (83%) training for "general fitness and health maintenance" during lockdown. Athletes trained alone (80%) and focused on bodyweight (65%) and cardiovascular (59%) exercise/training during lockdown. Compared with before lockdown, most athletes reported reduced training frequency (from between five and seven sessions per week to four or fewer), shorter training sessions (from ≥ 60 to < 60 min), and lower sport-specific intensity (~ 38% reduction), irrespective of athlete classification. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19-related lockdowns saw marked reductions in athletic training specificity, intensity, frequency, and duration, with notable within-sample differences (by athlete clas

PURPOSE: To investigate differences in athletes' knowledge, beliefs, and training practices during COVID-19 lockdowns with reference to sport classification and sex. This work extends an initial descriptive evaluation focusing on athlete classification. METHODS: Athletes (12,526; 66% male; 142 countries) completed an online survey (May-July 2020) assessing knowledge, beliefs, and practices toward training. Sports were classified as team sports (45%), endurance (20%), power/technical (10%), combat (9%), aquatic (6%), recreational (4%), racquet (3%), precision (2%), parasports (1%), and others (1%). Further analysis by sex was performed. RESULTS: During lockdown, athletes practiced body-weight-based exercises routinely (67% females and 64% males), ranging from 50% (precision) to 78% (parasports). More sport-specific technical skills were performed in combat, parasports, and precision (∼50%) than other sports (∼35%). Most athletes (range: 50% [parasports] to 75% [endurance]) performed cardiorespiratory training (trivial sex differences). Compared to prelockdown, perceived training intensity was reduced by 29% to 41%, depending on sport (largest decline: ∼38% in team sports, unaffected by sex). Some athletes (range: 7%-49%) maintained their training intensity for strength, endurance, speed, plyometric, change-of-direction, and technical training. Athletes who previously trained ≥5 sessions per week reduced their volume (range: 18%-28%) during lockdown. The proportion of athletes (81%) training ≥60 min/session reduced by 31% to 43% during lockdown. Males and females had comparable moderate levels of training knowledge (56% vs 58%) and beliefs/attitudes (54% vs 56%). CONCLUSIONS: Changes in athletes' training practices were sport-specific, with few or no sex differences. Team-based sports were generally more susceptible to changes than individual sports. Policy makers should provide athletes with specific training arrangements and educational resources to facilitate remot

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to explore the training-related knowledge, beliefs, and practices of athletes and the influence of lockdowns in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: Athletes (n = 12,526, comprising 13% world class, 21% international, 36% national, 24% state, and 6% recreational) completed an online survey that was available from 17 May to 5 July 2020 and explored their training behaviors (training knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and practices), including specific questions on their training intensity, frequency, and session duration before and during lockdown (March-June 2020). RESULTS: Overall, 85% of athletes wanted to "maintain training," and 79% disagreed with the statement that it is "okay to not train during lockdown," with a greater prevalence for both in higher-level athletes. In total, 60% of athletes considered "coaching by correspondence (remote coaching)" to be sufficient (highest amongst world-class athletes). During lockdown, < 40% were able to maintain sport-specific training (e.g., long endurance [39%], interval training [35%], weightlifting [33%], plyometric exercise [30%]) at pre-lockdown levels (higher among world-class, international, and national athletes), with most (83%) training for "general fitness and health maintenance" during lockdown. Athletes trained alone (80%) and focused on bodyweight (65%) and cardiovascular (59%) exercise/training during lockdown. Compared with before lockdown, most athletes reported reduced training frequency (from between five and seven sessions per week to four or fewer), shorter training sessions (from ≥ 60 to < 60 min), and lower sport-specific intensity (~ 38% reduction), irrespective of athlete classification. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19-related lockdowns saw marked reductions in athletic training specificity, intensity, frequency, and duration, with notable within-sample differences (by athlete clas

Introduction: To determine reasonable kicking loads to plan for preparation and rehabilitation, normal match loads of kicking need to be described. The volume and intensity of kicking activities are likely related to a soccer player's physical preparation and injury risk – performing too few or too many kicks could leave the player under prepared for the demands of a match, or at risk of an overuse injury, respectively. While the number of kicks is relatively easy to document, the intensity of kicking can practically be described either by the distance a kick travels or by the velocity of the ball in flight. It is unknown if these measures are correlated in match play. Further, it is not known if the kicking demands vary by playing position. Methods: Match analysis data for the entire 2012 season of the US Major League Soccer (every player, every minute of play, every kick) was examined using both a distance-based and velocity based approach. Number and types of kicks were described for each playing position using both distance and velocity-based approaches. Results: Distance- and velocity-based approaches were not seen to be equivalent, and a velocity-based approach was seen to be more reflective of the true kicking demands of soccer. The number and type of kicks made in each of the categories were seen to vary by playing position for each of the slow, medium, and fast categories (6 m/s, 6–12 m/s, and ≥12 m/s respectively). The variation in the number of kicking events between playing positions, as well as between games is seen to be large. For example, the average for goal keepers, in an average game would be less than 60 kicks, and more than 120 for midfielders. A suggested return to play program is described based on the mean and variance in the number of kicks, informed by these data. These data can then describe preparation for the average demands, as well as peak expected kicking demands during soccer. Discussion: The volume and intensity of kicking in profes

Introduction: Selection of younger athletes for advanced training in elite sport is assumed to be based on identification of innate talent. Previous researchers have identified relative age effects to influence these selection processes, however maturation status and relative skeletal age effects, which have the potential to be a greater influence, have not been widely examined. Methods: Skeletal Age (categorising athletes as: early maturing, on time, or late maturing via wrist and hand X-Ray and Fels classification) and Birth Quarter are documented for 472 boys from Elite Youth football Academies and compared to reference normative data to assess their effect on Academy selection. Results: Here we show that maturation status (categorising athletes as: early maturing, on time, or late maturing) is a much stronger influence – by an order of magnitude – on selection with a systematic over-representation of early maturing athletes in elite football academies; an effect that increases with age. Players born in the first and second quarters were over-represented across all age groups (U-9 to U-16), except under 17 where the RAE was not observed (p = 0.704). On the other hand, the skeletal age effect showed significant differences from the age category of U12 onwards compared to U9. This effect increased in magnitude with each successive age category (OR = 2.2, 95% CI (1.3–3.8) for the U-12 category and OR = 20.0, 95% CI (8.3–47.8) for U-17 Discussion: Our results demonstrate that athletes are being chosen in large by their maturation status, and as this relative benefit will have disappeared once all athletes are skeletally mature, this process is inadvertently excluding the majority of potential candidate athletes from this selection process. We suggest that consideration of maturation status of candidate athletes will result in a more equitable exposure to advanced training and the resultant performance benefits this incurs. Conversely, athletes who are currently being

Background: Thigh muscle injuries commonly occur during single leg loading tasks and patterns of muscle activation are thought to contribute to these injuries. The influence trunk and pelvis posture has on hip and thigh muscle activation during single leg stance is unknown and was investigated in a pain free population to determine if changes in body posture result in consistent patterns of changes in muscle activation. Methods: Hip and thigh muscle activation patterns were compared in 22 asymptomatic, male subjects (20-45 years old) in paired functionally relevant single leg standing test postures: Anterior vs. Posterior Trunk Sway; Anterior vs. Posterior Pelvic Rotation; Left vs. Right Trunk Shift; and Pelvic Drop vs. Raise. Surface EMG was collected from eight hip and thigh muscles calculating Root Mean Square. EMG was normalized to an "upright standing" reference posture. Repeated measures ANOVA was performed along with associated F tests to determine if there were significant differences in muscle activation between paired test postures. Results: In right leg stance, Anterior Trunk Sway (compared to Posterior Sway) increased activity in posterior sagittal plane muscles, with a concurrent deactivation of anterior sagittal plane muscles (p: 0.016-<0.001). Lateral hip abductor muscles increased activation during Left Trunk Shift (compared to Right) (p:= 0.001). Lateral Pelvic Drop (compared to Raise) decreased activity in hip abductors and increased hamstring, adductor longus and vastus lateralis activity (p: 0.037-<0.001). Conclusion: Changes in both trunk and pelvic posture during single leg stance generally resulted in large, predictable changes in hip and thigh muscle activation in asymptomatic young males. Changes in trunk position in the sagittal plane and pelvis position in the frontal plane had the greatest effect on muscle activation. Investigation of these activation patterns in clinical populations such as hip and thigh muscle injuries may provide