| Autor: |
Jagim AR; Sports Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, Onalaska, WI, USA., Wright GA; Exercise & Sport Science Department, University of Wisconsin - La Crosse, La Crosse, WI, USA., Camic CL; Kinesiology and Physical Education, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA., Kisiolek JN; School of Sport & Exercise Science, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO, USA., Luedke J; Exercise & Sport Science Department, University of Wisconsin - La Crosse, La Crosse, WI, USA., Oliver JM; Kinesiology Department, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX, USA., Fischer KM; Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA., Jones MT; Kinesiology, George Mason University, Manassas, VA, USA. |
| Abstrakt: |
Background : The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between training load and next-day recovery in collegiate American football (AF) players during pre-season. Methods : Seventeen athletes (Linemen, n = 6; Non-linemen, n = 11) participated in the 14-day study wearing monitoring (accelerometer + heart rate) sensors during on-field practice sessions throughout pre-season to assess the physiological (PL), mechanical load (ML) and recording of session RPE (sRPE load) immediately post-practice. Prior to practice, participants completed a drop-jump reactive strength index (RSI) test and reported perceived recovery status (PRS). Loaded counter movement vertical jump was assessed before and after pre-season. Results : For every one unit increase in sRPE load, RSI declined by 0.03. Non-linemen had a lower RSI value of 73.1 units compared to linemen. For every one unit increase in ML, the PRS decreased by 0.01. Non-linemen recorded higher average ML during week 2 (ES = 1.17) compared to linemen. Non-linemen recorded higher RSI values in weeks 1 (ES = -1.41) and 2 (ES = -1.72) compared to linemen. All training load and recovery parameters were lower week 2 compared to week 1 (p < 0.05) for all players. Conclusions : Next-day RSI values were influenced by sRPE load while next-day PRS appears to be more influenced by ML. No difference in PL or sRPE load was observed been groups despite non-linemen completing a higher ML throughout the preseason. A combination of training load and recovery metrics may be needed to monitor the fatigue and state of readiness of each player. |
