精英五人制足球运动员最坏情况下官方与非官方比赛的差异

IF 0.7 Q4 SPORT SCIENCES Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity Pub Date : 2021-12-31 DOI:10.29359/bjhpa.13.4.05
Konstantinos Spyrou, Tomás T. Freitas, E. Marín-Cascales, Rubén Herrero-Carrasco, P. Alcaraz
{"title":"精英五人制足球运动员最坏情况下官方与非官方比赛的差异","authors":"Konstantinos Spyrou, Tomás T. Freitas, E. Marín-Cascales, Rubén Herrero-Carrasco, P. Alcaraz","doi":"10.29359/bjhpa.13.4.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: ‪This study aimed to compare the worst-case scenarios (WCS) between official (OFF) and non-official (Non-OFF) matches, in different time-periods in an elite futsal team. Material and methods: Twenty-six games were divided into OFF (n = 13) and Non-OFF (n = 13). The WCS were calculated using: two methods, rolling averages (ROLL) and fixed-periods (FIX); four-length epochs (30-s, 1-, 3-, and 5-min); and player load per minute (PL·min-1). Results: Considering ROLL, significant and small differences were found in PL·min-1, with higher intensity in 30-s (p = 0.001; ES = -0.53) and 1-min (p = 0.001; ES = -0.47) in OFF when compared to Non-OFF, but non-significant and small to trivial changes in 3-min (p = 0.060; ES = -0.23) and 5-min (p = 0.605; ES = -0.06) were observed. Regarding FIX, significant and small changes were obtained, with higher intensity in OFF in all time-periods when compared to Non-OFF. Significant differences were found between the two methods (ROLL vs FIX) in 30-s, 1- and 3-min, but not in 5-min. Significant differences, with lower PL·min-1, were observed with increasing time-windows from both methods (p = 0.001). Conclusions: ‪In summary, OFF matches present higher WCS than Non-OFF ones when considering short time-periods, and the FIX method could underestimate the “actual intensity” of the match compared to ROLL.","PeriodicalId":43798,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences between official and non-official matches in worst-case scenarios in elite futsal players\",\"authors\":\"Konstantinos Spyrou, Tomás T. Freitas, E. Marín-Cascales, Rubén Herrero-Carrasco, P. Alcaraz\",\"doi\":\"10.29359/bjhpa.13.4.05\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: ‪This study aimed to compare the worst-case scenarios (WCS) between official (OFF) and non-official (Non-OFF) matches, in different time-periods in an elite futsal team. Material and methods: Twenty-six games were divided into OFF (n = 13) and Non-OFF (n = 13). The WCS were calculated using: two methods, rolling averages (ROLL) and fixed-periods (FIX); four-length epochs (30-s, 1-, 3-, and 5-min); and player load per minute (PL·min-1). Results: Considering ROLL, significant and small differences were found in PL·min-1, with higher intensity in 30-s (p = 0.001; ES = -0.53) and 1-min (p = 0.001; ES = -0.47) in OFF when compared to Non-OFF, but non-significant and small to trivial changes in 3-min (p = 0.060; ES = -0.23) and 5-min (p = 0.605; ES = -0.06) were observed. Regarding FIX, significant and small changes were obtained, with higher intensity in OFF in all time-periods when compared to Non-OFF. Significant differences were found between the two methods (ROLL vs FIX) in 30-s, 1- and 3-min, but not in 5-min. Significant differences, with lower PL·min-1, were observed with increasing time-windows from both methods (p = 0.001). Conclusions: ‪In summary, OFF matches present higher WCS than Non-OFF ones when considering short time-periods, and the FIX method could underestimate the “actual intensity” of the match compared to ROLL.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29359/bjhpa.13.4.05\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29359/bjhpa.13.4.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在比较官方(OFF)和非官方(Non-OFF)比赛在不同时间段内精英五人制球队的最坏情况(WCS)。材料与方法:将26个游戏分为OFF (n = 13)和Non-OFF (n = 13)两组。采用滚动平均(ROLL)和固定周期(FIX)两种方法计算WCS;四段时间(30-s, 1-, 3-, 5-min);和玩家每分钟加载(PL·min-1)。结果:考虑ROLL, PL·min-1的差异有统计学意义且较小,且在30 s时强度更高(p = 0.001;ES = -0.53)和1分钟(p = 0.001;与非OFF相比,OFF的ES = -0.47),但在3分钟内变化不显著且小到微不足道(p = 0.060;ES = -0.23)和5分钟(p = 0.605;ES = -0.06)。对于FIX,获得了显著而微小的变化,在所有时间段内,与Non-OFF相比,OFF的强度更高。两种方法(ROLL vs FIX)在30-s、1- min和3-min有显著差异,但在5-min无显著差异。随着时间窗的增加,两种方法观察到显著差异,PL·min-1较低(p = 0.001)。综上所述,在短时间内,OFF比赛的WCS高于Non-OFF比赛,而FIX方法与ROLL相比可能低估了比赛的“实际强度”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Differences between official and non-official matches in worst-case scenarios in elite futsal players
Background: ‪This study aimed to compare the worst-case scenarios (WCS) between official (OFF) and non-official (Non-OFF) matches, in different time-periods in an elite futsal team. Material and methods: Twenty-six games were divided into OFF (n = 13) and Non-OFF (n = 13). The WCS were calculated using: two methods, rolling averages (ROLL) and fixed-periods (FIX); four-length epochs (30-s, 1-, 3-, and 5-min); and player load per minute (PL·min-1). Results: Considering ROLL, significant and small differences were found in PL·min-1, with higher intensity in 30-s (p = 0.001; ES = -0.53) and 1-min (p = 0.001; ES = -0.47) in OFF when compared to Non-OFF, but non-significant and small to trivial changes in 3-min (p = 0.060; ES = -0.23) and 5-min (p = 0.605; ES = -0.06) were observed. Regarding FIX, significant and small changes were obtained, with higher intensity in OFF in all time-periods when compared to Non-OFF. Significant differences were found between the two methods (ROLL vs FIX) in 30-s, 1- and 3-min, but not in 5-min. Significant differences, with lower PL·min-1, were observed with increasing time-windows from both methods (p = 0.001). Conclusions: ‪In summary, OFF matches present higher WCS than Non-OFF ones when considering short time-periods, and the FIX method could underestimate the “actual intensity” of the match compared to ROLL.
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Effects of attending to a 12-week structured physical activity program on fitness and self-perception levels of obese primary schoolchildren The role of teachers (de-)motivational styles on students’ autonomous motivation in physical education and leisure time Comparison of the effects of the three methods of massage, selected yoga exercises and massage-yoga combination on the depression in elderly women Extended range of motion does not induce greater muscle damage than conventional range of motion in the bench press exercise The effectiveness of resistance exercises performed on stable and unstable surfaces in relation to torso activation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1