TY - JOUR
T1 - A comparison of rolling averages versus discrete time epochs for assessing the worst-case scenario locomotor demands of professional soccer match-play
AU - Fereday, Kieran
AU - Hills, Samuel
AU - Smith, Jordan
AU - Russell, Mark
AU - Cunningham, Daniel J
AU - Shearer, David
AU - McNarry, Melitta
AU - Kilduff, Liam
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank players and staff at Swansea City Association Football Club for their cooperation and participation in this study. No financial support was received in the completion of this research.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/1/9
Y1 - 2020/1/9
N2 - ObjectivesTo compare fixed epochs (FIXED) and rolling averages (ROLL) for quantifying worst-case scenario (‘peak’) running demands during professional soccer match-play, whilst assessing contextual influences.DesignDescriptive, observational.MethodsTwenty-five outfield players from an English Championship soccer club wore 10-Hz microelectromechanical systems during 28 matches. Relative total and high-speed (>5.5 m s−1) distances were averaged over fixed and rolling 60-s to 600-s epochs. Linear mixed models compared FIXED versus ROLL and assessed the influence of epoch length, playing position, starting status, match result, location, formation, and time-of-day.ResultsIrrespective of playing position or epoch duration, FIXED underestimated ROLL for total (∼7–10%) and high-speed (∼12–25%) distance. In ROLL, worst-case scenario relative total and high-speed distances reduced from 190.1 ± 20.4 m min−1 and 59.5 ± 23.0 m min−1 in the 60-s epoch, to 120.9 ± 13.1 m min−1 and 14.2 ± 6.5 m min−1 in the 600-s epoch, respectively. Worst-case scenario total distance was higher for midfielders (∼9−16 m min−1) and defenders (∼3–10 m min−1) compared with attackers. In general, starters experienced higher worst-case scenario total distance than substitutes (∼3.6–8.5 m min−1), but lower worst-case scenario high-speed running over 300-s (∼3 m min−1). Greater worst-case scenario total and high-speed distances were elicited during wins (∼7.3–11.2 m min−1 and ∼2.7–7.9 m min−1, respectively) and losses (∼2.7–5.7 m min−1 and ∼1.4–2.2 m min−1, respectively) versus draws, whilst time-of-day and playing formation influenced worst-case scenario high-speed distances only.ConclusionsThese data indicate an underestimation of worst-case scenario running demands in FIXED versus ROLL over 60-s to 600-s epochs while highlighting situational influences. Such information facilitates training specificity by enabling sessions to be targeted at the most demanding periods of competition.
AB - ObjectivesTo compare fixed epochs (FIXED) and rolling averages (ROLL) for quantifying worst-case scenario (‘peak’) running demands during professional soccer match-play, whilst assessing contextual influences.DesignDescriptive, observational.MethodsTwenty-five outfield players from an English Championship soccer club wore 10-Hz microelectromechanical systems during 28 matches. Relative total and high-speed (>5.5 m s−1) distances were averaged over fixed and rolling 60-s to 600-s epochs. Linear mixed models compared FIXED versus ROLL and assessed the influence of epoch length, playing position, starting status, match result, location, formation, and time-of-day.ResultsIrrespective of playing position or epoch duration, FIXED underestimated ROLL for total (∼7–10%) and high-speed (∼12–25%) distance. In ROLL, worst-case scenario relative total and high-speed distances reduced from 190.1 ± 20.4 m min−1 and 59.5 ± 23.0 m min−1 in the 60-s epoch, to 120.9 ± 13.1 m min−1 and 14.2 ± 6.5 m min−1 in the 600-s epoch, respectively. Worst-case scenario total distance was higher for midfielders (∼9−16 m min−1) and defenders (∼3–10 m min−1) compared with attackers. In general, starters experienced higher worst-case scenario total distance than substitutes (∼3.6–8.5 m min−1), but lower worst-case scenario high-speed running over 300-s (∼3 m min−1). Greater worst-case scenario total and high-speed distances were elicited during wins (∼7.3–11.2 m min−1 and ∼2.7–7.9 m min−1, respectively) and losses (∼2.7–5.7 m min−1 and ∼1.4–2.2 m min−1, respectively) versus draws, whilst time-of-day and playing formation influenced worst-case scenario high-speed distances only.ConclusionsThese data indicate an underestimation of worst-case scenario running demands in FIXED versus ROLL over 60-s to 600-s epochs while highlighting situational influences. Such information facilitates training specificity by enabling sessions to be targeted at the most demanding periods of competition.
KW - Football
KW - Physiology
KW - Monitoring
KW - Fatigue
KW - Activity profiles
KW - Running
U2 - 10.1016/j.jsams.2020.01.002
DO - 10.1016/j.jsams.2020.01.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 31937507
SN - 1440-2440
VL - 23
SP - 764
EP - 769
JO - Journal of Science and Medicine in Sports
JF - Journal of Science and Medicine in Sports
IS - 8
ER -