Training Load Control in Football

Transcription

1

2 Periodization in Sport Seminar Tel Aviv, Israel January 2018 Training Load Control in Football

3 Plan of the Talk Dose Response What Why When? External Load Internal Load Future direcions Conclusion

4 Before Starting Data Analysis What Why When? The Who? Data Analyst Data Scientist

5 The Who s Data Analyst Data Scientist

6 The Who s Validity Reliability Relevance Thomson Nguyen

7 Training in Football Basic Training Specific Functional Game like drills

8 Fitness for Football: Constructs

9 Fitness for Football: Constructs

10 Fitness for Football: Constructs Psycho/Social Bangsbo 1994 Tactical PERFORMANCE Technical Physiological

11 Dose-Response LOAD OVERSHOOT PERFORMANCE FATIGUE Optimal Scarce Excessive DOSE RECOVERY Page 11

12 Performance Constructs Banister 1975 Performance = Fitness Fatigue Key Words; Hormesis, Homeostasis, Allostasis, Personalization Load= Volume Intensity HORMESIS All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous Paracelsus Actions: Training Load Regulation Dose Response

13 Training Load Dichotomy Dose Response

14 TS Philosophy: Induction Evidence T1 Training T2 T3 T4 Induction T5 Tn Study Replication Knowledge

15 The Internal-Load in Football

16 Team-Studies: HR Validity

17 TS Philosophy: Own-Control Designs Elite Competive Set-up No parallel Control No RTM Control Period Own Control Design Intervention

18 Internal Load Estimation Session-RPE (S-RPE) Börg CR10 Scale (RPE) Training Duration (TD) S-RPE= RPE x TD Rate Average Intensity Timing range of validity? Foster et al 2001 Impellizzeri et al 2004 Manzi et al 2010

19 Internal Load Estimation Perceived Average Training Intensity

20 S-RPE Prediction Bias Brink et al IJSPP 2014

21 S-RPE Prediction Bias Observed vs Estimanted S-RPE Oss. Vs Pred. Coach TL Over Estimation Careful Prescription? Castagna et al. 2017

22 S-RPE Prediction Bias RPE Est vs Obs y = 0,8668x + 1,4048 r² = 0, Castagna et al. 2017

23 S-RPE Prediction Bias Castagna et al. 2017

24 S-RPE Timing

25 Internal vs External Load

26 Internal vs External Load

27 External Load Metrics

28 External Load Metrics Noisy at 25hz! Validity?

29 External Load Metrics IsoPower VO 2max

30 External Load: Metabolic Power

31 Speed vs Metabolic Power

32 External Load: Metabolic Power

33 Metabolic Power Validity Actual energy cost of constant running was significantly overestimated by MP approach... Actual energy cost of shuttle running was significantly underestimated.

34 Metabolic Power Validity MP largely underestimates the energy demands of soccer-specific drills, especially during the recovery phases. The poor reliability of MP > 20 W.kg 1 questions its value for monitoring purposes in soccer. Actual energy cost of shuttle running was significantly underestimated.

35 Metabolic Power Validity These results also highlight the dissociation between metabolic and muscle activity demands during COD-sprints, which questions the use of metabolic power as a single measure of running load in soccer.

36 Injuries and Performance Training Load Dynamic High Team Performance Adapted from Gabbett et al 2015 BJSM Moderate Team Fitness Low Fatigue Injuries Low Optimal High Excessive Training Load

37 Training Load Dynamic Gabbett et al 2004 JSS CONI SdS Seminario Tecnico: Dose Risposta nell allenamento 8 Marzo 2017 Roma

38 Training Load Dynamic Gabbett et al 2004 JSS

39 Training Load Dynamic

40 Training Load Dynamic Gabbett et al 2015 BJSM Acute/Chronic Load Ratio= Sweet Spot ACLR = S-RPE 1 week 3-6 weeks S-RPE

41 Training Load Dynamic Late-Season Pre-Season Early-Season Training Load per Week AU Acute/Chronic Load Ratio= Sweet Spot ACLR = S-RPE 1 week 3-6 weeks S-RPE

42 Training Load Dynamic Peter Blanch, and Tim J Gabbett Br J Sports Med 2016;50: Acute/Chronic Load Ratio= Sweet Spot ACLR = S-RPE 1 week 3-6 weeks S-RPE

43 Training Load Dynamic Training-Injury Prevention Paradox Athletes accustomed to high training loads have fewer injuries than athletes training at lower workloads. Well-developed physical qualities are associated with a reduced risk of injury. Under-training may increase injury risk Train Harder & Smarter

44 Training Load Dynamic Training-Injury Prevention Paradox Excessive and rapid increases in training loads are likely responsible for a large proportion of non-contact, soft-tissue injuries. Train Harder & Smarter

45 Training Load Dynamic Br J Sports Med Nov 3. pii: bjsports doi: /bjsports [Epub ahead of print]

46 Acute/Chronic Load Formula: Lolli et al Br J Sports Med Mathematical coupling in the AC WR calculation Legend W1= week 1 W2= week 2 W3= week 3 A= week 4

47 Training Load Dynamic Conclusions Lolli et al Br J Sports Med Collectively, our findings have demonstrated that the numerator and denominator in the ACWR are mathematically coupled and, therefore, spuriously correlated. The simplest solution is not to include acute load periods in the calculation of chronic load if the training load injury aetiological relationship, grounded on the magnitude of the ACWR, is to be examined accurately. Formula:

48 Load Monitoring in Football: Vanrenterghem et al 2017

49 Training Load Dynamic Inconsistent Findings External Load vs Physical Performance Changes Moderate Evidence HR based methods vs Aerobic Fitness Pre-Season Scarce Evidence I-TL Ex-TL vs Injuries

50 Training Load Dynamic Strongest Associations TD and S-RPE, S-RPE and TRIMP Strogest Associations External Load vs S-RPE Mode of Training dependent

51 Conclusion One Size doesn t fit all Internal Load External Load Validity Reliability

52 Periodization in Sport Seminar Tel Aviv, Israel January 2018 Training Load Control in Football תודה