4.4 Article

MATCH RUNNING PERFORMANCE AND EXERCISE INTENSITY IN ELITE FEMALE RUGBY SEVENS

Journal

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
Volume 26, Issue 7, Pages 1858-1862

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318238ea3e

Keywords

heart rate; game analysis; GPS technology; match-play demands

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Suarez-Arrones, L, Nunez, FJ, Portillo, J, and Mendez-Villanueva, A. Match running performance and exercise intensity in elite female rugby sevens. J Strength Cond Res 26(7): 1858-1862, 2012-The purpose of this study was to describe the match-play demands of professional female rugby players competing in Rugby Sevens (Rugby 7's) matches. Time-motion analyses (global position system) were performed on 12 elite female rugby players during 5 competitive matches in a 2-day international tournament. Data revealed that players covered an average distance of 1,556.2 +/- 189.3 m per game (14 minutes). Over this distance, 29.7% (462.6 +/- 94.6 m) was spent standing and walking, 33.2% (515.9 +/- 88.6 m) jogging, 11.6% (181.0 +/- 61.4 m) cruising, 16.4% (255.7 +/- 88.3 m) striding, 3.7% (57.1 +/- 40.8 m) high-intensity running, and 5.4% (84.0 +/- 64.8 m) sprinting. The average maximal distance of sprints, number of sprints, minimum distance of sprint, and mean sprint distance over the game were as follows: 25.8 +/- 16.1 m, 5.3 +/- 3.2 sprints, 6.5 +/- 2.0 m, and 17.2 +/- 8.8 m, respectively. The players' work-to-rest ratio was 1: 0.4. For over 75% of the game, the players were exposed to heart rates (HRs) >80% of their maximal HR. There were no statistical differences between the first and second halves in any of the variables analyzed. This study suggests that the physical demands of Rugby 7's are quite different from those reported in other rugby codes. For players and teams to remain competitive in female Rugby Sevens, coaching, conditioning, and physical fitness testing should reflect these current demands.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available