4.4 Article

Dietary Intake and Daily Distribution of Carbohydrate, Protein and Fat in Youth Tennis Players over a 7-Day Training and Competition Period

Journal

JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCE AND MEDICINE
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages 413-420

Publisher

JOURNAL SPORTS SCIENCE & MEDICINE
DOI: 10.52082/jssm.2021.413

Keywords

Tennis; nutrition; energy; carbohydrate; protein

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that youth tennis players have sub-optimal nutrition practices, with under fueling and inadequate carbohydrate intake, potentially affecting their performance, adaptation, recovery, and health.
During a 7-day training and/or competition period, macronutrient intake and distribution was assessed using food diaries, supported by remote food photography and 24-hr multiple pass recalls of youth tennis players categorised by under 12s, under 14s and under 16+ age groups (n = 27). Total energy did not differ between age groups nor type of day (training [TD], competition day [CD]), irrespective of a significant increase in body mass reported in the older players (U16+; p < 0.05). Average intakes were consistently below 2250 kcal.day(-1) (range 1965 +/- 317-2232 +/- 612 kcal.day(-1)). Carbohydrate consumption was below guidelines for all groups (<= 6g.kg(-1)). Conversely, protein intake met or exceeded guidelines throughout, with intakes >= 2 g.kg(-1) for both the U12 and U14 age groups on both days. Protein intake was similar to 17% higher on TDs than CDs (p < 0.05), with protein intake at lunch significantly higher on TDs than CDs (p < 0.05). No further differences were observed between breakfast, lunch or dinner between group or day. Inconsistent snacking was reported, with players consuming snacks on less than half of the days reported (46 +/- 12% of TDs and 43 +/- 30% of CDs). In conclusion, youth tennis players present sub-optimal nutrition practices, appearing to under fuel and under consume carbohydrate for performance, adaptation, recovery and health.

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