4.6 Article

Heart rate and blood lactate correlates of perceived exertion during small-sided soccer games

期刊

JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND MEDICINE IN SPORT
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 79-84

出版社

SPORTS MEDICINE AUSTRALIA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2007.08.005

关键词

Training intensity; Heart rate; Blood lactate; Rating of perceived exertion; Soccer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The rating of perceived exertion (RPE) could be a practical measure of global exercise intensity in team sports. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between heart rate (%HR(peak)) and blood lactate ([BLa(-)]) measures of exercise intensity with each player's RPE during soccer-specific aerobic exercises. Mean individual %HR(peak), [BLa(-)] and RPE (Borg's CR 10-scale) were recorded from 20 amateur soccer players from 67 soccer-specific small-sided games training sessions over an entire competitive season. The small-sided games were performed in three 4 min bouts separated with 3 min recovery on various sized pitches and involved 3-, 4-, 5-, or 6-players on each side. A stepwise Linear multiple regression was used to determine a predictive equation to estimate global RPE for small-sided games from [BLa(-)] and %HR(peak). Partial correlation coefficients were also calculated to assess the relationship between RPE, [BLa(-)] and %HR(peak). Stepwise multiple regression analysis revealed that 43.1% of the adjusted variance in RPE could be explained by HR atone. The addition of [BLa(-)] data to the prediction equation allowed for 57.8% of the adjusted variance in RPE to be predicted (Y= -9.49 - 0.152 %HR(peak) + 1.82 [BLa(-)], p<0.001). These results show that the combination of [BLa(-)] and %HR(peak) measures during small-sided games is better related to RPE than either %HR(peak) or [BLa(-)] measures atone. These results provide further support the use of RPE as a measure of global exercise intensity in soccer. (C) 2007 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据