Short-duration sprints (<10 seconds), interspersed with brief recoveries (<60 seconds), are common during most team and racket sports. Therefore, the ability to recover and to reproduce performance in subsequent sprints is probably an important fitness requirement of athletes engaged in these disciplines, and has been termed repeated-sprint ability (RSA). This review (Part I) examines how fatigue manifests during repeated-sprint exercise (RSE), and discusses the potential underpinning muscular and neural mechanisms. A subsequent companion review to this article will explain a better understanding of the training interventions that could eventually improve RSA. Using laboratory and field-based protocols, performance analyses have consistently shown that fatigue during RSE typically manifests as a decline in maximal/mean sprint speed (i.e. running) or a decrease in peak power or total work (i.e. cycling) over sprint repetitions. A consistent result among these studies is that performance decrements (i.e. fatigue) during successive bouts are inversely correlated to initial sprint performance. To date, there is no doubt that the details of the task (e.g. changes in the nature of the work/recovery bouts) alter the time course/magnitude of fatigue development during RSE (i.e. task dependency) and potentially the contribution of the underlying mechanisms. At the muscle level, limitations in energy supply, which include energy available from phosphocreatine hydrolysis, anaerobic glycolysis and oxidative metabolism, and the intramuscular accumulation of metabolic by-products, such as hydrogen ions, emerge as key factors responsible for fatigue. Although not as extensively studied, the use of surface electromyography techniques has revealed that failure to fully activate the contracting musculature and/or changes in inter-muscle recruitment strategies (i.e. neural factors) are also associated with fatigue outcomes. Pending confirmatory research, other factors such as stiffness regulation, hypoglycaemia, muscle damage and hostile environments (e.g. heat, hypoxia) are also likely to compromise fatigue resistance during repeated-sprint protocols.

The activity profiles of highly trained young soccer players were examined in relation to age, playing position and physical capacity. Time-motion analyses (global positioning system) were performed on 77 (U13-U18; fullbacks [FB], centre-backs [CB], midfielders [MD], wide midfielders [W], second strikers [2 (nd)S] and strikers [S]) during 42 international club games. Total distance covered (TD) and very high-intensity activities (VHIA; >16.1 km·h (-1)) were computed during 186 entire player-matches. Physical capacity was assessed via field test measures (e. g., peak running speed during an incremental field test, VVam-eval). Match running performance showed an increasing trend with age ( P<0.001, partial eta-squared (η (2)): 0.20-0.45). When adjusted for age and individual playing time, match running performance was position-dependent ( P<0.001, η (2): 0.13-0.40). MD covered the greater TD; CB the lowest ( P<0.05). Distance for VHIA was lower for CB compared with all other positions ( P<0.05); W and S displayed the highest VHIA ( P<0.05). Relationships between match running performance and physical capacities were position-dependent, with poor or non-significant correlations within FB, CB, MD and W (e. g., VHIA vs. VVam-eval: R=0.06 in FB) but large associations within 2 (nd)S and S positions (e. g., VHIA vs. VVam-eval: R=0.70 in 2 (nd)S). In highly trained young soccer players, the importance of fitness level as a determinant of match running performance should be regarded as a function of playing position.

No abstract

Short-duration sprints, interspersed with brief recoveries, are common during most team sports. The ability to produce the best possible average sprint performance over a series of sprints (≤10 seconds), separated by short (≤60 seconds) recovery periods has been termed repeated-sprint ability (RSA). RSA is therefore an important fitness requirement of team-sport athletes, and it is important to better understand training strategies that can improve this fitness component. Surprisingly, however, there has been little research about the best training methods to improve RSA. In the absence of strong scientific evidence, two principal training theories have emerged. One is based on the concept of training specificity and maintains that the best way to train RSA is to perform repeated sprints. The second proposes that training interventions that target the main factors limiting RSA may be a more effective approach. The aim of this review (Part II) is to critically analyse training strategies to improve both RSA and the underlying factors responsible for fatigue during repeated sprints (see Part I of the preceding companion article). This review has highlighted that there is not one type of training that can be recommended to best improve RSA and all of the factors believed to be responsible for performance decrements during repeated-sprint tasks. This is not surprising, as RSA is a complex fitness component that depends on both metabolic (e.g. oxidative capacity, phosphocreatine recovery and H+ buffering) and neural factors (e.g. muscle activation and recruitment strategies) among others. While different training strategies can be used in order to improve each of these potential limiting factors, and in turn RSA, two key recommendations emerge from this review; it is important to include (i) some training to improve single-sprint performance (e.g. 'traditional' sprint training and strength/power training); and (ii) some high-intensity (80-90% maximal oxygen consumption) interval training to best improve the ability to recover between sprints. Further research is required to establish whether it is best to develop these qualities separately, or whether they can be developed concurrently (without interference effects). While research has identified a correlation between RSA and total sprint distance during soccer, future studies need to address whether training-induced changes in RSA also produce changes in match physical performance.

This review focuses on the characteristics of tennis players during match play and provides a greater insight into the energy demands of tennis. A tennis match often lasts longer than an hour and in some cases more than five hours. During a match there is a combination of periods of maximal or near maximal work and longer periods of moderate and low intensity activity. Match intensity varies considerably depending on the players' level, style, and sex. It is also influenced by factors such as court surface and ball type. This has important implications for the training of tennis players, which should resemble match intensity and include interval training with appropriate work to rest ratios.