Objectives: To describe the perceptions of South African elite and semi-elite athletes on return to sport (RTS); maintenance of physical conditioning and other activities; sleep; nutrition; mental health; healthcare access; and knowledge of coronavirus disease 2019 . Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: A Google Forms survey was distributed to athletes from 15 sports in the final phase (last week of April 2020) of the level 5 lockdown period. Descriptive statistics were used to describe player demographic data. Chi-squared tests investigated significance (p < 0.05) between observed and expected values and explored sex differences. Post hoc tests with a Bonferroni adjustment were included where applicable. Results: 67% of the 692 respondents were males. The majority (56%) expected RTS after 1-6 months. Most athletes trained alone (61%; p < 0.0001), daily (61%; p < 0.0001) at moderate intensity (58%; p < 0.0001) and for 30-60 min (72%). During leisure time athletes preferred sedentary above active behaviour (p < 0.0001). Sleep patterns changed significantly (79%; p < 0.0001). A significant number of athletes consumed excessive amounts of carbohydrates (76%; p < 0.0001; males 73%; females 80%). Many athletes felt depressed (52%), and required motivation to keep active (55%). Most had access to healthcare during lockdown (80%) and knew proceedings when suspecting COVID-19 (92%). Conclusions: COVID-19 had physical, nutritional and psychological consequences that may impact on the safe RTS and general health of athletes. Lost opportunities and uncertain financial and sporting futures may have significant effects on athletes and the sports industry. Government and sporting federations must support athletes and develop and implement guidelines to reduce the risk in a COVID-19 environment.

Objective Our objective was to explore the training-related knowledge, beliefs, and practices of athletes and the influence of lockdowns in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods Athletes (n = 12,526, comprising 13% world class, 21% international, 36% national, 24% state, and 6% recreational) completed an online survey that was available from 17 May to 5 July 2020 and explored their training behaviors (training knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and practices), including specific questions on their training intensity, frequency, and session duration before and during lockdown (March–June 2020). Results Overall, 85% of athletes wanted to “maintain training,” and 79% disagreed with the statement that it is “okay to not train during lockdown,” with a greater prevalence for both in higher-level athletes. In total, 60% of athletes considered “coaching by correspondence (remote coaching)” to be sufficient (highest amongst world-class athletes). During lockdown, < 40% were able to maintain sport-specific training (e.g., long endurance [39%], interval training [35%], weightlifting [33%], plyometric exercise [30%]) at pre-lockdown levels (higher among world-class, international, and national athletes), with most (83%) training for “general fitness and health maintenance” during lockdown. Athletes trained alone (80%) and focused on bodyweight (65%) and cardiovascular (59%) exercise/training during lockdown. Compared with before lockdown, most athletes reported reduced training frequency (from between five and seven sessions per week to four or fewer), shorter training sessions (from ≥ 60 to < 60 min), and lower sport-specific intensity (~ 38% reduction), irrespective of athlete classification. Conclusions COVID-19-related lockdowns saw marked reductions in athletic training specificity, intensity, frequency, and duration, with notable within-sample differences (by athlete classification). Higher classification athletes had the strongest desire to “maintain” training and the greatest opposition to “not training” during lockdowns. These higher classification athletes retained training specificity to a greater degree than others, probably because of preferential access to limited training resources. More higher classification athletes considered “coaching by correspondence” as sufficient than did lower classification athletes. These lockdown-mediated changes in training were not conducive to maintenance or progression of athletes’ physical capacities and were also likely detrimental to athletes’ mental health. These data can be used by policy makers, athletes, and their multidisciplinary teams to modulate their practice, with a degree of individualization, in the current and continued pandemic-related scenario. Furthermore, the data may drive training-related educational resources for athletes and their multidisciplinary teams. Such upskilling would provide athletes with evidence to inform their training modifications in response to germane situations (e.g., COVID related, injury, and illness).