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.

While some parameters are fully recovered (e.g. hormonal and technical), our systematic review shows that a period of 72 h post-match play is not long enough to completely restore homeostatic balance (e.g. muscle damage, physical and well-being status). The extent of the recovery period post-soccer game cannot consist of a 'one size fits all approach'. Additionally, the 'real match' (11 vs. 11 format) likely induces greater magnitudes of perceptual (DOMS) and biochemical alterations (e.g. muscle damage), while neuromuscular alterations were essentially similar. Overall, coaches must adjust the structure and content of the training sessions during the 72-h post-match intervention to effectively manage the training load within this time-frame.

Exercising in the heat induces thermoregulatory and other physiological strain that can lead to impairments in endurance exercise capacity. The purpose of this consensus statement is to provide up-to-date recommendations to optimize performance during sporting activities undertaken in hot ambient conditions. The most important intervention one can adopt to reduce physiological strain and optimize performance is to heat acclimatize. Heat acclimatization should comprise repeated exercise-heat exposures over 1-2 weeks. In addition, athletes should initiate competition and training in a euhydrated state and minimize dehydration during exercise. Following the development of commercial cooling systems (e.g., cooling vest), athletes can implement cooling strategies to facilitate heat loss or increase heat storage capacity before training or competing in the heat. Moreover, event organizers should plan for large shaded areas, along with cooling and rehydration facilities, and schedule events in accordance with minimizing the health risks of athletes, especially in mass participation events and during the first hot days of the year. Following the recent examples of the 2008 Olympics and the 2014 FIFA World Cup, sport governing bodies should consider allowing additional (or longer) recovery periods between and during events for hydration and body cooling opportunities when competitions are held in the heat.

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.

No abstract

Exercising in the heat induces thermoregulatory and other physiological strain that can lead to impairments in endurance exercise capacity. The purpose of this consensus statement is to provide up-to-date recommendations to optimise performance during sporting activities undertaken in hot ambient conditions. The most important intervention one can adopt to reduce physiological strain and optimise performance is to heat acclimatise. Heat acclimatisation should comprise repeated exercise-heat exposures over 1–2 weeks. In addition, athletes should initiate competition and training in a euhydrated state and minimise dehydration during exercise. Following the development of commercial cooling systems (eg, cooling-vest), athletes can implement cooling strategies to facilitate heat loss or increase heat storage capacity before training or competing in the heat. Moreover, event organisers should plan for large shaded areas, along with cooling and rehydration facilities, and schedule events in accordance with minimising the health risks of athletes, especially in mass participation events and during the first hot days of the year. Following the recent examples of the 2008 Olympics and the 2014 FIFA World Cup, sport governing bodies should consider allowing additional (or longer) recovery periods between and during events, for hydration and body cooling opportunities, when competitions are held in the heat.

Over the past two decades, intermittent hypoxic training (IHT), that is, a method where athletes live at or near sea level but train under hypoxic conditions, has gained unprecedented popularity. By adding the stress of hypoxia during ‘aerobic’ or ‘anaerobic’ interval training, it is believed that IHT would potentiate greater performance improvements compared to similar training at sea level. A thorough analysis of studies including IHT, however, leads to strikingly poor benefits for sea-level performance improvement, compared to the same training method performed in normoxia. Despite the positive molecular adaptations observed after various IHT modalities, the characteristics of optimal training stimulus in hypoxia are still unclear and their functional translation in terms of whole-body performance enhancement is minimal. To overcome some of the inherent limitations of IHT (lower training stimulus due to hypoxia), recent studies have successfully investigated a new training method based on the repetition of short (<30 s) ‘all-out’ sprints with incomplete recoveries in hypoxia, the so-called repeated sprint training in hypoxia (RSH). The aims of the present review are therefore threefold: first, to summarise the main mechanisms for interval training and repeated sprint training in normoxia. Second, to critically analyse the results of the studies involving high-intensity exercises performed in hypoxia for sea-level performance enhancement by differentiating IHT and RSH. Third, to discuss the potential mechanisms underpinning the effectiveness of those methods, and their inherent limitations, along with the new research avenues surrounding this topic.

Based on current scientific literature, RSH induces greater improvement for mean repeated-sprint performance during sea-level repeated sprinting than RSN. The additional benefit observed for best repeated-sprint performance and [Formula: see text] for RSH versus RSN was not significantly different.