Elite soccer teams that participate in European competitions need to have players in the best physical and psychological status possible to play matches. As a consequence of congestive schedule, controlling the training load (TL) and thus the level of effort and fatigue of players to reach higher performances during the matches is therefore critical. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to provide the first report of seasonal internal and external training load that included Hooper Index (HI) scores in elite soccer players during an in-season period. Nineteen elite soccer players were sampled, using global position system to collect total distance, high-speed distance (HSD) and average speed (AvS). It was also collected session rating of perceived exertion (s-RPE) and HI scores during the daily training sessions throughout the 2015–2016 in-season period. Data were analysed across ten mesocycles (M: 1 to 10) and collected according to the number of days prior to a one-match week. Total daily distance covered was higher at the start (M1 and M3) compared to the final mesocycle (M10) of the season. M1 (5589m) reached a greater distance than M5 (4473m) (ES = 9.33 [12.70, 5.95]) and M10 (4545m) (ES = 9.84 [13.39, 6.29]). M3 (5691m) reached a greater distance than M5 (ES = 9.07 [12.36, 5.78]), M7 (ES = 6.13 [8.48, 3.79]) and M10 (ES = 9.37 [12.76, 5.98]). High-speed running distance was greater in M1 (227m), than M5 (92m) (ES = 27.95 [37.68, 18.22]) and M10 (138m) (ES = 8.46 [11.55, 5.37]). Interestingly, the s-RPE response was higher in M1 (331au) in comparison to the last mesocycle (M10, 239au). HI showed minor variations across mesocycles and in days prior to the match. Every day prior to a match, all internal and external TL variables expressed significant lower values to other days prior to a match (p<0.01). In general, there were no differences between player positions. Conclusions: Our results reveal that despite the existence of some significant differences between mesocycles, there were minor changes across the in-season period for the internal and external TL variables used. Furthermore, it was observed that MD-1 presented a reduction of external TL (regardless of mesocycle) while internal TL variables did not have the same record during in-season match-day-minus.

The purpose of this study was two-fold: (1) to describe weekly average values for training monotony (TM) and training strain (TS) and their variations across the full soccer season, based on the number of accelerations and decelerations; (2) to analyze the differences between starter and non-starter players on weekly average TM and TS values for the pre-season and three in-season periods. In total, 21 professional soccer players were evaluated over 48 weeks during the full-season. The TM and TS were calculated based on the number of accelerations and decelerations at zone 1, zone 2 and zone 3, respectively. The results revealed that starters presented higher values compared to non-starters throughout the full season for all variables analyzed (all, p < 0.05). Generally, there were higher values in the pre-season. Specifically, accelerations at zones 1, 2 and 3 revealed moderate to very large significance of the starters compared to non-starters over the full-season. Decelerations at zone 1, 2 and 3 presented moderate to nearly optimally significant greater weekly averages for starters compared to non-starters during the full season. In conclusion, the TM and TS values were higher for starters compared to non-starters through the full-season, which confirms that the training session does not provide a sufficient load to non-starter soccer players during the full-season.

In-season training load quantification of one-, two-and three-game week schedules in a top European professional soccer team. Phb (2018), https://doi. AbstractTop European soccer teams that play in UEFA competitions often participate in one, two-or three-games per week. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the variations in training load (TL) according to each team's competitive schedule. The aim of this study was to quantify internal and external TLs within five microcycles: M4 and M5onegame weeks; M1 and M3two-game weeks; M2three-game week). The sample consisted of thirteen elite soccer players. A global positioning system (GPS) was used to measure the total distance covered and distances of different exercise training zones (1-5), the session ratings of perceived exertion (s-RPE) scores and the amount of creatine kinase (CK) created during daily training sessions for the 2015-2016 in-season period. The data were analysed with respect to the number of days prior to a given match. The main results indicate that there was a significant difference in training intensity for zone 1 between M5 and M3 (4010.2±103.5 and 4507.6±133.0 m, respectively); a significant difference in training intensity for zone 3 between M4 and M2 (686.1±42.8 and 801.2±61.2 m, respectively); a significant difference in the duration of the training sessions and matches between M5 and M2 (69.2±2.1 and 79.6±2.3) and M1 and M2 (69.7±1.0 and 79.6±2.3); and finally, there was a significant difference in CK between M1 and M5 (325.5±155.0 and 194.4±48.9). Moreover, therewas a significant decrease in TL in the last day prior to a match, for all microcycles and all variables. There was no significant difference with respect to s-RPE. This study provides the first report of daily external and internal TLs and weekly accumulated load (training sessions and match demands) during one, two, and three-game week schedules in a group of elite soccer players. Expected significant differences are found in daily and accumulated loads for within-and between-game schedules. A similar pattern is ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P Texhibited for one-and two-game week microcycles regarding the day before the match, which exhibits a decrease in all variables.

In soccer, the assessment of the load imposed by training and a match is recognized as a fundamental task at any competitive level. The objective of this study is to carry out a systematic review on internal and external load monitoring during training and/or a match, identifying the measures used. In addition, we wish to make recommendations that make it possible to standardize the classification and use of the different measures. The systematic review was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search was conducted through the electronic database Web of Science, using the keywords “soccer” and “football”, each one with the terms “internal load”, “external load”, and “workload”. Of the 1223 studies initially identified, 82 were thoroughly analyzed and are part of this systematic review. Of these, 25 articles only report internal load data, 20 report only external load data, and 37 studies report both internal and external load measures. There is a huge number of load measures, which requires that soccer coaches select and focus their attention on the most useful and specific measures. Standardizing the classification of the different measures is vital in the organization of this task, as well as when it is intended to compare the results obtained in different investigations.

Purpose.: :The aim of the study was to compare training load (TL) of the days preceding a win, draw or defeat in a sample of elite professional soccer players across the in-season 2015/16. Methods.: : Twenty elite soccer players participated in this study. Total distance covered, highspeed running distance (HSRD), average speed, session rate of perceived exertion (s-RPE) and Hooper index scores (HI) were collected. Data from 24 weeks with one match were analysed through the match-day (MD-5, 4, 3, 2, 1) and MD+1. Results.: :The main finding emerges in MD-1, where a longer training duration preceding draws

Background: The main purpose of the current study was to compare the within-season variations of workload, training duration, acute/chronic workload ratio (ACWR), training monotony ™, and training strain (TS) through session rating perceived exertion (s-RPE) between starters and non-starters. Methods: Seventeen under-17 European male soccer players (age, 16.2 ± 0.3 y, height, 1.8 ± 0.1 m; body mass, 66.5 ± 4.0 kg) divided in two groups: nine starters and eight non-starters, were evaluated over 50 weeks throughout the season. Results: In general, there were load variations for all players during the full-season. RPE tended to decrease during in-season and RPE, training duration and s-RPE did not present significant differences between starters and non-starters. TM and TS presented lower values for starters in mesocycle (M) 4 and M11 compared to non-starters. TS presented lower values for starters in M4 and M11 compared to non-starters, while in M10 a higher value was found for starters when compared to non-starters. ACWR showed differences between starters and non-starters in two of the mesocycles. Conclusions: This study showed that some mesocycles provided higher load for non-starters. This information can alert coaches that non-starter players are likely to try too hard in training to demonstrate their abilities, leading to non-functional overreaching, overtraining syndrome, and then poor performance.

The purpose of this study was three-fold: (1) to describe anthropometric, maturation, and somatotype differences of players based on playing positions; (2) to analyze variations of accumulated load training (AcL) and fitness parameters between playing positions; and finally (3) to explain the variation of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) and peak power (PP) through the AcL, body fat (BF), maturity, somatotype and fitness levels. Twenty-seven male youth soccer players under-16 were divided by the following positions participated in this study: six central midfielders, four wingers (WG), five forwards, eight defenders, and four goalkeepers (GK). They were evaluated on two occasions: pre-season and after-season. Height, sitting height, body mass, BF, girths, percentage of BF (BF%), lean body mass, maturity, somatotype, sprint test, change of direction test, Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1, Wingate, PP, VO2max and fatigue index were assessed. Then, AcL was monitored during training sessions. The main results revealed significant differences between player positions for maturity offset (p = 0.001), for BF (p = 0.006), BF% (p = 0.015), and lean body mass kg (p = 0.003). Also, there were significant differences for AcL and fatigue index in pre-season between player positions (p < 0.05). In addition, there were some significant differences in pre- and after-season for VO2max and PP between player positions (p < 0.05). In conclusion, GK showed higher values in anthropometric, body composition variables and maturity offset compared to the other positions, while WG presented lower levels of BF. In pre-season, there were more differences by player positions for the different variables analyzed than after-season that reinforces the tactical role of the positions, and the emphasis in increased load in the beginning of the season. This study could be used by coaches, staff, and researchers as a reference for athletes of the same sex, age, and competitive level.

Background and Objectives: Interpretation of the load variations across a period seems important to control the weekly progression or variation of the load, or to identify in-micro- and mesocycle variations. Thus, the aims of this study were twofold: (a) to describe the in-season variations of training monotony, training strain and acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) through session ratings of perceived exertion (s-RPE), total distance and high-speed running (HSR); and (b) to compare those variations between starters and non-starters. Materials and Methods: Seventeen professional players from a European First League team participated in this study. They were divided in two groups: starters (n = 9) and non-starters (n = 8). The players were monitored daily over a 41-week period of competition where 52 matches occurred during the 2015–2016 in-season. Through the collection of s-RPE, total distance and HSR, training monotony, training strain and ACWR were calculated for each measure, respectively. Data were analyzed across ten mesocycles (M: 1 to 10). Repeated measures ANOVA was used with the Bonferroni post hoc test to compare M and player status. Results: The results revealed no differences between starters vs. non-starters (p > 0.05). M6 had a greater number of matches and displayed higher values for monotony (s-RPE, total distance and HSR), strain (only for total distance) and ACWR (s-RPE, TD and HSR). However, the variation patterns for all indexes displayed some differences. Conclusions: The values of both starters and non-starters showed small differences, thus suggesting that the adjustments of training workloads that had been applied over the season helped to reduce differences according to the player status. Even so, there were some variations over the season (microcycles and mesocycles) for the whole team. This study could be used as a reference for future coaches, staff and scientists.