Monitoring Training Load and Recovery in Volleyball Players During a Season

Abstract

Introduction Monitoring training loads, along with the recovery status, is important for preventing unwanted adaptations. Knowledge of these variables over volleyball seasons is still scarce. Objective To monitor and describe the training load and recovery status of volleyball players over a competitive season. Methods The sample consisted of 14 professional volleyball players. For the entire season, the training load was monitored daily by the SPE method during the session, and the recovery status was monitored by TQR and QBE on the first and last days of training for the week. Results There was a decrease in training load between Preparatory Period I and Competitive Period I (p = 0.03), followed by an increase in Preparatory Period II (p <0.001) and a new decrease in Competitive Periods II (p = 0.01 ) and III (p = 0.003). There was a significant reduction between Pre-TQR and QBE and Post-TQR and QBE in all mesocycles. In the Pre-TQR, there was a reduction between Preparatory Period II and Competitive Period II (p = 0.006), in the Pre-QBE, there was a reduction between Preparatory Period II and Competitive Period III (p = 0.002), and in the Post-TQR, this reduction was observed between Competitive Period I and Preparatory Period II (p = 0.03). In the Post-QBE, there was an increase between Preparatory Period I and Competitive Period I (p = 0.002), followed by a decrease in Preparatory Period II (p = 0.01). Conclusion Loads varied throughout the season, along with recovery, which varied according to the loads and characteristics of each period. Level of evidence I, Therapeutic Studies – Investigating the Results of Treatment.

External training load and the effects on training response following three different training sessions in young elite beach volleyball players

“…8,9 The reduced number of players and larger area to cover increase the individual stress level during training and competition compared to regular volleyball settings. 10,7 In order to monitor internal training response, different markers (session rate of perceived exertion [s-RPE], Delayed onset of muscle soreness [DOMS] and creatinkinase [CK]) were analyzed for indoor volleyball 8,11,12 but only one work evaluated elite beach volleyball players. 7 The authors identified different levels of s-RPE among blockers and defenders and between different mesocycles within a 10 week observation in a case study of 2 elite players.…”

Within-Week Variations and Relationships between Internal and External Intensities Occurring in Male Professional Volleyball Training Sessions

“…In addition, these variables showed predictive power over RPE-4 and S_RPE-4. Such findings show that higher internal intensities are correlated with lower external intensities in sessions further away from the game day, a fact not found on the days closest to the game, and it is possible to suggest that there is an oscillation in the training load during the week, allowing the athlete to recover throughout the sessions so that they are recovered on the game day [ 38 ]. Similar findings were found by Mendes et al [ 39 ] analyzing soccer athletes; these authors noticed that athlete fatigue, stress level, and internal intensity were significantly higher in the two training sessions immediately after match day.…”

Combined impact method in the preparatory period of the annual macrocycle of female volleyball players aged 18–19 years old

“…In the process of training highly qualified athletes, a relatively short general preparatory stage and a long special preparatory stage are usually planned. For athletes with low qualifications, the opposite ratio is reported [13,14].…”