The Preparation Period in Basketball: Training Load and Neuromuscular Adaptations

Ferioli, Davide; Bosio, Andrea; Bilsborough, Johann C.; Torre, Antonio La; Tornaghi, Michele; Rampinini, Ermanno

doi:10.1123/ijspp.2017-0434

Cited by 41 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The average of the best 3 values was used for analysis. Reliability and validity of this test have been widely reported in basketball literature [5,21,28].…”

Section: Design and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Previous studies reported changes in physical fitness of basketball players to be affected by the competitive level of play [4][5][6][7]17]. Thus, a thorough understanding of seasonal fitness variations at varying playing standards might highlight useful information for physical preparation staff and coaches alike.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The assessment of players' physical fitness across an entire basketball season indicates the effectiveness of conditioning programs and permits quantification of changes in fitness status of players across various phases of the season [4]. The greatest improvement in an athlete' physical fitness usually occurs during the preparation period, when players begin performing physical activity after a prolonged period of complete, or nearly complete rest [4][5][6]. During the competitive phase of the season strength and conditioning programs aim to maintain players' physical fitness, although realistically, fitness may slightly increase or decrease [4,7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite several studies investigating the seasonal changes in physical fitness of junior and collegiate (National Collegiate Athletic Association) basketball players [4,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15], only few studies have investigated these trends in adult male professional basketballers [5][6][7][8]16]. Gonzalez et al [8] investigated performance changes among 7 NBA basketball players from the beginning to the end of the regular season, reporting improvements in lower limb power produced during squat exercise and repeated vertical jumps.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 th week from the beginning) and after 3 weeks from the beginning of the Brazilian regular season. Similarly, the preparation period has been shown to be effective in enhancing the ability to sustain high-intensity intermittent efforts and repeated changes of direction, but to be less effective in improving the aerobic fitness and jumping ability of professional basketball players competing in Italian tournaments [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Seasonal changes in physical capacities of basketball players according to competitive levels and individual responses

Ferioli

Bosio²,

Zois

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe aim of this study was to quantify changes in physical capacities of thirty-eight basketball players selected from different teams, as well as from varying competitive levels (i.e. Division I, Division II and Division III) during the preparation and in-season periods. MethodsPre (T1) and post (T2) preparation period and during regular season (T3), the players completed a Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery test-level 1. Following a 3 to 8 days-break, players performed a 6-min continuous running test (Mognoni's test), a counter-movement jump test and a 5-min high-intensity intermittent running test. ResultsBlood lactate concentration measured after the Mognoni's test was significantly reduced from T1 to T2, and from T2 to T3 (P<0.001, ƞ 2 = 0.424). The distance covered during the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery test was significantly increased only from T1 to T2 in Division II and III (P<0.001, ƞ 2 = 0.789). Similarly, the physiological responses to high-intensity intermittent running test were improved only from T1 to T2 (all P<0.001, ƞ 2 = 0.495 to 0.652). Despite significant changes observed in running tests from T1 to T2, at individual level 35-55% of players did not show a very likely improvement. Relative peak power produced during vertical jumps at T3 by Division I players was increased compared to T1 (ANOVA interaction, P = 0.037, ƞ 2 = 0.134). ConclusionsThe main improvements in physical capacities occurred during the preparation period, when the aerobic fitness and the ability to sustain high-intensity intermittent efforts were moderately-to-largely improved. However, it appears that the preparation period does not PLOS ONE PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.

show abstract

“…The average of the best 3 values was used for analysis. Reliability and validity of this test have been widely reported in basketball literature [5,21,28].…”

Section: Design and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Seasonal changes in physical capacities of basketball players according to competitive levels and individual responses

Ferioli

Bosio²,

Zois

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Peripheral muscle function during repeated changes of direction in professional soccer players

Rampinini¹,

Martin

Ferioli

et al. 2022

Eur J Appl Physiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring Physical Demands in Basketball: An Explorative Systematic Review of Practices

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Measuring the physical work and resultant acute psychobiological responses of basketball can help to better understand and inform physical preparation models and improve overall athlete health and performance. Recent advancements in training load monitoring solutions have coincided with increases in the literature describing the physical demands of basketball, but there are currently no reviews that summarize all the available basketball research. Additionally, a thorough appraisal of the load monitoring methodologies and measures used in basketball is lacking in the current literature. This type of critical analysis would allow for consistent comparison between studies to better understand physical demands across the sport. Objectives The objective of this systematic review was to assess and critically evaluate the methods and technologies used for monitoring physical demands in competitive basketball athletes. We used the term 'training load' to encompass the physical demands of both training and game activities, with the latter assumed to provide a training stimulus as well. This review aimed to critique methodological inconsistencies, establish operational definitions specific to the sport, and make recommendations for basketball training load monitoring practice and reporting within the literature. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed using EBSCO, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science to identify studies through March 2020. Electronic databases were searched using terms related to basketball and training load. Records were included if they used a competitive basketball population and incorporated a measure of training load. This systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO Registration # CRD42019123603), and approved under the National Basketball Association (NBA) Health Related Research Policy. Results Electronic and manual searches identified 122 papers that met the inclusion criteria. These studies reported the physical demands of basketball during training (n = 56), competition (n = 36), and both training and competition (n = 30). Physical demands were quantified with a measure of internal training load (n = 52), external training load (n = 29), or both internal and external measures (n = 41). These studies examined males (n = 76), females (n = 34), both male and female (n = 9), and a combination of youth (i.e. under 18 years, n = 37), adults (i.e. 18 years or older, n = 77), and both adults and youth (n = 4). Inconsistencies related to the reporting of competition level, methodology for recording duration, participant inclusion criteria, and validity of measurement systems were identified as key factors relating to the reporting of physical demands in basketball and summarized for each study. Conclusions This review comprehensively evaluated the current body of literature related to training load monitoring in basketball. Within this literature, there is a clear lack of alignment in applied practices and metho...

show abstract

The Preparation Period in Basketball: Training Load and Neuromuscular Adaptations

Abstract: The preparation period induced minimal changes in the CMJ, while the ability to sustain repeated COD efforts was improved. Reaching high session rating of perceived exertion training loads might partially and negatively affect the ability to produce strength and power.

Cited by 41 publications

References 26 publications

Seasonal changes in physical capacities of basketball players according to competitive levels and individual responses

Seasonal changes in physical capacities of basketball players according to competitive levels and individual responses

Peripheral muscle function during repeated changes of direction in professional soccer players

Measuring Physical Demands in Basketball: An Explorative Systematic Review of Practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About