Physiological responses to ball-drills in regional level male basketball players

High-intensity interval training, solutions to the programming puzzle: Part I: cardiopulmonary emphasis

High-intensity interval training (HIT), in a variety of forms, is today one of the most effective means of improving cardiorespiratory and metabolic function and, in turn, the physical performance of athletes. HIT involves repeated short-to-long bouts of rather high-intensity exercise interspersed with recovery periods. For team and racquet sport players, the inclusion of sprints and all-out efforts into HIT programmes has also been shown to be an effective practice. It is believed that an optimal stimulus to elicit both maximal cardiovascular and peripheral adaptations is one where athletes spend at least several minutes per session in their 'red zone,' which generally means reaching at least 90% of their maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). While use of HIT is not the only approach to improve physiological parameters and performance, there has been a growth in interest by the sport science community for characterizing training protocols that allow athletes to maintain long periods of time above 90% of VO2max (T@VO2max). In addition to T@VO2max, other physiological variables should also be considered to fully characterize the training stimulus when programming HIT, including cardiovascular work, anaerobic glycolytic energy contribution and acute neuromuscular load and musculoskeletal strain. Prescription for HIT consists of the manipulation of up to nine variables, which include the work interval intensity and duration, relief interval intensity and duration, exercise modality, number of repetitions, number of series, as well as the between-series recovery duration and intensity. The manipulation of any of these variables can affect the acute physiological responses to HIT. This article is Part I of a subsequent II-part review and will discuss the different aspects of HIT programming, from work/relief interval manipulation to the selection of exercise mode, using different examples of training cycles from different sports, with continued reference to T@VO2max and cardiovascular responses. Additional programming and periodization considerations will also be discussed with respect to other variables such as anaerobic glycolytic system contribution (as inferred from blood lactate accumulation), neuromuscular load and musculoskeletal strain (Part II).

A comparison of heart rate response and frequencies of technical actions between half-court and full-court 3-a-side games in high school female basketball players

The purpose of this study was to compare heart rate (HR) response and frequency of technical actions between half-court and full-court 3-a-side games in female high school basketball players. Twelve young female basketball players (age 15.5 ± 0.5 years; height 165.1 ± 5.7 cm; body mass 57.3 ± 7.2 kg; training age 4.2 ± 0.7 years; HRmax 202.9 ± 5.6 b·min(-1)) participated in this study voluntarily. On the first day, anthropometric measurements (height and body mass) were taken for each player; this was followed by the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (YIRT) level 1 for the subjects. Then, half-court and full-court 3-a-side games were organized in random order at 2-day intervals. The HRmax for each player was determined during the YIRT, after which the HR was measured during the 3-a-side games. In addition, the frequencies of different categories of technical actions were counted manually during the 3-a-side games. A paired t-test was calculated for each dependent variable, including HR, percentage of maximum HR (%HRmax), and the frequencies of different technical actions to compare half-court and full-court 3-a-side games. The study results indicate that the full-court 3-a-side games produced significantly higher responses than the half-court 3-a-side games in terms of HR and %HRmax (p < 0.05), whereas the half-court games resulted in significantly higher frequencies of technical actions (p < 0.05). The results of this study suggest that, if coaches want to achieve greater HR responses, coaches of female high school basketball players should organize full-court 3-a-side games, whereas coaches who want to focus on technical actions should arrange half-court 3-a-side games.

Heart-rate responses by playing position during ball drills in basketball

The physiological load experienced during basketball drills is crucial to understand players' adaptation to team-sport training and plan physical-conditioning programs.

PURPOSE

To compare mean heart-rate (HRmean) responses by playing position during 2-a-side (2v2) and 3-a-side (3v3) ball drills in male junior basketball players and explore the relationship between HRmean and repeated-sprint ability (RSA).

METHODS

Thirty- one players volunteered to participate in this study. On separate occasions, they performed 2v2 and 3v3 ball drills and 6 repetitions of shuttle-run sprints of 20 m (10+10 m), departing every 20 s (RSA). Ball drills took place on the full length but only half the width of the court and were three 4-min bouts separated by 1-min rest periods. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) assessed the effect of the number of players on court (2v2 vs 3v3) and playing position (guards vs forwards vs centers) on HRmean, and a Pearson correlation coefficient evaluated the relation between HRmean and RSA.

RESULTS

The main results showed greater HRmean in 2v2 than in 3v3 ball drills (P < .001) in all playing positions (90.7% ± 1.3% vs 87.6% ± 3% of HRpeak in guards, 91.3% ± 2.1% vs 87.5% ± 3.7% of HRpeak for forwards, and 88.2% ± 3.5% vs 82.2% ± 5.6% of HRpeak in centers, respectively, for 2v2 and 3v3). In addition, centers were characterized by lower HRmean than guards and forwards in 3v3 only (P = .018).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that 2v2 drills should be preferred to 3v3 drills for aerobic conditioning, in particular for centers. Finally, RSA does not seem to influence players' acute responses to ball drills.