Changes in Aerobic and Anaerobic Performance Capabilities Following Different Interval-Training Programs

The aim of the study was to compare the effect of an increasing-distance interval-training program and a decreasing-distance interval-training program, matched for total distance, on aerobic and anaerobic performance capabilities. Forty physical education students were randomly assigned to either increasing- or decreasing-distance interval-training group (ITG and DTG), and completed two similar sets of tests before and after six weeks of training. One training program consisted of 100 – 200 – 300 – 400 – 500m running intervals, and the other 500 – 400 – 300 – 200 - 100m. While both training programs led to a significant improvement in 2000m run (ES = 0.02-0.68), the improvement in the DTG was significantly greater than in the ITG (18.3 ± 3.6 vs. 12.2 ± 3.2 %, p< 0.05). In addition, while both training programs led to a significant improvement in 300m run (ES = 0.25-0.73), the improvement in the DTG was significantly greater than in the ITG (21.1 ± 1.8 vs. 15.4 ± 1.1 %, p< 0.05). The findings indicate that beyond the significant positive effects of both training programs, the DTG showed significant superiority over the ITG in improving aerobic and anaerobic performance capabilities. Athletes should acknowledge that, in spite of identical total work, interval-training program might induce different physiological impacts if order of intervals is different

Effect of contact and no-contact small-sided games on elite handball players

This study aimed to investigate the effect of contact (C-SSG) and no-contact (NC-SSG) handball small-sided games (SSGs) on motion patterns and physiological responses of elite handball players. Twelve male handball players performed 10 C-SSG and 10 NC-SSG while being monitored through the heart rate (HR) and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) as physiological responses and time-motion activities profile using video-match analysis. Both game conditions resulted in similar HR responses (P > 0.05), but the NC-SSG led to a higher RPE scores. The time-motion activity analysis featured NC-SSG with a greater amount of walking (855.6 ± 25.1 vs. 690.6 ± 35.2 m) and backward movements (187.5 ± 12.3 vs. 142.5 ± 8.7 m) combined with fast running (232.3 ± 8.5 vs. 159.7 ± 5.7 m) and sprinting (79.5 ± 4.7 vs. 39.7 ± 3.7 m) activities (P < 0.001). Conversely, C-SSG had a higher percentage of jogging and sideway movements associated with greater frequency of jumping (0.87 ± 0.09 vs. 0.31 ± 0.06 nr) and physical contact (1.82 ± 0.55 vs. 0.25 ± 0.03 nr) events (P < 0.001). No between-regimen differences were found for the number of throws (P = 0.745). In addition, the RPE was significantly correlated with fast running relative distances (r = 0.909, P < 0.001) and sprinting relative distances (r = 0.939, P < 0.001). In conclusion, this investigation showed that both C-SSG and NC-SSG in team handball can effectively represent specifically oriented exercises, according to the sport-task and the performance demands