Comparison Of Physiological Demands Of Basketball Practice Sessions To A Pre-season Game: 2227 Board #240 June 1 2

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Excerpt

An athlete’s practice is ideally constructed to prepare them for game-type conditions. Training volume however, can be influenced by several factors including frequency, intensity, time, type, and volume of practice. Differences between basketball practices, scrimmages, and games are already illustrated (Montgomery et al., 2010 & Klusemann et al., 2013). The ability to improve practices to mimic game-type conditions could better prepare the athletes to perform in games.
PURPOSE: To compare the physiological demands of practice to a pre-season game.
METHODS: Ten Division II men’s basketball players participated in this study (20.7 ± 0.9 yrs, 94.0 ± 13.2 kg, 1.90 ± 0.09 m). All players wore Hexoskin activity monitors (Hexoskin, Montreal, CAN) which measure heart rate (HR) via ECG, g-force (above that of the earth’s gravity) via triaxial accelerometry, and time of day (including time spent wearing the monitor). Monitors were worn at practices for the week leading up to and the week following a pre-season game. A dependent, two-tailed t-test compared the average of twelve days of practice (P) to the pre-season game (G). Coefficient of determination was utilized to compare change in time while wearing the monitor to change in training volume (total g-force).
RESULTS: Time spent in practice was significantly greater than the game (P = 144 ± 2; G = 126 ± 2 min; p ≤ 0.05). While average HR did not differ (P = 121 ± 5; G = 121 ± 17 bpm), maximal HR was higher in the game (P = 180 ± 6; G = 189 ± 7 bpm; p ≤ 0.05). Average g-force was higher in practice (P = 0.38 ± 0.05; G = 0.30 ± 0.11 m/s2; p ≤ 0.05), however maximal g-force did not differ between the two (P = 3.64 ± 0.42; G = 3.97 ± 0.71 m/s2, p = 0.10). Total g-force (average g-force of the session multiplied by the minutes of the session) differed between the two conditions (P = 55.2 ± 7.7; G = 37.4 ± 13.6 min·m/s2; p ≤ 0.05). A coefficient of determination elucidated an r2 = 0.175, indicating that only 17.5% of the change in total g-force was explained by the difference in time between P and G.
CONCLUSION: Practices were longer, less intense based on maximal HR and a trending maximal g-force, with a higher average g-force and total g-force compared to the pre-season game. Volume of training for practices could be better tailored to more closely mimic game-type conditions, although the goals of practice should be considered.
    loading  Loading Related Articles