Citation

Gharbi A, Masmoudi L, Chtourou H, Chaari N, Tabka Z. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness 2017; 57(12): 1590-1596.

Affiliation

High Institute of Sport and Physical Education, Sfax University, Sfax, Tunisia - adnenegharbi@yahoo.fr.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, Edizioni Minerva Medica)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

27448143

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ability to perform repeated sprints is likely influenced by the mode of the recovery. Despite performance time, peak power, and mean power measured in most of studies, there are other specific sport abilities that should be examined after different recovery strategies.The aim of this study was to examine the effects of recovery modes (active [AR] vs passive [PR]) on physiological performance (lactate, HR, and blood pressure), psychological performance (perceived exertion rating [RPE] and feeling scale [FS]), and specific skills (kicking accuracy [KA] and repeated dribbling) in young soccer players.

METHODS: Ten male children (age 14.6 ± 0.8 yr; experience 5.3 ± 0.4 yr; body height 1.63 ± 0.4 m; body mass 52.5 ± 4.9 kg) who were soccer players performed two kicking accuracy tests on two separate occasions that involved ten 20-m dribbling speed tests with 20 s of PR or AR in a random order. The dribbling speed performance, total dribbling time (TT), best dribbling time (BT), mean time (MT), RPE, FS, blood pressure (BP), HR, lactate concentration ([La]), and KA were recorded. In addition, the fatigue index (FI) was calculated from the repeated dribbling sprint test (RDST).

RESULTS: The results showed that performing the RDST with PR between exercise bouts resulted in a shorter dribbling sprint time, as compared with AR during the last six repetitions. TT, MT, and FI (p < 0.001) were higher in AR than PR. However, BT, kicking accuracy, and the physiological parameters (i.e., [La], systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure) were not affected by the recovery type. Conversely, the present study demonstrated a better feeling score and lower perception of effort during passive recovery than during the active mode.

CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study demonstrate that PR is better than AR for RDST performance and for subjective fatigue estimation. Therefore, coaches and athletes are advised to utilize PR during competitions and training sessions requiring repeated high intensity exercises.

Language: en