Warming Up for Basketball: Comparing Traditional vs. Small-Sided Game Approaches in Youth Players

篮球热身:比较青少年球员传统比赛方式与小场地比赛方式

阅读:1

Abstract

This study compared the external [movement load (ML)] and internal [rating of perceived exertion (RPE), mean and peak heart rate (HRmean, HRpeak)] loads, performance and enjoyment between time-matched (~12 min) traditional (TRAD) and small-sided game (SSG) warm-ups in youth basketball players. Using a counterbalanced crossover design, 24 male players (16.0 ± 0.1 years) performed both warm-up types after reporting fatigue (ROF) and completing an 8 min standardized pre-warm-up. Before and after each warm-up, players completed 20 m sprint and countermovement jump (CMJ) tests; enjoyment (ENJ) was assessed post-warm-up. No significant differences were found between warm-ups for ROF (p = 0.053), RPE (p = 0.259), or HRmean (p = 0.053). However, SSG induced a higher HRpeak than TRAD (p = 0.001), while ML was greater in TRAD (p < 0.001). No interaction, time effect, or typology effect emerged for performance in sprinting and change of direction, although CMJ was higher after TRAD (p = 0.047). Enjoyment did not differ significantly (p = 0.066), although with a large effect size (r = 0.612). The greater ML in TRAD may reflect more dynamic basketball actions compared with SSG, which emphasized static tasks (e.g., screening, boxing out) yet produced higher HRpeak. Coaches may consider SSG warm-ups to replicate game-specific conditions while controlling the external load and maintaining adequate physiological preparation.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。