Skip to content

A comparison of training modality and total genotype scores to enhance sport-Specific biomotor abilities in under 19 male soccer players

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Soccer-specific training (SST) and small-sided games (SSGs) have been shown to develop physical proficiency in soccer. Research on genetics and epigenetics in the prescription of training is limited. The aims of this study were to compare the impact of three different SST/SSG methods and investigate if a total genotype score (TGS) influences training response. Subjects (n = 30 male soccer players, mean ± SD; age 17.2 ± 0.9 years, stature = 172.6 ± 6.2 cm; body mass = 71.7 ± 10.1 kg) were stratified into a ‘power’ (PG) or ‘endurance’ (EG) gene profile group, where a 15 Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) panel was used to produce algorithmically weighted TGS. Training 1 (T1 – SSGs only), Training 2 (T2 – SSGs / SST) and Training 3 (T3 – SST only) were completed (in that respective order), lasting 8 weeks each, interspersed by 4-week washouts. Acceleration (10 m sprint) was improved by T2 only (1.84 ± 0.09 s v 1.73 ± 0.05 s; Effect Size (ES) = 1.59, p < 0.001). Speed (30 m sprint) was improved by T2 (4.46 ± 0.22 s v 4.30 ± 0.19 s; ES = 0.81, p < 0.001) and T3 (4.48 ± 0.22 s v 4.35 ± 0.21 s; ES = 0.58, p < 0.001). Agility (T-test) was improved by T1 (10.14 ± 0.40 s v 9.84 ± 0.42 s; ES = 0.73, p < 0.05) and T3 (9.93 ± 0.38 s v 9.66 ± .45 s; ES = 0.66, p < 0.001). Endurance (Yo-Yo Level 1) was improved by T1 (1682.22 ± 497.23 m v 2028.89 ± 604.74 m; ES = 0.63, p < 0.05), T2 (1904.35 ± 526.77 m v 2299.13 ± 606.97 m; ES = 0.69, p < 0.001) and T3 (1851.76 ± 490.46 m v 2024.35 ± 588.13 m; ES = 0.35, p < 0.05). Power (Countermovement Jump) was improved by T3 only (36.01 ± 5.73 cm v 37.14 ± 5.62 cm; ES = 0.20, p < 0.05). There were no differences in T1, T2 and T3 combined when comparing PG and EG. The PG reported significantly (X2 ¬20)) = 4.42, p = 0.035, ES = 0.48) better training responses to T3 for power than the EG. These results demonstrate the efficacy of SSGs and SSTs in developing biomotor abilities. Although these results refute talent identification through the use of a TGS, there may be use in aligning training method to TGS to develop power-based qualities in soccer.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Publication statusAccepted for publication - 10 Jun 2019

Documents

  • A Comparison of Training Modality

    Rights statement: The embargo end date of 2050 is a temporary measure until we know the publication date. Once we know the publication date the full text of this article will be able to view shortly afterwards.

    Accepted author manuscript (Post-print), 385 KB, PDF document

    Due to publisher’s copyright restrictions, this document is not freely available to download from this website until: 1/01/50

    Licence: CC BY-NC

Related information

Relations Get citation (various referencing formats)

ID: 15013627