Douglas, AS and Kennedy, CR. Tracking in-match movement demands using local positioning system in world-class men's ice hockey. J Strength Cond Res 34(3): 639–646, 2020—While the global positioning system has been used in field sports for a decade, local positioning systems are newly available in indoor sports for the tracking of velocity and distance during competition. World-class male ice hockey players (n = 20) were monitored during 5 international matches. Speed and distance outputs were analyzed to determine the differences between positions, periods, and in-shift demands. Defense had a difference between forwards at distances covered at very slow (p < 0.001), slow (p < 0.001), and moderate (p < 0.001) speed. Forwards were found to cover a greater distance at very fast speed (p = 0.001) and sprint speed (p < 0.001). Defense had a decrease in skating distance at very fast (p < 0.001) and sprint skating speeds (p = 0.02). Forwards had an increase in very slow skating (p = 0.02) and a decrease in sprint skating distance (p = 0.02). Game situational differences were found for defense and forwards in average speeds for defense (p < 0.001) and forwards (p < 0.001). Local positioning systems data have the potential to accurately inform coaches of the position-specific demands of game situations and the training needs by position. Specifically, forwards performed more high-intensity skating than defensemen, whereas powerplay and penalty kill situations offered specific demands for the 2 positional groups. Finally, the intensity of skating was reduced in the third period for both defensemen and forwards. Further research can evaluate whether this is related to tactical decisions, or the metabolic cost of ice hockey.

The aim of this study is to investigate the differences between select on-ice measures using inertial movement sensors based on match outcome, and to determine changes in player movements across three periods of play. Data were collected during one season of competition in elite female ice hockey players (N = 20). Two-factor mixed effects ANOVAs for each skating position were performed to investigate the differences in match outcome, as well as differences in external load measures during the course of a match. For match outcome, there was a small difference for forwards in explosive ratio (p = 0.02, ES = 0.26) and percentage high force strides (p = 0.04, ES = 0.50). When viewed across three periods of a match, moderate differences were found in skating load (p = 0.01, ES = 0.75), explosive efforts (p = 0.04, ES = 0.63), and explosive ratio (p = 0.002, ES = 0.87) for forwards, and in PlayerLoad (p = 0.01, ES = 0.70), explosive efforts (p = 0.04, ES = 0.63), and explosive ratio (p = 0.01, ES = 0.70) for defense. When examining the relevance to match outcome, external load measures associated with intensity appear to be an important factor among forwards. These results may be helpful for coaches and sport scientists when making decisions pertaining to training and competition strategies.

Purpose: To compare on-ice external and internal training loads in world-class women’s ice hockey during training and competition. Methods: On-ice training loads were collected during 1 season from 25 world-class ice hockey players via wearable technology. A total of 105 on-ice sessions were recorded, which consisted of 61 training sessions and 44 matches. Paired and unpaired t tests compared training and competition data between and across playing positions. Results: For training data, there was a difference between positions for PlayerLoad (P < .001, effect size [ES] = 0.32), PlayerLoad·minute−1 (P < .001, ES = 0.55), explosive efforts (P < .001, ES = 0.63), and training impulse (P < .001, ES = 0.48). For the competition data, there were also differences between positions for PlayerLoad (P < .001, ES = 0.26), PlayerLoad·minute−1 (P < .001, ES = 0.38), explosive efforts (P < .001, ES = 0.64), and training impulse (P < .001, ES = 1.47). Similar results were found when positions were viewed independently; competition had greater load and intensity across both positions for PlayerLoad, training impulse, and explosive efforts (P < .001, ES = 1.59–2.98) and with PlayerLoad·minute−1 (P = .016, ES = 0.25) for the defense. Conclusions: There are clear differences in the volume and intensity of external and internal workloads between training and competition sessions. These differences were also evident when comparing the playing positions, with defense having lower outputs than forwards. These initial results can be used to design position-specific drills that replicate match demands for ice hockey athletes.

This study quantified and examined differences in measures of on-ice external load for subelite and elite female ice hockey players. External load variables were collected from subelite (N 5 21) and elite (N 5 24) athletes using Catapult S5 monitors during the preseason. A total of 574 data files were analyzed from training and competition during the training camp. Significant differences between groups were found across all variables. Differences in training between the 2 groups ranged from trivial (forwards PlayerLoad, p 5 0.03, effect-size [ES] 5 0.18) to large (forwards Explosive Efforts [EEs], p , 0.001, ES 5 1.64; defense EEs, p , 0.001, ES 5 1.40). Match comparisons yielded similar results, with differences ranging from small (defense Low Skating Load [SL], p 5 0.05, ES 5 0.49; Medium SL, p 5 0.04, ES 5 0.52) to very large (forwards PlayerLoad, p , 0.001. ES 5 2.25; PlayerLoad•min 21 , p , 0.001, ES 5 2.66; EEs, p , 0.001, ES 5 2.03; Medium SL, p , 0.001, ES 5 2.31; SL•min 21 , p , 0.001, ES 5 2.67), respectively. The differences in external load measures of intensity demonstrate the need to alter training programs of subelite ice athletes to ensure they can meet the demands of elite ice hockey. As athletes advance along the development pathway, considerable focus of their off-ice training should be to improve qualities that enhance their ability to perform high-intensity on-ice movements.