The purpose of this study was to use GPS, accelerometers, and session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) to examine the demands of a Division II women’s soccer team. Data was collected on 25 collegiate Division II women’s soccer players over an entire regular season (17 matches and 24 practices). ZephyrTM BioHarnesses (BHs) were used to collect tri-axial acceleration information and GPS derived variables for all matches and practices. Acceleration data was used to calculate Impulse Load, a measure of mechanical load that includes only locomotor related accelerations. GPS was used to quantify total distance and distance in six speed zones. Internal Training Loads were assessed via sRPE. Mean Impulse Load, total distance, and sRPE during match play was 20,120 ± 8609 N·s, 5.48 ± 2.35 km, and 892.50 ± 358.50, respectively. Mean Impulse Load, total distance, and sRPE during practice was 12,410 ± 4067 N·s, 2.95 ± 0.95 km, and 143.30 ± 123.50, respectively. Several very large to nearly perfect correlations were found between Impulse Load and total distance (r = 0.95; p < 0.001), Impulse Load and sRPE (r = 0.84; p < 0.001), and total distance and sRPE (r = 0.82; p < 0.001). This study details the mechanical demands of Division II women’s soccer match play. This study also demonstrates that Impulse Load is a good indicator of total distance.

Prior to major competitions, athletes often use a peaking protocol such as tapering or training cessation to improve performance. The majority of the current literature has focused on endurance-based sports such as swimming, cycling, and running to better understand how and when to taper or use training cessation to achieve the desired performance outcome. However, evidence regarding peaking protocols for strength and power athletes is lacking. Current limitations for peaking maximal strength is that many studies do not provide sufficient details for practitioners to use. Thus, when working with athletes such as powerlifters, weightlifters, throwers, and strongman competitors, practitioners must use trial and error to determine the best means for peaking rather than using an evidence-based protocol. More specifically, determining how to peak maximal strength using data derived from strength and power athletes has not been established. While powerlifting training (i.e., back squat, bench press, deadlift) is used by strength and power athletes up until the final days prior to a competition, understanding how to peak maximal strength relative to powerlifting performance is still unclear. Thus, the purpose of this study was to review the literature on tapering and training cessation practices relative to peaking powerlifting performance.

The purpose of this monitoring study was to investigate how alterations in training affect changes in force-related characteristics and weightlifting performance. Subjects: Seven competitive weightlifters participated in the study. Methods: The weightlifters performed a block style periodized plan across 20 weeks. Force plate data from the isometric mid-thigh pull and static jumps with 0 kg, 11 kg, and 20 kg were collected near the end of each training block (weeks 1, 6, 10, 13, 17, and 20). Weightlifting performance was measured at weeks 0, 7, 11, and 20. Results: Very strong correlations were noted between weightlifting performances and isometric rate of force development (RFD), isometric peak force (PF), peak power (PP), and jump height (JH). Men responded in a more predictable manner than the women. During periods of higher training volume, RFD was depressed to a greater extent than PF. JH at 20 kg responded in a manner reflecting the expected fatigue response more so than JH at 0 kg and 11 kg. Conclusions: PF appears to have been more resistant to volume alterations than RFD and JH at 20 kg. RFD and JH at 20 kg appear to be superior monitoring metrics due to their “sensitivity.”

Travis, SK, Pritchard, HJ, Mujika, I, Gentles, JA, Stone, MH, and Bazyler, CD. Characterizing the tapering practices of United States and Canadian raw powerlifters. J Strength Cond Res 35(12S): S26–S35, 2021—The purpose of this study was to characterize the tapering practices used by North American powerlifters. A total of 364 powerlifters completed a 41-item survey encompassing demographics, general training, general tapering, and specific tapering practices. Nonparametric statistics were used to assess sex (male and female), competition level (regional/provincial, national, and international), and competition lift (squat, bench press, and deadlift). The highest training volume most frequently took place 5–8 weeks before competition, whereas the highest training intensity was completed 2 weeks before competition. A step taper was primarily used over 7–10 days while decreasing the training volume by 41–50% with varied intensity. The final heavy (>85% 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) back squat and deadlift sessions were completed 7–10 days before competition, whereas the final heavy bench press session was completed <7 days before competition. Final heavy lifts were completed at 90.0–92.5% 1RM but reduced to 75–80% 1RM for back squat and bench press and 70–75% for deadlift during the final training session of each lift. Set and repetition schemes during the taper varied between lifts with most frequent reports of 3 × 2, 3 × 3, and 3 × 1 for back squat, bench press, and deadlift, respectively. Training cessation durations before competition varied between deadlift (5.8 ± 2.5 days), back squat (4.1 ± 1.9 days), and bench press (3.9 ± 1.8 days). Complete training cessation was implemented 2.8 ± 1.1 days before competition and varied between sex and competition level. These findings provide novel insights into the tapering practices of North American powerlifters and can be used to inform powerlifting coaches and athlete's tapering decisions.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 3 vs. 5 days of training cessation on body composition, perceived recovery and stress state, and maximal strength. Nineteen strength-trained athletes (23.8 6 4.1 year; 90.8 6 20.7 kg; 174.2 6 7.3 cm) completed a powerlifting specific 4-week training block followed by either 3 or 5 days of training cessation. During the 4-week training block, athletes were trained 3 days per week, performing 3-4 movements that included at least 2-3 competition lifts per session while performing 4-5 sets of 3-5 repetitions with intensity ranging from 75 to 100% 1 repetition maximum (1RM). Body composition, psychometric measures, upper-body maximal strength, and lower-body maximal strength were assessed before (T1) and after 4 weeks of training (T2) and at 3 or 5 days of training cessation (T3). The alpha level was set at p , 0.05. After the 4-week training block (T1 to T2), trivial significant increases in body mass (p 5 0.016, Hedge's g 5 0.04) and bench press 1RM (p 5 0.01, g 5 0.16) were observed, as well as small significant increases in back squat 1RM (p , 0.001, g 5 0.23), deadlift 1RM (p 5 0.003, g 5 0.20), powerlifting total (p , 0.001, g 5 0.21), and Wilks Score (p , 0.001, g 5 0.27). There were no significant differences between groups for isometric back squat performance, psychometric measures, and body composition after training cessation (T2-T3). However, small significant decreases in isometric bench press performance were observed after 5 days (p , 0.001, g 5 0.16), but not 3 days of training cessation. The results of this study suggest maximal lower-body strength can be preserved during 3 and 5 days of training cessation, but maximal upper-body strength is only preserved for 3 days after 4 weeks of strength training in athletes.