International journal of sports physiology and performance · 2026
High-Speed Running and Recovery Dynamics in Professional Soccer Match Play: A Comparison Between Starters and Substitutes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Silva Hugo, Ribeiro João, Lima-Alves Adriano, Girard Olivier
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study compared the temporal structure of high-speed running (HSR) efforts and subsequent recovery profiles between starters and substitutes, and across playing positions, in professional soccer.
METHODS: Sixty-one male professional players (26.9 [5.2] y) from 2 teams were monitored across 24 official matches, resulting in 215 match observations (148 starters and 67 substitutes). Match running performance was monitored using 10-Hz global navigation satellite system units. Episode-level variables included HSR duration, recovery duration, HSR-recovery intervals, and intervals between consecutive HSR efforts. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare playing roles, while recovery durations were categorized into <60 s, 60-120 s, and >120 s bands and analyzed using χ2 tests.
RESULTS: Mean HSR duration did not differ between starters and substitutes (2.37 [1.64] vs 2.40 [1.75] s), nor were differences for HSR-recovery intervals (3.86 [3.59] vs 3.75 [3.55] s), HSR-HSR intervals (3.51 [3.48] vs 3.57 [3.16] s), or the HSR/recovery ratio (1.05 [1.53] vs 1.00 [1.66]) (all P > .05). However, starters displayed significantly shorter recovery durations than substitutes (13.34 [33.51] vs 16.72 [39.50] s; P = .017). Recovery-band distributions differed by playing role (P < .001), with starters completing a greater proportion (97% vs 93%) of short recoveries (<60 s), whereas substitutes exhibited relatively higher proportions of moderate (6%) and long (1%) recoveries. Playing position influenced temporal intervals and the HSR/recovery ratio, but not HSR or recovery duration.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite longer recovery durations in substitutes, the overall temporal structure of HSR efforts was largely consistent between playing roles, with HSR and recovery periods predominantly occurring within short-time windows.
METHODS: Sixty-one male professional players (26.9 [5.2] y) from 2 teams were monitored across 24 official matches, resulting in 215 match observations (148 starters and 67 substitutes). Match running performance was monitored using 10-Hz global navigation satellite system units. Episode-level variables included HSR duration, recovery duration, HSR-recovery intervals, and intervals between consecutive HSR efforts. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare playing roles, while recovery durations were categorized into <60 s, 60-120 s, and >120 s bands and analyzed using χ2 tests.
RESULTS: Mean HSR duration did not differ between starters and substitutes (2.37 [1.64] vs 2.40 [1.75] s), nor were differences for HSR-recovery intervals (3.86 [3.59] vs 3.75 [3.55] s), HSR-HSR intervals (3.51 [3.48] vs 3.57 [3.16] s), or the HSR/recovery ratio (1.05 [1.53] vs 1.00 [1.66]) (all P > .05). However, starters displayed significantly shorter recovery durations than substitutes (13.34 [33.51] vs 16.72 [39.50] s; P = .017). Recovery-band distributions differed by playing role (P < .001), with starters completing a greater proportion (97% vs 93%) of short recoveries (<60 s), whereas substitutes exhibited relatively higher proportions of moderate (6%) and long (1%) recoveries. Playing position influenced temporal intervals and the HSR/recovery ratio, but not HSR or recovery duration.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite longer recovery durations in substitutes, the overall temporal structure of HSR efforts was largely consistent between playing roles, with HSR and recovery periods predominantly occurring within short-time windows.