Author(s): BAO, R., LI, Y.X., LYU, S.Z., WU, Z.Q., Institution: EAST CHINA NORMAL UNIVERSITY, Country: CHINA, Abstract-ID: 756

INTRODUCTION:
In elite football, training load monitoring is vital for optimizing training and recovery plans. While extensive data exist from club settings, national team training loads remain largely unexamined in the literature, primarily due to confidentiality restrictions. Since training constitutes the majority of a player's weekly physical stimulus, investigating its structure and ratio in the national team context a notably under researched environment is therefore essential.
METHODS:
A total of 16 elite outfield football players from the Chinese U20 men's national football team participated in this study. Ten variables were selected: Total Distance, Duration, Accelerations > 2.5 m·s-2, Decelerations > 2.5 m·s-2, Standing (0–0.71 km·h-1), Walking (0.72–7.1 km·h-1), Jogging (7.2–14.3 km·h-1), Running (14.4–19.7 km·h-1), High-Speed Running (19.8–25.1 km·h-1), Sprinting (>25.2 km·h-1). Linear mixed models were used for analysis, with each physical load metric as the dependent variable, training week as a fixed effect, and player identity as a random intercept. For statistically significant main effects of training week (P < 0.05), Tukey post-hoc tests were conducted for pairwise comparisons. Cohen’s d effect sizes (with 95% confidence intervals) were calculated to evaluate the practical significance of significant differences.
RESULTS:
Training load peaked in Week 1 across key metrics (e.g., Duration: 527.04 ± 59.46 min; Total Distance: 46981.42 ± 6004.57 m). A significant reduction followed in Week 2, with most metrics reaching their lowest in the taper week (Week 3). Notably, high-speed running (1506.16 ± 335.42 m) and sprinting distances (269.68 ± 149.50 m) peaked in Week 3, indicating maintained high-intensity stimulus during low-volume phases. Load then partially recovered and stabilized in Weeks 4-5 at levels comparable to Week 2. Large standard deviations highlighted considerable inter-individual variation. In summary, the periodization featured an initial load peak, a two-step reduction, and a maintenance phase, demonstrating a dissociation between overall volume and high-intensity running.
CONCLUSION:
A non-linear periodization strategy, marked by the dissociation of overall training volume from high-intensity running load, was evident in the training load distribution during the preparation. Particularly during the taper week, when total load reached its lowest, high-intensity running peaked instead, reflecting a design that promotes recovery while prioritizing the maintenance of football-specific key physical capacities. Despite significant individual variations and the need for further validation of its long-term effects, this load distribution pattern provides a practical reference for balancing fatigue management and performance maintenance during short-term training camps.