Search

Competing Interests: MB declares to have received financial support for his research from Desmotec srl, Biella, Italy, producing flywheel devices in 2020 and 2024. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Flywheel (isoinertial) resistance training is a valid strength training method that has been incorporated in sport for decades, yet little is known about how therapists working in sport apply flywheel resistance training. We aimed to describe and understand current application and perception of flywheel resistance training amongst therapists working in sport. Seventy- three therapists (13 ± 10 years of experience) started part of this survey with 52 completing the entire electronic questionnaire. Nine multiple choice questions on application and perceptions of flywheel training (prerequisites, use of technology, barriers, and upper- and lower-body exercises) preceded two 6-point Likert scale statements on strength and reduction of injury likelihood. Most therapists (47/73) either used or intended to use flywheel training with their athletes and stated familiarisation would be a priority prior to initiating training. Although more than half suggested they were confident flywheel training could enhance strength (27/52) and muscular prehabilitation outcomes (40/52), many remained unsure. Nonetheless, it appears that therapists would mostly include flywheel training within prehabilitation (40/52) or during the later stages of rehabilitation (37/52). To monitor progress, therapists slightly prefer power (30/52) over velocity outputs, while few would not use them at all. Although therapists would prescribe most exercises - the squat, rotational exercise, and unilateral leg curl would be the most selected. Meanwhile, therapists reported remain most unsure or would avoid prescribing the lateral squat and unilateral hip extension. The biggest perceived barriers to flywheel training are equipment cost/space, evidence, and scheduling. The investigation provides valuable insight into the application and perception of flywheel training amongst therapists working in sport., Competing Interests:  Marco Beato declares to have received financial support for his research from a private company producing flywheel devices in 2020. The other authors do not have any competing interests to declare., (© 2023 de Keijzer, Raya-González, López Samanes, Moreno-Perez and Beato.)

This study aims to quantify and compare the external and internal training load demands of sided-game drills in professional team players during the competitive season. Twenty-four male professional soccer players of the same club were enrolled in this study. Drills were categorized as large-sided games (LSG): 10vs10 (84 × 60 m or 72 × 60 m), Hexagon possession 9vs9 + 3 (36 × 48 m), Possession gate 8vs8 + 2 (36 × 44 m), Possession 7vs7 + 3 (30 × 32 m) or as Small-sided games (SSG): 6vs6 (48 × 42 m), and Possession 6vs4 (30 × 60 m). A total of 7 drills and 279 individual data points were included in this analysis. Distance covered, high-speed running (HSR), and sprinting distance were all calculated in meters per minute (m.min -1 ) while total accelerations (>3 m.s -2 ) and total decelerations (- < 3 m.s -2 ) were calculated in number of actions per minute (n.min -1 ). All external load was measured with global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) STATSports Apex units. Players' internal load was quantified using their rating of perceived exertion (RPE). We found that distance covered ( p  < 0.01, large ), HSR ( p  < 0.01, large ), and sprinting distance ( p  < 0.01, large ) changed between drills (e.g., greater in LSG formats), acceleration ( p  < 0.01, large ) and deceleration ( p  < 0.01, large ) demands were greater in smaller formats (e.g., SSG 6vs6, and Possession 6vs4), while RPE was lower in the Possession gate 8vs8 + 2 format ( p  < 0.01, large ). This study found that sided-games can replicate and sometimes exceed some match-specific intensity parameters, however, HSR and sprinting were consistently lower compared to official matches., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Beato, de Keijzer and Costin.)

This study investigated the effect of flywheel moment of inertia (0.029, 0.061, and 0.089 kg·m 2 ) on concentric and eccentric peak power and eccentric:concentric peak power ratio during unilateral flywheel leg curl and hip extension exercises. Moreover, the inter-session reliability of peak power was analyzed during both exercises. Twenty amateur male soccer athletes attended five visits-performing three sets of eight repetitions of either unilateral leg curl or hip extension (all three moments of inertias) during each visit. For the unilateral leg curl, there were no differences in any measure between moments of inertia ( p = 0.479) but a higher eccentric than concentric peak power for all moments of inertia ( p < 0.001). For the unilateral hip extension, differences between moments of inertia were reported for all measures ( p < 0.05). Specifically, the lowest moment of inertia elicited the greatest concentric peak power ( p = 0.022), there were no differences with the medium inertia ( p = 0.391), and the greatest moment of inertia obtained the greatest eccentric peak power ( p = 0.036). Peak power measures obtained acceptable to excellent reliability while the eccentric:concentric ratio reported unacceptable to good reliability for both exercises. A variety of moments of inertia can elicit high eccentric knee flexor demands during unilateral leg curls, whereas higher moments of inertia are needed to achieve an eccentric-overload in peak power during hip extensions. Different exercises may have different inertia-power relationships. Concentric and eccentric peak power measures should continue to inform training, while the eccentric:concentric ratio should not be used., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 de Keijzer, McErlain-Naylor and Beato.)