Objective: Our objective was to explore the training-related knowledge, beliefs, and practices of athletes and the influence of lockdowns in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: Athletes (n = 12,526, comprising 13% world class, 21% international, 36% national, 24% state, and 6% recreational) completed an online survey that was available from 17 May to 5 July 2020 and explored their training behaviors (training knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and practices), including specific questions on their training intensity, frequency, and session duration before and during lockdown (March–June 2020). Results: Overall, 85% of athletes wanted to “maintain training,” and 79% disagreed with the statement that it is “okay to not train during lockdown,” with a greater prevalence for both in higher-level athletes. In total, 60% of athletes considered “coaching by correspondence (remote coaching)” to be sufficient (highest amongst world-class athletes). During lockdown, < 40% were able to maintain sport-specific training (e.g., long endurance [39%], interval training [35%], weightlifting [33%], plyometric exercise [30%]) at pre-lockdown levels (higher among world-class, international, and national athletes), with most (83%) training for “general fitness and health maintenance” during lockdown. Athletes trained alone (80%) and focused on bodyweight (65%) and cardiovascular (59%) exercise/training during lockdown. Compared with before lockdown, most athletes reported reduced training frequency (from between five and seven sessions per week to four or fewer), shorter training sessions (from ≥ 60 to < 60 min), and lower sport-specific intensity (~ 38% reduction), irrespective of athlete classification. Conclusions: COVID-19-related lockdowns saw marked reductions in athletic training specificity, intensity, frequency, and duration, with notable within-sample differences (by athlete classification). Higher classification athletes had the strongest desire to “maintain” training and the greatest opposition to “not training” during lockdowns. These higher classification athletes retained training specificity to a greater degree than others, probably because of preferential access to limited training resources. More higher classification athletes considered “coaching by correspondence” as sufficient than did lower classification athletes. These lockdown-mediated changes in training were not conducive to maintenance or progression of athletes’ physical capacities and were also likely detrimental to athletes’ mental health. These data can be used by policy makers, athletes, and their multidisciplinary teams to modulate their practice, with a degree of individualization, in the current and continued pandemic-related scenario. Furthermore, the data may drive training-related educational resources for athletes and their multidisciplinary teams. Such upskilling would provide athletes with evidence to inform their training modifications in response to germane situations (e.g., COVID related, injury, and illness).

Exercise is known to improve many aspects of human health, including modulation of the immune system and inflammatory status. It is generally understood that exercise reduces inflammation, but there are missing links in terms of understanding the mechanisms as well as the differences between exercise modalities. N-glycosylation of immunoglobulin G (IgG) and total plasma proteins was previously shown to reflect changes in inflammatory pathways, which could provide valuable information to further clarify exercise effects. In order to further expand the understanding of the relationship between physical activity and inflammation, we examined the effect of intense exercise, in the form of repeated sprint training (RST), on IgG and total plasma proteins N-glycosylation in combination with traditionally used inflammation markers: C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6), and leukocyte count. Twenty-nine male physical education students were separated into treatment (RST, N = 15) and control (N = 14) groups. The RST group completed a 6-week exercise protocol while the control group was instructed to refrain from organized physical activity for the duration of the study. Three blood samples were taken at different time points: prior to start of the training program, the final week of the exercise intervention (EXC), and at the end of the 4-week recovery period (REC). Following the end of the recovery period IgG N-glycosylation profiles showed anti-inflammatory changes in RST group compared to the control group, which manifested as a decrease in agalactosylated (p = 0.0473) and an increase in digalactosylated (p = 0.0473), and monosialylated (p = 0.0339) N-glycans. Plasma protein N-glycans didn’t change significantly, while traditional inflammatory markers also didn’t show significant change in inflammatory status. Observed results demonstrate the potential of intense physical exercise to reduce levels of systemic basal inflammation as well as the potential for IgG N-glycosylation to serve as a sensitive longitudinal systemic inflammation marker.

Sporiš, G, Milanović, Z, Harasin, D, Trajković, N, and Vuleta, D. Effects of a training program for special operations battalion on soldiers fitness characteristics. J Strength Cond Res 26(10): 2872–2882, 2012—The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of special operations battalion (SOB) training program on soldiers' fitness parameters. The research was conducted on a sample of 25 members (mean ± SD: age 27.93 ± 5.12 years, height 178.64 ± 6.91 cm, body mass 81.42 ± 9.18 kg) of the Croatian Armed Forces for SOB, divided into control and experimental groups. Total duration of the SOB basic training was 62 days. The sample of variables consists of 12 tests for the assessment of fitness characteristics, 2 tests for functional capacity, and 18 morphological measures. Morphological parameters were measured according to the instructions of the International Biological Program. Fitness characteristics were measured with the following tests: 1-kg medicine ball throw from a seated position, standing broad jump (SBJ), relative sergeant test, 20-m sprint, the maximum thrust from the bench, push-ups in 2 minutes (PU_2minutes), sit-ups in 2 minutes (SU_2minutes), pull-ups (PU), thrust from the bench with 70% of body weight (BP_70%), crawling and jumping, agility test 93639 with turn (A9-3-6-3-9), and sit and reach. Functional abilities were evaluated with 2 tests: 3,200 m running (SK3200) and 300 yards running (MBI3Y). There was a statistically significant difference in a set of fitness characteristics variables analyzed between the 2 groups in initial and final measurements in the multivariate level. Analyzing the results of t-test, differences of variables, it was evident that the difference after the SOB program occurred in 7 variables in the experimental group: SBJ, PU2minutes, SU2minutes, PU, BP70%, MBI3Y, and SK3200. Basic training for SOB during 8 weeks has produced significant burnout of the body for the participants who have completed their training. This led to a reduction in fitness performance manifested through the tested variables.

A desire to make fitness testing cheaper and easier to conduct in a team-sport setting has led to the development of numerous field aerobic fitness tests. This has contributed to a growing confusion among strength and conditioning coaches about which one to use. The main aim of this narrative review was to examine the reliability, validity, sensitivity and usefulness of the commonly used field aerobic fitness tests and to provide practical guidelines for their use in soccer. The University of Montreal track test (UMTT) and Vam Eval test seem the best options for estimation of maximal oxygen uptake (VO_2max) while the highest signal-to-noise ratio of the 30-15 intermittent fitness test (30-15IFT) suggests its superior sensitivity to track changes in fitness. The UMTT and 30-15IFT are the best solutions for prescription of long and short high-intensity interval training sessions, respectively. All field tests mostly present with marginal usefulness, but the smallest worthwhile change for UMTT or Vam Eval test, Yo-YoIRT2 and 30-15IFT are smaller than their stage increment making the improvement of only one stage in the test performance already worthwhile. Strength and conditioning coaches are advised to choose the test based on their specific purpose of testing.

Purpose: Monitoring is a fundamental part of the training process to guarantee that the programmed training loads are executed by athletes and result in the intended adaptations and enhanced performance. A number of monitoring tools have emerged during the last century in sport. These tools capture different facets (eg, psychophysiological, physical, biomechanical) of acute training bouts and chronic adaptations while presenting specific advantages and limitations. Therefore, there is a need to identify what tools are more efficient in each sport context for better monitoring of training process. Methods and Results: We present and discuss the fine-tuning approach for training monitoring, which consists of identifying and combining the best monitoring tools with experts’ knowledge in different sport settings, designed to improve (1) the control of actual training loads and (2) understanding of athletes’ training adaptations. Instead of using single-tool approaches or merely subjective decision making, the identification of the best combination of monitoring tools to assist experts’ decisions in each specific context (ie, triangulation) is necessary to better understand the link between acute and chronic adaptations and their impact on health and performance. Future studies should elaborate on the identification of the best combination of monitoring tools for each specific sport setting. Conclusion: The fine-tuning monitoring approach requires the simultaneous use of several valid and practical tools, instead of a single tool, to improve the effectiveness of monitoring practices when added to experts’ knowledge.