In previous studies, the effect of single or combined intake of caffeine (CAF) and taurine (TAU) on exercise performance was investigated. However, the potential synergistic effect on physical and cognitive performance after fatigue induced by anaerobic exercise is unknown. The effects of single and combination CAF and TAU supplementation on the Wingate test in elite male boxers and to evaluate balance, agility and cognitive performance after fatigue are being investigated for the first time in this study. Twenty elite male boxers 22.14 ± 1.42 years old were divided into four groups in this double-blind, randomized crossover study: CAF (6 mg/kg of caffeine), TAU (3 g single dose of taurine), CAF*TAU (co-ingestion of 3 g single dose of taurine and 6 mg/kg of caffeine) and PLA (300 mg maltodextrin). The findings are as follows: co-ingestion of CAF*TAU, improved peak (W/kg), average (W), minimum (W) power, time to reach (s), and RPE performances compared to the PLA group significantly (p < 0.05). Similarly, it was determined that a single dose of TAU, created a significant difference (p < 0.05) in peak power (W/kg), and average and minimum power (W) values compared to the CAF group. According to the balance and agility tests performed after the Wingate test, co-ingestion of CAF*TAU revealed a significant difference (p < 0.05) compared to the PLA group. In terms of cognitive performance, co-ingestion of CAF*TAU significantly improved the neutral reaction time (ms) compared to the TAU, CAF and PLA groups. As a result, elite male boxers performed better in terms of agility, balance and cognitive function when they consumed a combination of 6 mg/kg CAF and 3 g TAU. It has been determined that the combined use of these supplements is more effective than their single use.

Objectives: This study aimed to comprehensively investigate the physiological effects of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation combined with resistance training on the lipid profile, inflammatory and antioxidant responses, neuro-biomarkers, and physical performance parameters in physically healthy young adults. Methods: Thirty physically active male participants were randomly assigned to an experimental group (omega-3 + resistance training) or a control group (resistance training only). Over eight weeks, both groups performed a standardized resistance training program three times per week. The experimental group additionally received 3150 mg/day of omega-3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA). Pre- and post-intervention assessments included blood biomarkers (LDL, HDL, triglycerides, IL-6, TNF-α, CRP, GSH, MDA, BDNF, serotonin, and dopamine) and physical performance tests (1RM, CMJ, RSI, 10 m sprint, and Illinois agility). Results: The experimental group showed significant improvements in the lipid profile, with decreases in LDL and triglyceride levels and an increase in HDL levels. Levels of the inflammatory cytokines IL-6 and TNF-α were significantly reduced, while GSH levels increased and MDA levels decreased, indicating an enhanced antioxidant status. The neuro-biomarker analysis revealed increased levels of BDNF, dopamine, and serotonin. Physical performance tests demonstrated greater improvements in muscular strength, power, speed, agility, and reaction-based performance in the omega-3 group compared to controls. Conclusions: These findings suggest that omega-3 supplementation, when combined with resistance training, has a multi-systemic enhancing effect on both physiological markers and physical performance. This combination may represent a promising strategy for optimizing athletic adaptations and recovery in physically active populations. Future studies should further explore these effects across different populations and training modalities.

Purpose: This study compared the effects of a modern multimodal non-fatiguing recovery protocol with traditional low-intensity active running and passive recovery on neuromuscular performance, muscle damage, inflammatory responses, oxidative stress, and perceptual outcomes following a standardized football match. Methods: Twenty male semi-professional football players completed a randomized, counterbalanced, repeated-measures crossover design. Each participant completed three recovery conditions: passive recovery, traditional active running at 55–60% HRmax, and modern multimodal recovery consisting of very low-intensity cycling at 40–50% HRmax, foam rolling, and percussive therapy. A 7-day washout interval separated experimental periods. Neuromuscular performance and biochemical markers were assessed at baseline (Pre), immediately following completion of the assigned 20-min recovery condition (post-recovery), and at 24 h. Perceptual outcomes were assessed at post-recovery and 24 h. Results: The standardized football match was followed by neuromuscular impairments and increases in markers of muscle damage, inflammation, and oxidative stress. The modern condition showed smaller post-recovery declines in several neuromuscular outcomes, including peak force (− 7.5% vs. −14.3% in passive recovery), RFD (− 12.9% vs. −21.4%), and CMJ height (− 7.3% vs. −16.0%). Significant pairwise differences favored the modern condition over passive recovery for several outcomes, whereas differences between the modern and traditional active recovery conditions were outcome-specific. At 24 h, several neuromuscular variables were numerically closer to baseline under the modern condition. The modern condition also showed smaller increases in CK (+ 78% vs. +115% in passive recovery), IL-6 (+ 172% vs. +239%), MDA (+ 40% vs. +56%), and TOS (+ 40% vs. +63%), together with smaller disturbances in antioxidant status. Perceptual outcomes similarly showed a more favorable recovery pattern under the modern condition. Conclusion: A modern multimodal non-fatiguing recovery strategy may support short-term neuromuscular recovery and attenuate biochemical disturbances following a standardized football match, particularly when compared with passive recovery. However, differences between the modern and traditional active recovery conditions were outcome-specific and were not consistently observed across all measures. These findings support interpreting the multimodal protocol as an integrated recovery strategy rather than as evidence for the independent efficacy of its individual components. Clinical trail number: This study was not prospectively registered.