Background: The benefits of oral caffeine intake to enhance several aspects of physical performance, such as aerobic endurance, strength, power, and muscle endurance performance, are well supported. However, how the physical performance benefits of caffeine supplementation are translated into better specific actions in intermittent sports during real or simulated competition has been the topic of fewer investigations, and their results need to be appropriately reviewed and meta-analyzed. Objective: The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of acute caffeine intake on specific actions in intermittent sports involving decision making and high-intensity efforts (eg, team, racket, and combat sports) during real or simulated competitions. Methods: All studies included had blinded and crossover experimental designs, and we conducted a risk-of-bias analysis. In total, we included 24 studies. A meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) estimated by Hedges g and 95% CIs. Results: Caffeine ingestion increased high-intensity sport-specific actions during competition, such as the number of sprints (SMD: 0.48; 95% CI, 0.23–0.74), body impacts (SMD: 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08–0.49), accelerations (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI, 0.06–0.63), decelerations (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI, 0.12–1.14), and high-intensity offensive efforts (SMD: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.11–0.61). Additionally, caffeine ingestion induced a higher positive or success rate of actions during real or simulated competition (SMD: 0.44; 95% CI, 0.19–0.69). Conclusion: The current meta-analysis provides evidence of caffeine supplementation in increasing high-intensity efforts and the success rate of sport-specific actions during real or simulated competition.

The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the differences in the mean propulsive velocities between men and women in the different exercises studied (squat, bench press, inclined bench press and military press). Quality Assessment and Validity Tool for Correlational Studies was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Six studies of good and excellent methodological quality were included. Our meta-analysis compared men and women at the three most significant loads of the force–velocity profile (30, 70 and 90% of 1RM). A total of six studies were included in the systematic review, with a total sample of 249 participants (136 men and 113 women). The results of the main meta-analysis indicated that the mean propulsive velocity is lower in women than men in 30% of 1RM (ES = 1.30 ± 0.30; CI: 0.99–1.60; p < 0.001) and 70% of 1RM (ES = 0.92 ± 0.29; CI: 0.63, 1.21; p < 0.001). In contrast, for the 90% of the 1RM (ES = 0.27 ± 0.27; CI: 0.00, 0.55), we did not find significant differences (p = 0.05). Our results support the notion that prescription of the training load through the same velocity could cause women to receive different stimuli than men.

This study examined the force–velocity profile differences between men and women in three variations of row exercises. Twenty-eight participants (14 men and 14 women) underwent maximum dynamic strength assessments in the free prone bench row (PBR), bent-over barbell row (BBOR), and Smith machine bent-over row (SMBOR) in a randomized order. Subjects performed a progressive loading test from 30 to 100% of 1-RM (repetition maximum), and the mean propulsive velocity was measured in all attempts. Linear regression analyses were conducted to establish the relationships between the different measures of bar velocity and % 1-RM. The ANOVAs applied to the mean velocity achieved in each % 1-RM tested revealed significantly higher velocity values for loads < 65% 1-RM in SMBOR compared to BBOR (p < 0.05) and higher velocities for loads < 90% 1-RM in SMBOR compared to PBR (p < 0.05) for both sexes. Furthermore, men provided significantly higher velocity values than women (PBR 55–100% 1-RM; BBOR and SMBOR < 85% 1-RM; p < 0.05) and significant differences were found between exercises and sex for 30–40% 1-RM. These results confirm that men have higher velocities at different relative loads (i.e., % 1-RM) compared to women during upper-body rowing exercises.

Injuries are common in team sports and can impact both team and individual performance. In particular, hamstring strain injuries are some of the most common injuries. Furthermore, hamstring injury ratios, in number of injuries and total absence days, have doubled in the last 21 seasons in professional soccer. Weakness in hip extensor strength has been identified as a risk factor in elite-level sprinters. In addition, strength imbalances of the hamstring muscle group seem to be a common cause of hamstring strain injuries. In this regard, velocity-based training has been proposed to analyze deficits in the force–velocity profile. Previous studies have shown differences between men and women, since there are biomechanical and neuromuscular differences in the lower limbs between sexes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the load–velocity profile between males and females during two of the most important hip extension exercises: the hip thrust and the deadlift. Sixteen men and sixteen women were measured in an incremental loading test following standard procedures for the hip thrust and deadlift exercises. Pearson’s correlation (r) was used to measure the strength of the correlation between movement velocity and load (%1RM). The differences in the load–velocity relationship between the men and the women were assessed using a 2 (sex) × 15 (load) repeated-measures ANOVA. The main findings revealed that: (I) the load–velocity relationship was always strong and linear in both exercises (R² range: 0.88–0.94), (II) men showed higher velocities for light loads (30–50%1RM; effect size: 0.9–0.96) than women for the deadlift, but no significant differences were found for the hip thrust. Based on the results of this study, the load–velocity equations seem to be sex-specific. Therefore, we suggest that using sex-specific equations to analyze deficits in the force–velocity profile would be more effective to control intensity in the deadlift exercise.

Background: This study aimed to analyze the effect of caffeine ingestion on basketball performance in semi-professional female players. Methods: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized experimental design was conducted, in two different periods separated by a week. Twelve female basketball players ingested 3 mg of caffeine/kg of body mass or a placebo. After 60 min, participants completed two repetitions of the specified sequence: Abalakov jump, countermovement jump (CMJ), 5-0-5 (505) test, and 20 m sprint. Later, external loads and game statistics were recorded during a 30-min simulated basketball game. Results: Significant improvements were observed in CMJ height and 505 test with caffeine ingestion compared to the placebo. Significant moderate differences were evident between conditions in external load variables, specifically, an increased number of high-intensity changes of direction during simulated games with caffeine ingestion. Two-point shot efficiency significantly improved after pre-caffeine ingestion compared with placebo. Conclusions: Three mg of caffeine per kg of body mass may serve as an effective ergogenic aid to increase physical performance and some variables of performance index in highly trained basketball players.

Our main aim in this study was to analyze any differences in Win Percentages at Home (HW) that might represent a Home-Court Advantage (HA) in women’s professional basketball. A secondary objective was to analyze how team ability might modify the HA effect by comparing any interaction effect between HW and team ability in games played with and without fans. We collected data from first Spanish female basketball divisions, using a linear mixed model (LMM) for repeated measures to identify differences between time periods (games with fans vs. games without fans) for HA and HW. When comparing games with and without fans, we found no significant HA and HW differences ( p = .283 and p = .872, respectively). In fact, interestingly, we observed higher win values when fans were absent. Additionally, during the COVID-19 shut down stage, HA increased; but it returned to pre-pandemic levels afterward, with no significant differences between these periods ( p = .482). Similarly, while HW seemed to increase during the COVID-19 shut down period and continued improving in the post-pandemic phase, there were actually no statistically significant differences ( p = .772). Higher HA and HW were evident without fans during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period when fans were present in women’s professional basketball. During the post-pandemic period, HA decreased upon fans’ return, while HW continued increasing. We discuss possible bases for these unexpected findings.