Duxx,
Can you post the results of the three 3000m guys regarding their CMJ?
Thanks.
The 3000m was suspicious to me even… I am sure they didn’t calculated the warm-up in total distance. But team average is within reported values… 2306m (including GK and ‘fools’).
Those three guys were central middlefielder, right back, and left/right middlefielder. VJs were 39cm, 48cm, 39cm.
Note that guy who did 56cm VJ did 2800m yoyo… I am not so sure about negative relationship…
Can someone calculate the correlation btw yoyo and CMJZ values from table?
CMJZ
Mean +/-SD: 48.99 +/-4.20
Yo-Yo
Mean +/-SD: 2289.52 +/-630.67
r=-0.09, not significant (p=0.686)
PS athletes 4 & 5 were excluded (missing data)
The warm-up in the Yo-Yo is 240m (40x6), normally it’s not counted in the total, it might or might not have been counted here.
There is also a slight subjective parameter in the YY test, which is when the tester decides to stop the athlete. If he waits untill the athlete is 2m behind the line, the athlete might have done an extra 3-4 steps (120-160m).
Thanks Nikoluski!
This confirms my ‘theory’ that for this group of players there is not correlation between VJ and yoyo, so they are two different abilities without positive nor negative connection.
I am sure that warm-up is not calculated in total distance.
As for subjectivity… yes there is! Some of the players were excluded from the test but they could keep going, they have just missed the pace… They were excluded after two ‘fails’ no matter when (not in succession).
Duxx,
Check the times for your 20m.
Some guys seem to be faster than Asafa at top speed (0.6" to cover 10m) 
Wait… I noticed it’s actually the flyn’ 20m time, between 10 and 30m, you should correct the table accordingly.
Duxx so what are you trying to say. Can you just break this thing down. Years ago, they tested Ronaldo in an open 100m and he ran 10.9 electric. He was supposed to be the fastest.
My friend was an All-american ran 6.55 11.19, 48 400m splits. Would run circles around the competition on a soccer field. He was so much faster it was comical. Are you trying to say these guys have blazing speed or are you trying to say its more aerobic, or both.
I am not trying to say anything! I am just discussing the results and their posible application in training.
OK. Im no soccer expert but I did watch every game of the world cup one year.
What type of training do you give your athletes. Is it more speed endurance based?
Holy cow, come to think of it, the kid that ran 10.2 at my school trained a soccer player with just speedwork and falling starts and he was all-conference.
Come on now. Take a chance. What do you think of the idea of an inverse relationship between vert and YoYo results?
I say you’ll find one because back and forth tests apply alot of re-acceleration/speed change to what might otherwise seem to be a largely aerobic test- more regular and frequent than in the game itself, shifting towards the middle ground of intensity and away from the high/low experience on the field. A drop in Vert or other power indicators with a rise in test performance is a warning.
I always fear training towards a test and the 20+% change in 5.5 weeks is another warning.
I don’t know is it possible to classify soccer drills (small sided games) as SE based in the first place. I explained my ‘approach’ in ‘manual’. Now, we are in in-season and I re-joined the club during the in-season, so I am not doing that much now, except individual team strength training.
Well, altought the reverse relationship between ‘aerobic’ and ‘anaerobic’ qualities is sound, I guess it depends on the the athlete level, specialization, training methods and priorities. IMO you can have BOTH up to some level, after that level… well, you have to specialize. I don’t know whether this ‘threshold’ level in ‘aerobic’ or ‘anaerobic’ qualities is ever reached in team sports, basketball and soccer included (due their ‘mixed’ nature). This would be more of importance in pure ‘anaerobic’ sports like shotput, sprint, vertical jump… etc… I hope you get my point? It depends… 
As for Hi/Lo experience on the field… I don’t know wheather we can make such a ‘sharp’ classification… It is useful up to some point, but after that…
I agree that drop in VJ and other power qualities is warning, as is any drop in physical performance. We have to juggle with a lot of ‘components’.
Why do you think that 20+% increase in 5.5wks is ‘warning’? Haven’t you noticed same, if not larger, increase in strength in begginers? Is this a warning too? We are not talking about VO2max increase, but rather yoyo increase wich result in greater ground covered in HI running in the macth… I agree that the goal of training is not increase in testing result, but we should have some form of ‘indicator’. In sprinting it is easy – you have a stopwatch, but in soccer it is very hard to do time motion analysis, thus tests like yoyo can be helpful and informative.
HELGERUD, J., L. C. ENGEN, U. WISLØFF, and J. HOFF. Aerobic endurance training improves soccer performance. Med. Sci.
Sports Exerc., Vol. 33, No. 11, 2001, pp. 1925–1931. Purpose: The aim of the present study was to study the effects of aerobic training
on performance during soccer match and soccer specific tests. Methods: Nineteen male elite junior soccer players, age 18.1 0.8 yr,
randomly assigned to the training group (N 9) and the control group (N 10) participated in the study. The specific aerobic training
consisted of interval training, four times 4 min at 90–95% of maximal heart rate, with a 3-min jog in between, twice per week for 8
wk. Players were monitored by video during two matches, one before and one after training. Results: In the training group: a) maximal
oxygen uptake (V˙ O2max) increased from 58.1 4.5 mL·kg1·min1 to 64.3 3.9 mL·kg1·min1 (P 0.01); b) lactate threshold
improved from 47.8 5.3 mL·kg1·min1 to 55.4 4.1 mL·kg1·min1 (P 0.01); c) running economy was also improved by 6.7%
(P 0.05); d) distance covered during a match increased by 20% in the training group (P 0.01); e) number of sprints increased by
100% (P 0.01); f) number of involvements with the ball increased by 24% (P 0.05); g) the average work intensity during a soccer
match, measured as percent of maximal heart rate, was enhanced from 82.7 3.4% to 85.6 3.1% (P 0.05); and h) no changes
were found in maximal vertical jumping height, strength, speed, kicking velocity, kicking precision, or quality of passes after the
training period. The control group showed no changes in any of the tested parameters. Conclusion: Enhanced aerobic endurance in
soccer players improved soccer performance by increasing the distance covered, enhancing work intensity, and increasing the number
of sprints and involvements with the ball during a match. Key Words:V˙ O2max, LACTATE THRESHOLD, RUNNING ECONOMY,
SKILL
McMillan, Helgerud, Macdonald, Hoff. Physiological adaptations to soccer specific endurance training in professional youth soccer players. Br J Sports Med 2005;39:273–277
Background: Improved oxygen uptake improves soccer performance as regards distance covered,
involvements with the ball, and number of sprints. Large improvements in oxygen uptake have been shown
using interval running. A similar physiological load arising from interval running could be obtained using
the soccer ball in training.
Objectives: The main aim was to study physiological adaptations to a 10 week high intensity aerobic
interval training program performed by professional youth soccer players, using a soccer specific ball
dribbling track.
Methods: Eleven youth soccer players with a mean (SD) age of 16.9 (0.4) years performed high intensity
aerobic interval training sessions twice per week for 10 weeks in addition to normal soccer training. The
specific aerobic training consisted of four sets of 4 min work periods dribbling a soccer ball around a
specially designed track at 90–95% of maximal heart frequency, with a 3 min recovery jog at 70% of
maximal heart frequency between intervals.
Results: Mean Vo2max improved significantly from 63.4 (5.6) to 69.8 (6.6) ml kg21 min21, or 183.3
(13.2) to 201.5 (16.2) ml kg20.75 min21 (p,0.001). Squat jump and counter movement jump height
increased significantly from 37.7 (6.2) to 40.3 (6.1) cm and 52.0 (4.0) to 53.4 (4.2) cm, respectively
(p,0.05). No significant changes in body mass, running economy, rate of force development, or 10 m
sprint times occurred.
Conclusion: Performing high intensity 4 min intervals dribbling a soccer ball around a specially designed
track together with regular soccer training is effective for improving the Vo2max of soccer players, with no
negative interference effects on strength, jumping ability, and sprinting performance
Duxx- you are right that you can have a balance BUT at some point there is a trade-off between qualities, and, at that point, higher scores mean a less effective player
I would agree with that statement, but the question is ‘where is that point’ and ‘will that point be ever reached in [smart] training program’?
I would talk of training efficiency.
You have two average and one sub-par performers in the CMJ who can do 3000 in the YYR.
First thing to check is the role. Are they all midfielders (those who run the most)? Is one of them an external midfielder (who needs more speed)? Is one of them a central forward or central defensor (those who run the least)?
According to the answer you might put one or more in maintenance mode for metabolic training and work more on the neural side.
Noe thing for sure. You’re more likely to find the right balance if you suit the game by observation rather than a test away from it.
This is an old debate: adapting training system to players or players to playing system?
IMO the process is dynamic and both factors should be taken into consideration, and both evolve over time. For this player I would suggest training action as you have pointed, yet again evaluate his abilities to his position and maybe put him to another position if his technical/tactical skills are on the place…
What are the average, best/worst yoyo results you experienced in soccer and how do they transfer to fiels on your subjective evaluation?
Testing it’s self is almost completely meaningless.
I was told of a case 2 years ago of a pro who was moving to high level pro-team.
He completely failed the clubs (and leagues) fitness test in his ‘medical’.
There was a big debate and the club were not going to sign him - one smart man said to take him.
Within 3 weeks he was one of the teams outstanding players.
It is not the problem with tests, but rather with those coaches who interpret them
Tests are a problem.
If someone fails a test - they fail a test. End of.
For example - if your girlfriend fails a pregnancy test I don’t care what way you say it - you’re going to be a Daddy.
If Person A beats Person B in a test - Person A is better than Person B at that test.
You can say it anyway you want but no two coaches will interpret those tests anyother way.
So if a test isn’t going to tell you anything -why use it?
It is not the problem with tests, but rather with those coaches who use them