MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809966808 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002699

Running Demands and Activity Profile of the New Four-Quarter Match Format in Men's Field Hockey

2018· article· en· W2809966808 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammed Ihsan, Vincent Yeo, Frankie Tan, Ranald Joseph, Marcus Lee, Abdul Rashid Aziz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField hockeyIntensity (physics)MathematicsQuarter (Canadian coin)Animal sciencePhysicsGeographyBiologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Ihsan, M, Yeo, V, Tan, F, Joseph, R, Lee, M, and Aziz, AR. Running demands and activity profile of the new four-quarter match format in men's field hockey. J Strength Cond Res 35(2): 512-518, 2021-This study determined the running demands of men's field hockey with regards to the revised four-quarter match format. Twenty-eight male field hockey players were equipped with global positioning system units while competing in 14 competitive international games over a 1-year period. All matches allowed for unlimited substitutions, and consisted of four 15-minute quarters (i.e., Q1-Q4). A progressive decline in total distance (TD) was observed in Q2 (2,072 ± 141 m) to Q4 (2,055 ± 212 m) compared with Q1 (2,171 ± 195 m, p < 0.05). However, the decline in TD was due to decreases in low-intensity activity (<15 km·h-1, p < 0.05), as high-intensity running (HIR; >15 km·h-1) distances were similar throughout Q1-Q4 (p = 0.263). Positional data demonstrated a similar profile, where significant decreases in TD, but not in HIR, was observed across all playing positions at some point over the 4 quarters (p < 0.05). DEF accumulated the lowest amount of TD (7,631 ± 753 m), HIR (2,257 ± 498 m), and high-intensity decelerations (60 ± 9, >-2m·s-2) compared with MID and FWD (p < 0.05). By contrast, FWD performed the highest amount of HIR (3,090 ± 565 m) and high-intensity accelerations (110 ± 9, >2 m·s-2) compared with MID and DEF (p < 0.05). In conclusion, our results showed that although there was a progressive decline in TD over the 4 quarters of match play, high-intensity running performance (i.e., HIR and high-intensity acceleration) was maintained throughout the match regardless of playing position.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207