Positional and between quarter differences in physical demands of elite female field hockey players during international matches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The main aims of this study were to examine whether there are positional- and between-quarter differences in the physical load of elite female field hockey players during international matches. Methods: Twenty-three international female field hockey players were equipped with Global Positioning Systems devices, while competing over nine international matches. Results: Players covered a mean relative distance, relative player load, and distance covered in the form of low-, moderate-, and high intensity activities of 107.5 m/min, 10.3 AU/min, 41.6%, 47.9%, and 9.9%, respectively. Defenders achieved the lowest relative Player load (ES: 0.8-1.1) and greatest distance covered in the form of low intensity activities compared to Midfielders and Forwards (ES: 0.8-0.9). Forwards and Midfielders covered significantly greater distance in the form of high intensity activity compared to Defenders (ES: 1.6-2.2). Significant reductions in relative distance, relative Player load, and moderate intensity activity are observed for all positions between Quarters 1-4 despite the availability of unlimited substitutions. However, players were able to maintain their high intensity activity throughout the match with no significant differences between Quarters 1-4. The majority of variables were higher (ES > 0.2) during Quarter 2 compared to Quarter 3, especially for Midfielders and Defenders. Conclusions: Current findings provide further evidence on the positional- and between-quarter external match load of international female field hockey players that coaches should consider when designing training programs and drills to better prepare players for match demands. The results also provide some insight into the fatigue experienced by players and the possible pacing strategies they employ during matches. These findings support the need for re-warm-ups and may further influence how coaches time their substitutions to enhance running performance in future.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".