4.4 Article

BALL-SPORT ENDURANCE AND SPRINT TEST (BEAST90): VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF A 90-MINUTE SOCCER PERFORMANCE TEST

Journal

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
Volume 24, Issue 12, Pages 3209-3218

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181bac356

Keywords

football; soccer protocol; intermittent

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Williams, JD, Abt, G, and Kilding, AE. Ball-sport endurance and sprint test (BEAST(90)): validity and reliability of a 90-minute soccer performance test. J Strength Cond Res 24(12): 3209-3218, 2010-The aim of this study was to determine the validity and reliability of a 90-minute soccer performance test: Ball-sport Endurance and Sprint Test (BEAST(90)). Fifteen healthy male amateur soccer players participated and attended 5 testing sessions over a 10-day period to perform physiologic and soccer-specific assessments. This included familiarization sessions and 2 full trials of the BEAST(90), separated by 7 days. The total 90-minute distance, mean percent peak heart rate (HRpeak), and estimated percent peak oxygen uptake of the BEAST(90) were 8,097 +/- 458 m, 85 +/- 5% and 82 +/- 14%, respectively. Measures obtained from trial 1 and trial 2 were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Reliability of measures over 90 minutes ranged from 0.9-25.5% (% typical error). The BEAST(90) protocol replicated soccer match play in terms of time, movement patterns, physical demands (volume and intensity), distances, and mean and HRpeak values, as well as having an aerobic load similar to that observed during a soccer match. Reproducibility of key physical measures during the BEAST(90) were mostly high, suggesting good reliability. The BEAST(90) could be used in studies that wish to determine the effects of training or nutritional interventions on prolonged intermittent physical performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available