O tão conhecido sided-small game, em bom e velho português – Jogos em Espaços Reduzidos, é uma excelente estratégia para o desenvolvimento técnico e tático de praticantes de jogos desportivos coletivos, especialmente os de invasão. Há alguns problemas com esta metodologia, mas isto é papo para outro post.
Acaba de sair artigo comparando 2×2; 3×3 e 4×4. Nele, observaram que 3×3 parece ser uma das melhores combinações para o treinamento aeróbio. #fikadica.
Physical Responses of Different Small-Sided Game Formats in Elite Youth Soccer Players
Brandes, Mirko; Heitmann, Anke; Müller, Lutz
Brandes, M, Heitmann, A, and Muller, L. Physical responses of different small-sided game formats in elite youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2011-A major use of small-sided games (SSGs) in soccer training is the concomitant development of game-specific aerobic fitness. We hypothesize that the SSG formats of 2 vs. 2, 3 vs. 3, and 4 vs. 4 players reveal game-like intensities and therefore are most adequate to increase game-specific aerobic fitness. Heart rate (HR), percentage of maximum heart rate (HRmax), blood lactate concentration (La), and time-motion characteristics of 17 elite male youth soccer players (aged 14.9 +/- 0.7 years, [latin capital V with dot above]O2max 61.4 +/- 4.5 ml[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]min-1, HRmax 199.6 +/- 7.3 b[middle dot]min-1) were collected by global positioning systems while performing the SSG formats. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and effect sizes were calculated to demonstrate the differences between SSG formats. Highest physiological responses were obtained in 2 vs. 2 (HR: 186 +/- 7 b[middle dot]min-1, HRmax: 93.3 +/- 4.2%, La: 5.5 +/- 2.4 mmol[middle dot]L-1) followed by 3 vs. 3 (HR: 184 +/- 8 b[middle dot]min-1, HRmax: 91.5 +/- 3.3%, La: 4.3 +/- 1.7 mmol[middle dot]L-1) and 4 vs. 4 (HR: 179 +/- 7 b[middle dot]min-1, HRmax 89.7 +/- 3.4%, La: 4.4 +/- 1.9 mmol[middle dot]L-1). Pronounced differences were found for most physiological parameters and for time spent in the speed zones “walking” (<5.3 km[middle dot]h-1), “moderate-speed running” (10.3-13.9 km[middle dot]h-1), and “maximum sprinting” (>=26.8 km[middle dot]h-1). The findings suggest that all the formats reveal game-like intensities and are suitable for aerobic fitness improvements. However, we found pronounced demands on the anaerobic energy supply in 2 vs. 2, whereas 3 vs. 3 and 4 vs. 4 remain predominantly on an aerobic level and differ mainly in the HR response. We suggest using 3 vs. 3 for soccer-specific aerobic fitness training.