Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
ISSN: 1303 - 2968   
Ios-APP Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Androit-APP Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
from September 2014
©Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2011) 10, 346 - 354

Research article
Assessing Inter-Effort Recovery and Change of Direction Ability with the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test
Bachar Haydar1, Hani Al Haddad1,2, Said Ahmaidi1, Martin Buchheit1,2, 
Author Information
1 EA-3300: Laboratory of Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Picardie, Jules Verne, Amiens, France
2 Physiology Unit, Sport Science Department, Aspire, Academy for Sports Excellence, Doha, Qatar

Martin Buchheit
✉ Research Laboratory, EA 3300 «Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation», Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Picardie, Jules Verne, F-80025, Amiens, France
Publish Date
Received: 10-09-2010
Accepted: 07-03-2011
Published (online): 01-06-2011
Share this article

The aim of the present study was to propose a new and simple field assessment of inter-effort recovery and change of direction (COD) ability based on performance during the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test (30-15IFT, an intermittent, incremental shuttle-run test) using three different protocols. Forty team-sport players (22 ± 2 years) performed either (group A; n = 16) the original 30-15IFT and two modified versions, one without a rest period (i.e. continuous run, 30-15IFT-CONT) and one without COD (30-15IFT-LINE), or (group B; n = 24) the original 30-15IFT and a modified version with more COD (28-m shuttle instead of 40-m, 30- 15IFT-28m). Heart rate (HR), blood lactate concentration ([La]b), rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and maximal running speed were recorded for all tests. There was no statistical difference in either maximal HR (A: p = 0.07 and B: p = 0.94) or RPE (A: p = 0.10 and B: p = 0.97) between tests. Compared with the 30-15IFT (12.3 ± 2.5, p < 0.01) and 30-15IFT-LINE (11.3 ± 2.6, p = 0.07, ES = 0.61), [La]b was lower for 30-15IFT-CONT (9.6 ± 3.3 mmol.L-1). Compared with 30-15IFT, maximal running speed was higher for 30-15IFT-LINE (103.1 ± 1.7%, p < 0.001) and lower for 30-15IFT-CONT (93.2 ± 1.4%, p < 0.001), while it was similar for 30-15IFT-28m (99.7 ± 3.6%, p = 0.62). Maximal speeds reached after the four tests were significantly but not perfectly correlated (r = 0.74 to 95, all p < 0.001). Present results show that differences in the maximal running speed reached following different versions of the 30-15IFT can be used by coaches to isolate and evaluate inter- effort recovery (i.e. 30-15IFT vs. 30-15IFT-CONT) and COD (i.e., 30-15IFT vs. 30-15IFT-LINE) abilities in the field. Additionally, COD ability as evaluated here appears to be independent of shuttle-length.

Key words: High-intensity running, agility, intermittent exercise, field test, HR/speed relationship

           Key Points
  • The comparison of the maximal running speed reached at the original 30-15 with these reached at two modified protocols (i.e., 30-15 and 30-15 ) enables a simple and field-based assess-ment of between-efforts recovery and COD abilities during high-intensity runs.
  • These data can be used by coaches to complete the physical profiling of each player, which could high-light the need for specific training interventions.
Home Issues About Authors
Contact Current Editorial board Authors instructions
Email alerts In Press Mission For Reviewers
Archive Scope
Supplements Statistics
Most Read Articles
  Most Cited Articles
JSSM | Copyright 2001-2020 | All rights reserved. | LEGAL NOTICES | Publisher

It is forbidden the total or partial reproduction of this web site and the published materials, the treatment of its database, any kind of transition and for any means, either electronic, mechanic or other methods, without the previous written permission of the JSSM.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.