%0 Journal Article
%T Comparative Analysis of Training Loads among New Basketball Players in Anhui University of Chinese Medicine
%A Tao Liu
%J Advances in Physical Education
%P 149-175
%@ 2164-0408
%D 2024
%I Scientific Research Publishing
%R 10.4236/ape.2024.144011
%X The study comprehensively investigates the analysis of training loads among new basketball players in Anhui University of Chine Medicine. The research encompasses a detailed analysis of players’ profiles, including age, length of service as players, and current playing positions. These profiles formed the basis for initial testing to establish baseline data on the athletes’ physical and technical abilities. The study’s focus was on the periodization of training loads over a two-month span, comparing the performance of athletes following a standard training regimen (control group) and those subject to a specialized training program (experimental group). Data were meticulously gathered through training logs, monitoring of training loads, and evaluation of performance outcomes using both objective measures (such as running times and jumping heights) and technical skills assessments (accuracy of throws and free throws). The research was designed to culminate in final testing, which mirrored initial testing to measure progress and the effects of the training loads. This allowed for robust correlation and analysis to inform the development of a unified system of training loads for new basketball athletes. While the study aims to be comprehensive, it is delimited to new basketball athletes within a specified age and experience range, potentially limiting the findings’ applicability to more seasoned players or those outside of this demographic. The research was conducted within a fixed timeframe of two months, which may not capture the long-term effects of the training loads. The study is also geographically delimited, with participants drawn only from Anhui University of Chinese Medicine Basketball Team, which may influence the training facilities and competition levels. The research design does not cover the entirety of possible training methodologies but focuses on a structured program with predefined macrocycles and microcycles. Furthermore, the scope is limited to physical and technical performance outcomes, without an extensive exploration of psychological or social factors that may influence an athlete’s response to training. The delimitation explicitly excludes these factors, which could be considered in future research to provide a more holistic understanding of training loads’ effects on new basketball athletes. Result reveals that the average age of players in the experimental group was 18.4, while 18.3 in the control group. Meanwhile, the average length of service of both experimental and control groups was 2
%K Training Loads
%K Basketball Players
%K Physical Preparedness
%K Technical Preparedness
%U http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=136630