rss
Br J Sports Med 2008;42:146-151 doi:10.1136/bjsm.2007.036426
  • Original article

Quantification of the physiological and performance characteristics of on-court tennis drills

  1. M Reid1,5,
  2. R Duffield2,
  3. B Dawson1,
  4. J Baker3,
  5. M Crespo4
  1. 1
    University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  2. 2
    Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, New South Wales, Australia
  3. 3
    Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
  4. 4
    International Tennis Federation, London, UK
  5. 5
    Tennis Australia, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  1. Machar Reid, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; mmreid{at}cyllene.uwa.edu.au
  • Received 18 February 2007
  • Revised 4 July 2007
  • Accepted 23 July 2007
  • Published Online First 6 August 2007

Abstract

Objective: To determine the physiological responses and stroke characteristics of common on-court tennis training drills.

Methods: Six high-performance players performed 1×6 repetitions of four common on-court training drills on two separate occasions; once with 30:30 seconds work:rest, and once with 60:30 seconds work:rest. Heart rate (HR), blood lactate [La], distance covered by the player (GPS) and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured before the start of each drill and after the first and last repetition. Measures of shot count and accuracy and post-impact ball velocity per drill were also recorded.

Results: Significant differences were observed between drills in measures of [La] and RPE both during ([La] 2.1–4.4 mmol/l; RPE 2.6–5.1) and after ([La] 4.4–10.6 mmol/l; RPE 4.3–7.6) drills, yet individual HR responses (160–182 beats/minute) were similar. Increased work times (60 v 30 seconds) also produced consistently raised [La] and RPE responses, yet players’ average movement velocities and forehand ball speed and accuracy remained consistent. Significant decreases in forehand ball speed and accuracy were observed during higher-intensity training drills, whereas significantly lower mean movement velocities underpinned performance of less intensive drills.

Conclusions: The four drills produced physiological responses that reflect previously reported normal or maximal matchplay demands. These results point to the adaptations possible with adjustment of training drill type and load specific to matchplay demands or training phase.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.