ACCELEROMETER LOADS DURING BASKETBALL DRILLS IN PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS Torres-Ronda, L.1,2, Schelling, X.2 1Exercise and Sport Nutrition Lab, Department of Health and Kinesiology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA; 2Complex Systems in Sports Research Group (Spain) This poster template is from http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/posteradvice.htm. It is free, free, free for non-commercial use. If you really like it, I’m always thrilled to get postcards from wherever you happen to be presenting your poster. -- Colin Purrington, Department of Biology, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA 19081, USA. cpurrin1@swarthmore.edu Introduction There is a challenge in designing training drills to optimize simultaneously physical, specific skills and cognitive demands which reproduce game requirements, for a greater ecological validity (Reilly, Morris, & Whyte, 2009). High-sampling-rate (>100 Hz) accelerometers capable of detecting 3-dimensional movements (anterior–posterior, medial–lateral and vertical), have demonstrated excellent validity and reliability (Barrett, Midgley, & Lovell, 2014), allowing to quantify physical demands (external load) of both training and competition in team sports (Arruda, et al., 2015; Boyd, Ball, & Aughey, 2011; Cormack, Smith, Mooney, Young, & O'Brien, 2014; Montgomery, et al., 2010). Nevertheless, there is a paucity of data analyzing basketball drills using microtechnology such as accelerometers (Montgomery, et al., 2010; Scanlan, 2014). The purpose of this study was to quantify the workload during basketball-specific drills measured through microtechnology (i.e., accelerometers). Conclusions This study provides insight into the specific requirements of a range of exercises typically performed in basketball sessions. The use of accelerometer data is presented as a useful tool in assessing the workload of an indoor sport, such as basketball. Further, systematic monitoring of the physical demands during training would likely improve basketball drill classification and training periodization.   Confrontation Format (mean±SD) Court 2v2 (n = 22) 3v3 (n = 42) 4v4 5v5 Difference in means (%); ±90% CL Uncertainty in the true differences Full Court 14.6±2.8 18.7±4.1 13.8±2.5 17.9±4.6 a) -31.1; ±12.7 most likely b) 9.7; ±5.6 likely c) -29.3; ±10.6 d) 25.9; ±4.2 e) 4.2; ±6.2 possibly f) -29.5; ±7.3 (n = 40) (n = 16) (n = 30) Half Court 12.7±2.7 10.9±1.8 10.8±2.3 12.0±5.6 a) 15.9; ±13.7 b) 13.5; ±9.8 c) 9.4; ±10.0 d) 3.1; ±9.6 unclear e) -3.5; ±20.9 f) -7.0; ±15.8 Note: Differences in means (%; ±90% CL) are identified as: a) 2v2-3v3; b) 2v2-4v4; c) 2v2-5v5; d) 3v3-4v4; e) 3v3-5v5; f) 4v4-5v5. Materials and methods A convenience sample of twelve professional male basketball players (Spanish 1st Division) were monitored over a 4-week period, during 2013–2014 Spanish competitive basketball season. Basketball-drills data (i.e., 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, and 5v5) was collected from a 16 basketball-specific team-training sessions, where a total of 1139 training observations were analyzed, involving a total of 95 ± 33 drills (mean ± SD per player (range: 31 to 123). Workload data (Acceleration load; AL) was obtained from a tri-axial accelerometer at 100Hz sampling frequency, and were expressed over time (AL.min-1). Comparisons among training drills were assessed via standardized mean differences. Results Resutls showed that the higher values were identified when playing full-court 3v3 and 5v5 (AL: 18.7 ± 4.1 and 17.9 ± 4.6, respectively) compared with other traditional balanced basketball drills such as 2v2 and 4v4 (14.6±2.8 and 13.8±2.5, respectively). Acceleration load per minute on half court showed trivial/moderate differences with a likely increase of ~10-20% in 2v2 drill compared with any other formats. Literature related Arruda, A. F., Carling, C., Zanetti, V., Aoki, M. S., Coutts, A. J., & Moreira, A. (2015). Effects of a very congested match schedule on body-load impacts, accelerations, and running measures in youth soccer players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform, 10, 248-252. Barrett, S., Midgley, A., & Lovell, R. (2014). PlayerLoad: reliability, convergent validity, and influence of unit position during treadmill running. Int J Sports Physiol Perform, 9, 945-952. Montgomery, P. G., Pyne, D. B., & Minahan, C. L. (2010). The physical and physiological demands of basketball training and competition. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 5, 75-86. Reilly, T., Morris, T., & Whyte, G. (2009). The specificity of training prescription and physiological assessment: a review. J Sports Sci, 27, 575-589. Scanlan, A. T. (2014). The relationships between internal and external training load models during basketball training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Acknowledgments We would like to thank the technical staff and players for their collaboration. For further information Please contact to Lorena Torres lorenatorres07@yaho.es or on Twitter @lorenatorres07 Xavi Schelling ender80@hotmail.com or on Twitter @xschelling