This study investigated acute training load responses and physical fitness performance to two differing rest-redistribution interval training protocols. Sixty-eight semi-professional male Australian Rules football players were allocated into rest-redistribution 6 (RR6; 2 sets of 6 repetitions of 100 m sprinting efforts, every 40 s, with 3 min passive recovery between sets) or rest-redistribution 12 (RR12; 12 sets of 1 repetition of 100 m sprinting efforts, every 55 s) for a six-week intervention period. Acute training load responses included mean repetition time; mean repetition decrement; mean heart rate and rating of perceived exertion. Physical fitness performance tests (2 km running time-trial, 20 m sprint, standing vertical jump, Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test two [Yo-Yo IRT2]), and sum of seven skinfolds were conducted pre- and post-intervention. During interval training, mean repetition decrement was significantly reduced in RR12 for repetitions 1-6 (p = 0.04), and 7-12 (p = 0.01) when compared to RR6. Only a within groups over time improvement in Yo-Yo IRT2 performance (p = 0.003) and sum of seven skinfolds (p = 0.001), was noted for physical fitness performance. These findings indicate that a rest redistribution with longer, more frequent rest periods enabled individuals to maintain a higher repetition speed for a longer duration.
© Copyright 2025 International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching. SAGE Publications. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.