A study published in Biology of Sport reveals that elite youth football players do not fully recover their muscle strength even 72 hours after a match.
FSI Lab Team · @fsitraining_
April 15, 2025
7 minutes
The research was led by Fábio Nakamura, director of the FSI Lab, with contributions from Lúcio Cunha and Ricardo Pimenta.
The research you’re about to explore takes an in-depth look at post-match fatigue and provides key data to help rethink weekly training planning.
Remember, the full article is open access. You can download it using this link.
The team evaluated 73 high-level players from the U19 and U23 categories of Portuguese football. They used a very specific and reliable test: the Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull (IMTP)—an exercise that measures the maximum force a player can generate in a position similar to that of an explosive movement.
The Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull (IMTP) is a test that measures how much maximum force a player can generate by pushing against a fixed bar without moving. It’s performed standing, with the bar positioned at thigh height—in a posture similar to that of a jump or a sprint.
It’s a quick, low-impact test, ideal for detecting fatigue or assessing muscle status without interfering with training. It’s also closely linked to performance in key actions such as sprinting or changing direction.
The players were divided into two groups:
Experimental group: players who played more than 60 minutes.
Control group: players who did not participate in the match.
Their force-generating capacity was measured before the match (in a “fresh” state), and again at 48 and 72 hours post-match.
At 48 hours post-match, players who had played more than 60 minutes showed an 8.1% decrease in their peak force.
At 72 hours, the loss was still 6.2%, meaning they had not fully recovered.
Surprisingly, even the players who did not play showed an 8.2% drop in force at 72 hours—suggesting that post-match compensatory training sessions may also contribute to accumulated fatigue.
No significant differences were observed between the 48h and 72h measurements, indicating that recovery plateaus between those time points.
In addition, there was no direct relationship between external (GPS) or internal (RPE) load and the loss of force, suggesting that these data alone do not fully explain the neuromuscular impact of a match.
This study clearly shows that 48 hours are not enough to restore force production capacity after a demanding match. Even at 72 hours post-match, many players are still far from their baseline levels.
This challenges many traditional training plans, where MD+2 or even MD+3 are considered “safe” days for medium or high loads. At least in young players, that assumption may not hold true.
This isometric test, which can be performed quickly and without impact, has proven to be sensitive to the effects of fatigue and muscle damage. It can serve as a solid alternative to assess players’ neuromuscular readiness throughout the microcycle—especially when you want to avoid interfering with overall training load.
One of the most striking findings is that players who did not participate in the match but trained in compensatory sessions also experienced a drop in muscle strength. This suggests that some of these sessions, although shorter, can be relatively intense—involving accelerations, decelerations, and changes of direction in a short time frame.
This insight may help coaches rethink how non-starters’ sessions are designed, and whether they truly serve their purpose without compromising recovery ahead of the following training sessions.
Individualize whenever possible The data show a high degree of variability between players. Not everyone recovers at the same pace or responds equally to the same load.
Look beyond GPS data External and internal load metrics are still useful—but they don’t tell the whole story. Tools like the IMTP, or even certain jump tests, can add a valuable layer of insight.
Reassess training load distribution across the microcycle If signs of fatigue are still present at 72 hours, certain stimuli—such as eccentric work or high-speed drills—may need to be delayed or adjusted.
Be cautious with MD+2 training Although it’s usually light, MD+2 still falls within the recovery window. Pushing too hard at that point may increase the risk of injury or slow down the athlete’s progress.
This work has been accepted by Biology of Sport, one of the most prestigious journals in sports science. The fact that a study led by researchers from the FSI Lab has reached this level reinforces FSI Training’s commitment to producing useful, evidence-based knowledge that is directly connected to everyday practice in clubs.
If you work with young players or are involved in weekly training planning, this article offers strong reasons to rethink when, how, and how intensely you train after a match.
Want to Stay Updated on the Latest News?
Stay informed about everything happening in the FSI Training ecosystem by subscribing to our newsletter and following us on social media.
