Speed Endurance Improvement through Long Interval and Short
Interval Methods
Rizki Mubaraq, Nina Sutresna and Boyke Mulyana
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jln. Dr. Setiabudhi No. 229, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: Speed Endurance, Long Interval, Short Interval.
Abstract: This study was conducted to reveal the increased endurance speed required in football through the practice of
Long Interval and Short Interval by performing the interval run according to the characteristics of each
method. It was performed in 16 times. The exercises performed after the initial test and the final test upon the
completion of all treatment. The research method in this research is experimental method by using pre-test
post-test two treatment design. This treatment was done by 20 U-19 Diklat Persib athletes. The instrument of
the study was 150 M running test. The result showed that there is some improvements as the result of the
implementation of both methods. From the average score, it was identified that Short Interval method
outperformed the long Interval method. However, the paired t test showed that there were no improvements
as a result of the implementation of both methods. The result from the paired t test demonstrated that the
critical values for Long Interval and Short Interval are 6.357 and 8.524. It clearly showed that the post test
score is lower than the pre-test score. This implies that long interval does not significantly affect speed
endurance. Based on the results of the data it is concluded that there is no significant improvement between
Long Interval and Short Interval training methods.
1 INTRODUCTION
Physical performance plays an important role in
modern football, as different studies have reported an
increase in distance travelled at high-intensity during
matches and have shown that these parameters are
related to competition standards (Bangsbo et al.,
1991; Mohr, 2016; Bradley et al, 2009). Football is an
open-skill interval activity, with intensity of practice
that varies from low-intensity runs and runs to an all-
out sprint and jump (Tessitore, 2005). The aerobic
contribution in football reaches 90%, although the
anaerobic contribution also has a very important role
(Bangso, 1994). One unique in football is combining
aerobic and anaerobic training, speed endurance
training is one form of training (Richard, 2017).
One of the exercises that can combine aerobic
and anaerobic systems is speed endurance exercise,
the exercise is a short duration of 10-30 seconds (Iaia,
2015). Speed endurance is the ability to maintain
speed for 10-20 seconds repetitively with high
intensity, such as in American football, baseball,
basketball, rugby, soccer and ice hockey (Bompa,
2015). High intensity training is very important for
competitive football and sports team athletes (Mohr,
2016). All players with any position must have
excellent speed and can work with high intensity,
every position in football has its own working
characteristics most of each position from midfielders
and back players working with high intensity (Iaia,
2009). Speed endurance is the ability to maintain the
highest speed in the most distant distance (Steinbach,
1999). Speed endurance exercises provides a
challenge to an anaerobic energy system that must
provide energy to the body by maintaining a high
intensity of exercise in some time, and aerobic energy
systems aid in its recovery at this high intensity
(Richard, 2017)
One of the most applicable training methods for
endurance training is the interval training method.
One of the advantages of this method is the ability to
increase aerobic and anaerobic skill at the same time
(Billat, 2001). Interval training is one of the most
popular methods used by athletes to improve the
physiological and fitness of specific variables (Huang
et al., 2016). Impellizzeri et al. (2006) explains
interval training and small side games will increase
the stamina of football players. Interval training is a
method that is done by running - break - run - break
Interval training involves repeating exercise attacks
Mubaraq, R., Sutresna, N. and Mulyana, B.
Speed Endurance Improvement through Long Interval and Shor t Interval Methods.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education (ICSSHPE 2017) - Volume 2, pages 253-256
ISBN: 978-989-758-317-9
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
253

interspersed by the recovery period. Interval training
consists of repeated run and rest repetition (Babu and
Kumar, (2014).Interval training method is a very
heavy training method because the intensity used is
high so that the athlete's condition must be fully ready
so that the result from the application of this method
becomes influential significantly (Sidik, 2011).
During individual training interval sessions perform
activities at relatively high intensities, within a certain
timeframe and for the number of repetitions (Sindiani
et al., 2017). The interval method to consider is the
distance or time taken, the speed or effort performed,
the number of repetitions of the working interval, the
distance or the time of recovery and the type of
recovery activity. HIT require 90 to 100% working
period on VO2 max (VO2max).
Of the many types of interval training methods
there are 2 methods that will be the focus of the study;
long interval training and short interval training. Long
interval training is accompanied by the following
characteristics: duration of work: 2-5 minutes, work
intensity: 85-90% best performance standard,
duration of recovery period: 2-8 minutes, work
recovery ratio: 1: 1 to 1: 2, repetition: 3-12.
Characteristics of short interval training are: duration
of work: 5-30 seconds, work intensity: 95 +% best
performance standard, duration of recovery period:
15-150 sec, working recovery ratio: 1: 3 to 1: 5,
repetition: 5-20 (Rushall and Pyke, 1990).
Based on the above explanation it can be
concluded that the difference between the long
interval and short interval methods lies in the setting
of the length of the exercise, the intensity, the number
of reps performed as well as the difference in the rest.
Both methods are basically intended to practice speed
endurance.
The objectives of the study are: 1) To find out if
Long Interval Training gives significant effect on
speed endurance improvement, 2) To find out if short
interval training gives significant effect on speed
endurance improvement, 3) To reveal the significant
differences between Long Interval and Short Interval
method on the speed endurance improvement.
2 METHODS
The method used in this study was experimental
design. The design relevant to the method was the
pre-test post-test two treatment design. The design
involved two groups of interval training method.
Group 1 used long Interval method and Group 2 used
short interval method. Pertest and Post-test were
administered to both groups. The sample was 20
Diklat Persib U-19 players. The main instrument for
the data collection was 150 meter Speed Endurance
Test Sprint.
3 RESULTS
The following table 1 describes the result of 150 M ru
test for long interval and short interval group.
Table 1: Long Interval Method Test Result.
Pretest
Long interval
Posttest
Long Interval
N
Valid
10
10
Missing
10
10
Mean
22.5920
21.0020
Std. Deviation
1.09278
.73956
Minimum
20,75
19.46
Maximum
24.73
21.82
Based on the table 2, the mean of pre-test of Long
Interval Method is 22.5920 and post-test is 21.0020.
Table 2: Short Interval Method Result.
Pretest
Short Interval
Posttest
Short Interval
N
Valid
10
10
Missing
10
10
Mean
22.5230
20.7380
Std. Deviation
.093388
.74462
Minimum
21.08
19.44
Maximum
23.90
21.93
Based on the table, it was found out that mean of
pre-test on Short Interval is 22.5230 and the post test
is 20.7380. Hypothesis testing:
 The probability or Sig (2-tailed) is 0,000 is
lower than 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05), therefore, it can
be concluded that Ho was rejected that implies
there is significant difference of mean before
and after Long Interval Method
implementation;
 The probability or Sig (2-tailed) is 0,000 is
lower than 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05), therefore, it can
be concluded that Ho was rejected that implies
there is significant difference of mean before
and after short Interval Method
implementation;
 The value for Long Interval is -0.598 and t
critical for 95% significance level and df= 9 the
observed value is 2.26 The observed value is
lower than the critical value (-0.598<2.26) and
P value (0,557 > 0,05) meaning that Ho was
accepted. It means that there is no significant
difference between Long Interval and short
interval method score.
ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education
254

4 DISCUSSION
Based on the results of the research described above,
there is an increase in endurance speed in both
training methods. But judging from the average
increase, the method of Short Interval is higher
compared to Long Interval. There is an increase as
many as 20.7380 points in short interval on the post
test, on the other hand, in the Long Interval, the
increase is only 21.0020.
The result of data processing using SPSS 23
shows that group B using Short Interval practice
method is more increased compared to group A using
Long Interval method in terms of endurance speed.
This is consistent with field experience which shows
that in practice using the Short Interval method will
force athletes to work with a very high intensity,
measurable and structured on duration and recovery
as well.
Short interval method is a quick method of
training that can be used in a team game context
(Rushall and Pyke, 1990). It is consistent with the
context of this study using a football team. This
exercise is an anaerobic exercise, especially an
alactacid energy source whose work is short,
anaerobic here is the speed endurance itself (Rushall
and Pyke, 1990).
The main exercise of this work is the aerobic
system even though at the end of the repetition the
anaerobic energy system is also trained in the practice
session of this method Long Interval (Rushall and
Pyke, 1990). In this type of exercise use two aerobic
and anaerobic energy systems with a 2-5 minutes
training time (Rushall and Pyke, 1990). in the Long
Interval method, the dominant one is the aerobic
energy system.
In the training sessions discussed in this study, on
the method of Short Interval and Long Interval
training distance, intensity and volume of the exercise
have been designed in accordance with the
characteristics of each method. In this study the
researchers apply the principle of individualization
that each player has a training program each person in
accordance with the ability of players viewed from
the initial test results. The coach will all way monitor
and instruct the players to practice optimally assisted
by 3 other coaches from Diklat Persib U19.
Judging from the improvement of the two
methods already mentioned above, the improvement
of both methods is not significant. However, the
method of Short Interval increase is greater than the
Long Interval method. Therefore, there is no
significant improvement between Long Interval and
Short Interval method on the speed endurance.
5 CONCLUSSIONS
Based on the results of data processing that did show
that the average method of Short Interval gives more
improvement than Long Interval method to the
durability of speed, but these two methods do not
provide significant improvement, therefore the
authors draw the conclusion that there is no
significant increase from the Long Interval and Short
Interval methods of speed endurance.
REFERENCES
Bangsbo, J., Norregaard, L., Thorsoe, F., 1991. Activity
profile of competition soccer. Canadian Journal of
Sports Sciences. 16, 110-116.
Babu, M. S., Kumar, P. P., 2014. Effect of continuous
running fartlek and interval training on speed and
coordination among male soccer players. Journal of
Physical Education. 1(1), 33-41.
Bompa, T. B., 2015. Periodization Training For Sports,
Human Kinetics. United Kingdom,
3rd
Edition.
Bradley, P. S., Sheldon, W., Wooster, B., Olsen, P., Boanas,
P., Krustrup, P., 2009. High-intensity running in
English FA Premier League soccer matches. Journal of
Sports Sciences. 27, 159-168.
Billat, L. V., 2001. Interval training for performance: a
scientific and empirical practice. Sports Medicine.
31(1), 13-31.
Huang, G., Wang, R., Chen, P., Huang, S. C., Donnelly, J.
E., Mehlferber, J. P., 2016. Dose-response relationship
of cardiorespiratory fitness adaptation to controlled
endurance training in sedentary older adults. European
Journal of Preventive Cardiology. 23(5), 518–529.
Iaia, F. M., 2015. The Effect of Two Speed Endurance
Training Regimens on Performance of Soccer Players.
PLOS ONE, 2.
Iaia, F. M., 2009. High-Intensity Training in Football.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and
Performance. 292.
Impellizzeri, F. M., Marcora, S. M., Castagna, C., Reilly,
T., Sassi, A., Iaia, F. M., Rampinini, E., 2006.
Physiological and performance effects of generic
versus specific aerobic training in soccer players.
International Journal of Sports Medicine. 27, 483-492.
Mohr, M., 2016. Comparison between Two Types of
Anaerobic Speed Endurance. Journal of Human
Kinetics. 183-184.
Mohr, M., 2016. Comparison between two types of
anaerobic speed endurance training in competitive
soccer players. Journal of Human Kinetics. 1.
Richard, 2017. Speed Endurance Training. The BEST Way
to Train for Soccer-Specific Fitness. 1.
Rushall, B., Pyke, F. S., 1990. Training for sports and
fitness, Macmillan Education, 350. South Melbourne.
Sidik, D., 2011. Manfaat Pelatihan Harness: Manfaat
pelatihan Harness dalam Meningkatkan Kemampuan
Speed Endurance Improvement through Long Interval and Short Interval Methods
255

Fisik Anaerob dan Aerob, Diambil kembali dari
dizas424starperformance:
http://dizas424starperformance.blogspot.com//
Sindiani, M., Eliakim, A., Segev, D., Meckel, Y., 2017. The
effect of two different interval-training programmes on
physiological and performance indices. European
Journal of Sport Science. 1-8.
Tessitore, A., Meeusen, R., Tiberi, M., Cortis, C., Pagano,
R., Capranica, L., 2005. Aerobic and anaerobic profiles,
heart rate and match analysis in older soccer players.
Ergonomics. 48 (11-14), 1365-1377.
ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education
256