Gender Differences in Anaerobic and Aerobic Responses to a Full Season of NCAA Division 1 Ice Hockey
Introduction Ice hockey is a physiologically demanding sport that requires aerobic and anaerobic fitness. Very little research exists comparing male and female athletes who compete in this sport. This comparative study examined the impact of a full season on aerobic fitness, anaerobic power, and fatigue in highly trained male and female hockey players. Methods A total of 29 (15 men, 14 women) NCAA Division 1 hockey players were included in the study. Differences and seasonal changes in aerobic fitness, anaerobic power, and fatigue as determined by preseason and postseason testing were assessed using a standardized graded exercise test and Wingate Anaerobic Tests (WAnT). Results Maximal oxygen uptake did not differ between the pre- and post-season in either gender ( p > 0.05). However, men had significantly higher maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max) at both time points ( p < 0.05). WAnT-derived relative mean power (W/kg), relative peak power (W/kg), and fatigue index (%) were not significantly different between pre- and post-season for either gender ( p > 0.05). Men demonstrated a significantly higher RMP than women ( p < 0.05) in both pre- and post-season data, but no differences were observed between genders in Relative Peak Power (RPP) ( p = 0.791) or FI ( p = 0.250). Discussion Despite data supporting changes over a season in other sports, a season of ice hockey did not elicit changes in aerobic or anaerobic fitness in both groups. However, data does support that when athletes are exposed to similar environments, gender differences are minimal. Conclusion Coaches may employ similar strategies when approaching different genders participating in the same sport.
Institutions
- University of St. Thomas - Minnesota (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- The Open Sports Sciences Journal
- Published
- 2025-11-19
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.2174/011875399x401142251112064317
- Primary Topic
- Sports Performance and Training
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- University of St. Thomas