Environmental associations with heart-rate responses during field-based submaximal fitness testing in female football players: an exploratory multi-centre study
Shushan T, Lovell R, McLaren SJ, Buchheit M. Environmental associations with heart-rate responses during field-based submaximal fitness testing in female football players: an exploratory multi-centre study. Science and Medicine in Football. 2026. doi:10.1080/24733938.2026.2747385
Same answer, 10 years later: ~1% HR per 10°C.
At PSG, more than 10 years ago, we collected HR during submaximal runs on the fly, with a very simple analysis. Our finding: exercise HR was ~1% higher for every 10°C. These data are shown in the 20-years review.
Now, with Tzlil Shushan, Ric Lovell and Shaun McLaren, we took it to another level. 84 female players, 3 Australian NPL clubs, 971 tests, mixed models, the full package (huge credit to Tzlil for leading this).
The answer? ~1 percentage point higher HRex per 10°C of wet-bulb temperature (90% CI: 0.1 to 1.9).
Different sex, different country, different stats. Same number!
So was the heavy stats worth it? Yes, but not for the average. What our rigorous analysis shows, and our simple one could not, is that individual player responses (SD 2.2 points) and day-to-day noise (SD 2.0 points) are about twice as large as the average effect itself. In real words for practitioners: temperature matters at group level, but a fixed “1% correction” will not fit every player.
And it stays observational: an association, not proof that heat causes the HR change.
Grateful for the journey. We keep working on the other contextual factors (load, recovery, hydration, menstrual cycle…) to make better use of these tests.
Long live the submaximal test!
#SubmaximalTest #HeartRate #WomensFootball #SportScience #Monitoring
