📄 medicine

Effects of 8-Week Recreational Basketball and Soccer Training on Physical Fitness, Body Composition, and Psychological Responses in Untrained Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

This randomized controlled trial demonstrates that an 8-week recreational small-sided game program in either soccer or basketball is equally effective in significantly improving physical fitness, body composition, and psychological responses in untrained young adults compared to a control group.

Original authors: Yu Li, Xinjie Han, Guodong Zheng, Haitian Li, Shu Wen

Published 2026-08-13

📖 4 min read☕ Coffee break read

CC BY 4.0

Original authors: Yu Li, Xinjie Han, Guodong Zheng, Haitian Li, Shu Wen

Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). ✨ This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer

Imagine your body as a high-performance vehicle that has been sitting in a garage for too long. The engine is a bit rusty, the tires are flat, and the driver (you) feels a bit sluggish. For decades, scientists and coaches have tried to get this vehicle running again using strict, repetitive drills: running in circles on a track or lifting heavy weights in a quiet room. While these "structured exercises" work, they often feel like a chore. The driver gets bored, the engine sputters, and the car ends up back in the garage. This is a major problem for public health because when people don't enjoy their workout, they stop doing it.

Enter the world of "recreational team sports." Think of these not as drills, but as a chaotic, fun traffic jam where you have to dodge, sprint, and change direction constantly. Two of the most popular games in this traffic jam are soccer and basketball. Both games are like a full-body workout disguised as play. They force your heart to race, your muscles to fire quickly, and your brain to make split-second decisions. The big question scientists have been asking is: If you want to get fit without the boredom of a gym, does it matter if you choose the soccer field or the basketball court? Is one game a better "tune-up" for your body than the other, or are they both equally good at turning that rusty car into a speed machine?

This study decided to settle the debate by turning 45 untrained young adults into a real-life experiment. The researchers split these participants into three groups. One group played small-sided soccer (3v3 or 4v4), another played small-sided basketball (also 3v3 or 4v4), and the third group was the "control group"—they just went about their normal lives without any new exercise. Everyone in the sports groups played three times a week for eight weeks. The scientists measured everything from how much they weighed and how much muscle they had, to how strong their legs were, how fast their hearts could pump, and how quickly they could sprint. They also asked the players how much fun they were having and how hard the games felt.

The results were a clear victory for the games. After eight weeks, both the soccer players and the basketball players saw massive improvements, while the control group saw almost nothing. The soccer group lost about 2.8% of their body weight and the basketball group lost 2.7%. Their body mass index (BMI) dropped by the same amounts. But it wasn't just about getting lighter; they got stronger and faster, too. The soccer players increased their squat strength by 7.4%, and the basketball players by 6.9%. When it came to cardio, both groups saw their maximum oxygen uptake (a measure of how well your body uses air) jump by about 10%. They also got significantly better at sprinting repeatedly without getting tired.

Here is the most exciting part: the two sports were essentially twins in terms of results. The study found no significant difference between the soccer group and the basketball group. Whether you were kicking a ball or dribbling one, your body got the same amazing upgrade. The only real differences were in how the players felt during the training. The basketball players felt like they were working harder right at the start of the program, while the soccer players felt like they had to use more mental energy and focus as the weeks went on. However, both groups reported high levels of enjoyment throughout the entire eight weeks.

The researchers concluded that you don't need to pick a "winner" between soccer and basketball to get fit. Both are equally powerful tools for transforming an untrained, sedentary person into someone with better strength, speed, and heart health. The secret sauce isn't the specific sport, but the "small-sided game" format itself—playing in smaller groups on smaller fields keeps the action constant and the intensity high. The study suggests that if you want to get fit and actually look forward to it, you can pick whichever game you like more, because your body will thank you either way. The only thing the study couldn't tell us is if these changes last forever, since they only watched the players for eight weeks, but for a short burst of time, both games proved to be a perfect recipe for a healthier, happier body.

Technical Summary: Effects of 8-Week Recreational Basketball and Soccer Training on Untrained Adults

Problem Statement
Physical inactivity and sedentary behavior are established global public health risks associated with obesity, cardiovascular disease, metabolic dysfunction, and poor mental health. While traditional exercise interventions (e.g., continuous aerobic training and resistance programs) are physiologically effective, long-term adherence among sedentary and untrained individuals remains low due to barriers such as low motivation, monotony, and perceived excessive exertion. Although recreational team sports like soccer and basketball are recognized as promising alternatives that integrate physical activity with social interaction and enjoyment, direct comparisons between these two modalities in untrained adults are scarce. Specifically, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing their comparative effects on comprehensive physical fitness, body composition, and psychological responses.

Methodology
This study employed a parallel-group randomized controlled trial design involving 45 untrained young adults (mean age: 19.82 ± 0.61 years). Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three groups:

Soccer Small-Sided Games (SSG): $n=15$ .
Basketball Small-Sided Games (BSG): $n=15$ .
Control Group (CG): $n=15$ (no specific training regimen).

Intervention Protocol:

Duration: 8 weeks.
Frequency: 3 sessions per week, separated by at least 48 hours.
Structure: Both training groups utilized alternating 3v3 and 4v4 formats.
- SSG: Played on a 20m × 15m artificial turf. 3v3 matches consisted of four 5-minute bouts; 4v4 matches consisted of two 10-minute halves.
- BSG: Played on a standard half-court. 3v3 matches consisted of four 5-minute quarters; 4v4 matches consisted of two 10-minute halves. A 15-second shot clock was enforced to maintain intensity.
Preparation: All participants completed an 8-session technical skills phase prior to the intervention.
Monitoring: Training load was monitored via Polar H10 heart rate monitors, Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES-S), and the Rating Scale for Mental Effort (RSME).

Outcome Measures:
Assessments were conducted one week before and one week after the intervention:

Body Composition: Body mass, BMI, and Lean Body Mass (calculated via the Hume formula).
Muscular Strength: One-repetition maximum (1RM) squat.
Cardiorespiratory Fitness: 20-meter multistage fitness test (20 m MFT) to estimate VO₂max.
Repeated Sprint Ability (RSA): Running-based Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST) measuring peak power, mean power, and fatigue index.
Psychological: Exercise enjoyment, perceived exertion, and mental effort.

Key Results

Physical Fitness: Both SSG and BSG groups demonstrated significant improvements compared to the Control Group (CG) across all metrics ( $p < 0.001$ $p < 0.001$ ).
- Body Composition: SSG reduced BMI by 2.8% and BSG by 2.7%. Lean body mass decreased slightly in both groups (-1.9% and -1.8%, respectively), while body mass decreased similarly.
- Strength: 1RM squat increased by 7.4% (SSG) and 6.9% (BSG).
- Endurance: 20 m MFT distance improved by 19.8% (SSG) and 20.5% (BSG), corresponding to VO₂max increases of 10.0% and 10.3%.
- Sprint Ability: Both groups showed significant gains in peak power, mean power, and fatigue index compared to CG.
Comparative Efficacy: There were no significant differences between the SSG and BSG groups for any physical fitness or body composition outcome ( $p > 0.05$ ). Both interventions were equally effective.
Psychological Responses: Exercise enjoyment remained high and stable in both groups throughout the study. However, differential patterns were observed in perceived exertion: the BSG group reported higher initial perceived exertion (Week 1), while the SSG group reported higher perceived exertion in later weeks (Weeks 6 and 7). Soccer training also required greater mental effort in later stages, potentially due to tactical complexity.
Control Group: The CG showed no significant changes in any measured variable ( $p > 0.05$ ).

Significance and Claims
The study concludes that recreational basketball and soccer small-sided games are equally effective interventions for improving body composition, muscular strength, cardiorespiratory fitness, and repeated sprint ability in untrained young adults. The authors posit that the physiological adaptations are driven by the intermittent high-intensity structure inherent to small-sided games (characterized by accelerations, decelerations, and multidirectional movements) rather than sport-specific skills.

The paper claims that these modalities offer a "time-efficient and engaging" approach to reducing physical inactivity. The sustained high levels of exercise enjoyment support the feasibility of these sports as public health tools to overcome barriers to adherence, such as monotony and low motivation. The findings suggest that community health programs can flexibly prescribe either sport based on individual preference without compromising physiological outcomes.

Limitations
The authors note several limitations: the 8-week duration limits assessment of long-term sustainability; dietary intake and unstructured physical activity were not rigorously controlled; and the sample consisted solely of young college students, limiting generalizability to older, overweight, or clinical populations.

Technical Summary: Effects of 8-Week Recreational Basketball and Soccer Training on Untrained Adults

More like this