My answer is very simple: hell yes<\/strong> we can. The real question is not can we<\/em>, but do they<\/em> actually need it?<\/em> Because improvement at this stage of the season is not about chasing numbers, but about understanding the football context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is a lot of noise today around running metrics. Is running volume an important KPI? How much does it really matter if one team covers 110 km and another 118?<\/p>\n\n\n\n As always, context wins. And to answer this properly, I love quoting Luka Modri\u0107, one of the best midfield players today. He said something like: \u201cFootball is played with the head. The<\/strong> physical part is important, but more important is where you run and how you read the<\/strong> game.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And that\u2019s the whole story. If your players read the game better than the opponent, you will simply run less, because you will arrive earlier, occupy better spaces, position yourself in a smarter way, and do more with less. Meanwhile, the team that is constantly reacting, constantly defending, constantly chasing, will accumulate large running numbers whether they want it or not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Running Demands in the 4-2-3-1 Formation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n When we look deeper into the physical demands of the 4-2-3-1, the story becomes even more interesting. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The study by Georgios Paraskevas (2021)<\/strong> analysed 26 elite matches and showed that running loads change dramatically depending on whether a team is in or<\/strong> out of possession<\/strong>, and this depends heavily on the position.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Out of possession<\/strong>, the biggest workload is on the wide defenders (WD)<\/strong>, central<\/strong> midfielders (CM)<\/strong> i central defenders (CD)<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This shows that the \u201cdefensive engine\u201d of the team\u2014CD and CM\u2014works significantly harder physically when the team does not control the ball.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In possession<\/strong>, the load shifts drastically:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Interestingly, wide defenders, wide midfielders and forwards registered more sprinting distance and longer VHIR efforts compared to central defenders and central midfielders, reinforcing the fact that offensive transitions and wide play demand explosive actions in space. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The key takeaway from Paraskevas\u2019 work is simple: in the 4-2-3-1 formation, only<\/strong> the wide defenders are highly taxed both in and out of possession<\/strong>. Wide midfielders and forwards are taxed mainly in possession<\/em>, while central defenders and central midfielders are taxed mainly out of possession<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Now, let\u2019s connect this to something we all watched. Take the Champions League example everybody remembers. Real Madrid ran the least in the quarter-final second legs. Arsenal covered 72 miles, while Real managed only 66.8. In the first leg, Arsenal passed 70 miles again, while Real stayed around 63.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And here comes the twist, Real Madrid lost both games.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, they have world-class players, but when you enter a competition like the Champions League, where the tempo is higher, the transitions are faster, and the physical requirements are unforgiving, running volume suddenly becomes<\/em> an important KPI. Not in isolation, not as a magic number, but as a reflection of intensity, intention and competitiveness<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n The data published by beIN Sports paints the full picture:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Real Madrid ran the least of all eight quarter-final teams, and the physical disparity matched their worst run in the competition in years. They only out-ran their opponent once all season, and this Champions League campaign ended with six defeats<\/strong>, the most in the club\u2019s history for a single edition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In contrast, the teams driving the tempo of the competition, Dortmund, PSG, Arsenal, Aston Villa, Bayern, consistently covered higher distances. Borussia Dortmund ran over 76 miles<\/strong> in their comeback attempt against Barcelona. PSG logged more than 71 miles<\/strong> trying to break Aston Villa\u2019s defensive block. Even Inter Milan, one of the \u201clower\u201d running teams, still reached 70+ miles<\/strong>, comfortably ahead of Real\u2019s numbers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n So the message here is not that \u201crunning more means winning\u201d football is never that simple. The message is that your physical KPIs must match the demands of the competition<\/strong> you are trying to win<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In domestic leagues, you might get away with different models. In the Champions League, you won\u2019t.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This brings us back to the main idea of the blog: context defines load, load defines adaptation, and adaptation defines readiness.<\/strong> There is no universal number that fits every team. Real Madrid and Arsenal are perfect opposites, each successful in their environment, but when they met in a competition that demands constant high-speed running, physiology mattered<\/strong>. (https:\/\/www.beinsports.com\/en-us\/soccer\/uefa-champions-league\/articles-video\/real-madrid-exposed-once-again-after-distance-covered-in-arsenal-match-is-revealed-2025-04-17).<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Now let me bring this even closer to home, the Croatian league. This is maybe the most interesting part of working inside the Ultrax ecosystem. You talk with coaches daily, you see planning sheets, GPS metrics, microcycles, and very quickly you realize something important: two teams can have completely different weekly loads and still be equally successful. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I\u2019ve seen teams with over 40 km per week in-season and teams who barely touch 25\u201330 km. And here\u2019s the twist, both groups win games, both groups keep players fit, and both groups have similar injury rates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Two teams can choose two completely different pathways and still end up in the same place because the game model, the player profile, the pitch size, the squad depth, the session structure, and the readiness of the players all dictate what works. When people copy Premier League numbers into the Croatian league without respecting the difference in tempo, number of transitions, weather conditions, pitch quality, and training schedule, we get false comparisons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So back to the original question \u2014 can we have a load day during the in-season?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes. And not only can we \u2014 sometimes we absolutely should<\/em>. But only when it fits the needs of the players and the needs of the game model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A loss of sharpness in speed profiles can be addressed through targeted speed-strength work. There is no \u201cyes or no\u201d answer, only the right question:<\/p>\n\n\n\n When you look at the day-to-day reality of Croatian second-division football, the microcycle often has a very simple and predictable rhythm. On Tuesday, the squad splits depending on minutes played. Those who played less or didn\u2019t play at all get a compensation session \u2014 usually a mix of football actions and conditioning to bring them closer to match load.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The starters, meanwhile, go through a short regeneration session, often 30\u201340 minutes of bikes, mobility, and light technical work. It doesn\u2019t sound like much, but the intention is clear: reset the system and balance the squad.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Wednesday is the only true \u201chard\u201d day of the microcycle and everything revolves around it. In the morning you\u2019ll typically see a focused gym session, two main strength lifts, some auxiliary work, nothing crazy, just enough to maintain strength without creating unnecessary fatigue. The main work comes in the afternoon: the key training of the week. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This is where intensity is highest, the tempo is closest to match demands, and many teams add a running supplement at the end, whether that\u2019s HSR exposure, sprint efforts, accelerations, or a small RSA block. If there is one day in the week where players really accumulate physical load, this is it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Weekly Load Summary<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Starters: ~1800\u20132100 AU \/ Non-starters: ~2000\u20132400 AU (because they carry Tue compensation + extra<\/strong> work on Sat)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n On Thursday, everything shifts toward tapering. Coaches keep the volume low but the quality high. This day is often filled with finishing, free-kicks, and short technical blocks with long rest intervals. The goal is simple: maintain sharpness without adding fatigue. Every step from Thursday onward is aimed at arriving on Saturday in the right state . Friday is the classic MD-1 structure that almost every Croatian club follows. Set pieces, organization, a bit of rondo, some activation work, and in many clubs today, a small neuromuscular stimulus , a few controlled jumps and one maximal sprint. It\u2019s not fatigue-inducing; it\u2019s just enough to wake up the system and prepare players for the match.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n When you look at this Wednesday afternoon training session, the first thing that stands out is how uniformly high the load is across the entire team<\/strong>. There are no positional markers,no tactical labels, ust raw numbers. And when raw numbers look like this, you immediately know one thing: this was the overload day of the week<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Across roughly twenty players, total distance ranges from 7,700 m to 9,200 m<\/strong>, high-speed running (HSR >20 km\/h) from 570 m to 1,206 m<\/strong>, and sprint distance (>25 km\/h) from 265 m<\/strong> to 535 m<\/strong>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n This type of session is the backbone of an in-season microcycle, an MD-3 overload stimulus that consolidates aerobic work, mechanical load, and neuromuscular exposure in one place so that the rest of the week can progress toward freshness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Total distance is the easiest metric to interpret. Here, players fall mostly between 8.2\u20139.2<\/strong> km<\/strong>, with only a few dropping below 8 km. When the majority of players cross the 8.5 km mark in training, it means the pitch size was large, the games were extended, and the coach allowed phases of continuous play without heavy stoppages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The one or two athletes above 9,100 m<\/strong> represent the upper slice of total volume, the ones who either naturally roam more, or who simply accumulated a bit more work because of their role in the exercises.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n On the opposite end, players below 8,000 m<\/strong> likely experienced slightly modified exposure, fewer transitions, or shorter involvement in continuous games\u2014but still enough to call the day \u201chigh load\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n This is where the session\u2019s true intensity starts to reveal itself. HSR values ranged from ~570 m<\/strong> all the way up to 1,200 m<\/strong>. In most professional environments, anything above 700\u2013800 m<\/strong> is already a substantial dose on a training day. So when multiple players surpass 900 or even 1,000 meters, you know the design intentionally exposed them to high-speed work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This typically means:<\/p>\n\n\n\n When more than half of your squad touches 800\u20131,200 m of HSR<\/strong>, you\u2019ve provided a strong mechanical load for tissue adaptation, something players need to tolerate match demands.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n The sprint distances here\u2014between 265 and 535 meters<\/strong>\u2014tell a very clear story. These are match-like sprint numbers<\/strong>, not warm-up or \u201ctechnical day\u201d values. A few players above 480\u2013520 meters<\/strong> received a very high neural stimulus. These are the athletes who will need closer monitoring the next day, because sprinting volume carries the highest neuromuscular cost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This level of sprint exposure usually requires:<\/p>\n\n\n\n But again, this is exactly what you want on the middle day of the week: a well-timed<\/strong> overload window<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Total Distance Groups (approximate):<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n HSR Groups:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Sprint Distance Groups:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n You can all agree that this session looks<\/em> like a proper load day. Total distance, high-speed running, sprint values, everything is clearly pushed upward. And this is exactly where the conversation around \u201ccut-offs\u201d and GPS standards becomes interesting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the last few years we\u2019ve started labeling things as too high<\/em>, too low<\/em>, optimal<\/em>, red zone<\/em>, above threshold<\/em>, and so on. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Some clubs even design training sessions with the primary goal to hit certain GPS numbers<\/strong>, almost like trying to copy the physical profile of a match. <\/p>\n\n\n\n But here\u2019s the reminder we all need:<\/p>\n\n\n\n GPS load is not the same as training stimulus.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If your session is built only to \u201csimulate\u201d the game, you may miss the chance to actually develop<\/strong> something. Sometimes a drill with lower total distance but high mechanical load, or high eccentric action, or high deceleration density gives you more value than chasing arbitrary kilometers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The second point is about habitual loading<\/strong>. Every team has their own patterns, what I like to call \u201cloading habits\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When you zoom out, ask yourself:<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn-Possession vs Out-of-Possession<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Physical Demands Out of Possession<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Champions League Example: Does Running Volume Matter?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Champions League Running Demands: What the Data Shows<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Why Physical Output Must Match Competition Demands<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Different Leagues, Different Load Demands<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
How do you explain that?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
When Should You Use a Load Day In-Season?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Declines in repeated high-intensity endurance may require a controlled conditioning stimulus.
When the tactical model emphasizes large transitions, load days are often best delivered in a football-specific context.
During congested periods with players nearing fatigue thresholds, removing the load day can be the most effective option.<\/p>\n\n\n\nWhat do my players and my game model need right now?<\/em><\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Why Wednesday Is the Key Load Day<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.ultrax.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Columns.png\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.ultrax.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/zamjena.png\")
What a High-Load Day Really Looks Like: Interpreting the<\/strong> Wednesday GPS Session<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Role of MD-3 in Weekly Load Structure<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.ultrax.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Columns2.png\")
example :D)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nHigh-Speed Running as a Key Load Indicator<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Sprint Load and Neuromuscular Demand<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Breaking Down Load by Player Groups<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.ultrax.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Columnsnew.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nWhy GPS Numbers Don\u2019t Tell the Whole Story<\/h2>\n\n\n\n