## 4 Discussion  
The aim of this study is to describe the distribution of external load in different training sessions and competitions in competitive micro-cycles in women's football. According to the current state of the art, this is the first study carried out on the description of tactical periodization in women's football. The results confirm the starting hypotheses because despite describing a distribution of the conditional demands (for example, strength, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Comparison of**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Variables**} \\ \cline{2-7} \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Type of Sessions**} & **TD** & **HSR** & **Sprint** & **ACC2** & **DEC2** & **PL** & **TDmin** \\ \hline VEL vs. OM & \(8.4\) (ELI) & \(1.1\) (MI) & \(0.7\) (MI) & \(2.2\) (VLI) & \(2.3\) (VLI) & \(5.6\) (ELI) & \(0.8\) (MI) \\ \hline VEL vs. PREOM & \(-1.8\) (LD) & \(-1.7\) (LD) & \(-0.8\) (MD) & \(-1.8\) (LD) & \(-1.8\) (LD) & \(-1.5\) (LD) & \(-1.8\) (LD) \\ \hline VEL vs. INT & \(-0.2\) (SD) & \(-1.7\) (LD) & \(-1.2\) (LD) & \(0.9\) (MI) & \(0.6\) (MI) & \(0.0\) (T) & \(-1.2\) (LD) \\ \hline VEL vs. EXT & \(0.4\) (SI) & \(-0.7\) (MD) & \(-0.2\) (SD) & \(-0.6\) (MD) & \(-0.7\) (MD) & \(0.2\) (SI) & \(0.1\) (T) \\ \hline EXT vs. OM & \(6.6\) (ELI) & \(2.1\) (VLI) & \(0.9\) (MI) & \(2.7\) (VLI) & \(3.1\) (VLI) & \(4.8\) (ELI) & \(0.8\) (MI) \\ \hline EXT vs. PREOM & \(-1.9\) (LD) & \(-1.0\) (MD) & \(-0.7\) (MD) & \(-1.2\) (LD) & \(-1.2\) (LD) & \(-1.5\) (LD) & \(-1.7\) (LD) \\ \hline EXT vs. INT & \(-0.5\) (MD) & \(-1.1\) (MD) & \(-1.1\) (MD) & \(1.4\) (LI) & \(1.2\) (LI) & \(-0.2\) (SD) & \(-1.2\) (LD) \\ \hline INT vs. OM & \(6.2\) (ELI) & \(3.7\) (VLI) & \(2.4\) (VLI) & \(1.0\) (MI) & \(1.4\) (LI) & \(4.5\) (ELI) & \(2.3\) (VLI) \\ \hline INT vs. PREOM & \(-1.2\) (LD) & \(0.4\) (SI) & \(0.6\) (MI) & \(-2.3\) (VLD) & \(-2.2\) (VLD) & \(-1.2\) (LD) & \(-0.6\) (MD) \\ \hline PREOM vs. OM & \(8.7\) (ELI) & \(4.0\) (ELI) & \(1.8\) (LI) & \(3.7\) (VLI) & \(4.2\) (ELI) & \(6.2\) (ELI) & \(2.8\) (VLI) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: ED is extremely large decrease, VLD is very large decrease, LD is large decrease, MD is moderate decrease, SD is smaller decrease, T is trivial, SI is small increase, MI is moderate increase, LI is large increase, VLI is very large increase, ELI is extremely large increase. VEL is velocity day, INT is intensity or strength day, EXT is extensivity or endurance day, PREOM is previous day to match day, OM is official match day. TD is total distance expressed in meters (m), HSR is high-intensity running distance (m), Sprint is sprint running distance (m), ACC2 is the number of accelerating at \(>2\) m/s\({}^{2}\) (m), DEC2 is the number of decelerations at \(<\)\(-2\) m/s\({}^{2}\) (n), PL (au) is player load, and TDmin is distance per min (m/min\({}^{1}\)).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Effect size of external load variables in different training and competition sessions. Figure 2: Means and deviations of the high metabolic load distance (HMLD, m, in blue) and total impacts (Total impacts, n, in green) of the players on the different training days. Note: VEL is velocity day, INT is intensity or strength day, EXT is extensivity or endurance day, PREOM is previous day to match day, OM is official match day. Significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) are represented: 1 is higher than VEL, 2 is higher than INT, 3 is higher than EXT, and 4 is higher than PREOM. resistance, and speed) based on the horizontal alternation during the competitive micro-cycle sessions, none of them replicated the demands of the competition. In line with the results obtained in previous studies carried out in men's football [14; 28], the total and effective duration was significantly shorter in the training sessions compared to those obtained in official matches (Figure 1). Among the three acquisition sessions (VEL, INT, and EXT), the VEL session was the one with the lowest density, probably due to the intermittent or dividing nature of the tasks of this session.