## 4 Discussion  
The purpose of this study was to create the running performance profile of young high-level football players based on their playing position in the 1-4-3-3 formation and to detect possible differences between positions. Additionally, the change in running performance between the two halves was examined. The results confirmed our hypotheses that the greatest total distances, as well as the distances covered at higher intensities in this formation, would be covered by players positioned on the wings. In one of the first studies [32] that investigated the effect of playing position on the running performance of young football players, it was observed that midfielders covered the greatest distance, while the SDs and Fs covered the greatest distance at high speeds. The position with the least external load was that of the CDs. This study was conducted with a large number of players aged 13 to 18, but it did not separate the playing positions (SD, CD, SM, CM, F) in relation to the formation. The lack of reference to the formation may obscure or exaggerate the differences between playing positions, which limits the usefulness of the findings for coaches. In another study [30], it was observed that the CDs covered the least total distance and also the least distance in sprints and high-speed running. The researchers also noted that the CMs covered the greatest total distance, and together with the CDs, they covered the least distance in sprints. In contrast, the Fs covered a greater distance in sprints than the Side Midfielders. However, for a better evaluation of the findings in this study, it is important to mention that the formation in which the players were positioned was not specified. The findings of these two studies are partially in agreement with ours. Specifically, in our study, the CDs covered the shortest distance, followed by the Forwards. On the other hand, the greatest distance was covered by the SMs, followed by the CMs (10,933 vs. 10,733 m), with the values being close to each other. In sprints, the shortest distance was covered by the CMs, while the greatest distance was covered by the SDs and SMs (291 vs. 287 m). The observed differences with the findings of other studies are likely due to the playing formations. Regarding the central positions, there is a high number of players, which limits the space available for covering long distances at high speeds. Additionally, the tactical role of CDs, which is heavily focused on defensive duties, is another limiting factor for covering high-speed distances. Studies that refer to specific formations are relatively limited, especially in young high-level players. Below, we will mention some studies that refer to specific formations. In a recent study [22] on young high-level athletes, three formations (1-4-4-2, 1-4-3-3, 1-3-5-2) were compared, and it was observed that in the 1-4-3-3 formation, the CDs covered the shortest total distance, which can be attributed to their positioning and primarily defensive responsibilities. On the other hand, CMs recorded the greatest total distance, likely due to their dual role in both attack and defense, requiring constant movement across large areas of the pitch. Regarding high-speed running and sprints, SDs were found to cover the greatest distances, particularly in formations that required them to support both offensive and defensive transitions along the flanks. In contrast, CDs covered the least distance at high speed, reflecting their more static positioning and concentration in central defensive zones. These findings closely align with the results of the present study, reinforcing the idea that tactical formation and positional role significantly affect the physical performance and running profiles of players, even at the youth level. This emphasizes the importance of tailoring training programs not only to the player's position but also to the specific demands of the team's tactical system.