## 1 Introduction
To win matches, it is necessary to optimally load the players during the training days (high-speed running distance (HSRD) and s-RPE) but not give them the highest load because this could lead to negative results [12; 20]. At the same time, other studies suggest that the players should be trained with high intensity to cope with the most intense periods of the match (worst case scenarios); therefore, the strength and conditioning coaches ought to design their training drills to replicate these periods [2; 21; 22; 23; 24] but should avoid excessive accumulated fatigue that can affect the match outcome [12]. The microcycle length in football usually varies depending on the competitive calendar [24; 25]. Nevertheless, similar periodization load strategies are applied (load on the middle days and unload on MD \(-\) 2 and MD \(-\) 1) [14; 26]. The length of the microcycle may have an impact on the load of soccer players [13; 24; 27; 28]. Recent studies showed that the training load increased with longer microccycles [25; 28]. In their research, [PERSON] et al. (2022) [13] found that a weekly load in long microcyles was greater than that in regular and short microcyles, not only in volume but also in the intensity (except for relatively high-intensity accelerations \(>\) 3 m/s\({}^{2}\) (ACC\({}_{\text{HIGH}}\)), high-intensity decelerations \(<\) -3 m/s\({}^{2}\) (DEC\({}_{\text{HIGH}}\)) and high metabolic load (HML)). Similarly, [PERSON] et al. (2019) [28] found that weeks with five training sessions had increased values for all external load ratios than weeks with three or four sessions. [PERSON] et al. (2017) [14] found that the weekly load (4 training sessions) represented a load equal to 3.1, 3.9 and 3.3 for total distance, accelerations and decelerations, respectively, but running distance (14.4-19.8 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)) and HSR (\(>\)19.8 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)) had relatively lower values (2.5 and 2.1, respectively). From another study [28], the ratios for the total distance, player load and total number of high accelerations and decelerations during the three-training-session week were 1.8 \(\pm\) 0.6, 2.0 \(\pm\) 0.6, 2.2 \(\pm\) 1.8 and 1.6 \(\pm\) 0.9, respectively, and in the five-training-session week 3.5 \(\pm\) 1.3, 3.8 \(\pm\) 1.6, 4.1 \(\pm\) 1.6 and 3.4 \(\pm\) 1.9, respectively. However, for running distance (14.0-19.9 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)) and high-speed running distance (20.0-24.9 km\(\cdot\)h\({}^{-1}\)), these values were 1.2 \(\pm\) 0.7 and 1.1 \(\pm\) 0.8, respectively, in the three-training-session week and 2.3 \(\pm\) 1.3 and 2.3 \(\pm\) 1.5, respectively, in the five-training-session week. Observing all these different loading approaches, it is interesting to further investigate the relation of a weekly load to the game demands. According to [PERSON] et al. (2019) [28], there were trivial-to-small correlation between the weekly training load and match demand. Thus, training is independent of the dynamics of the next match. Other studies found that the game result is dependent on the number of training sessions during the preceding week [29] and the training load on specific days in the microcycle [12]. To avoid the negative effects of accumulated load, the priority during short microccycles is to recover from the previous game and focus on the development of soccer skills rather than on strength and conditioning [29]. This is an acceptable approach, but coaches adapt different training methodologies [30]. Therefore, it is necessary to further identify the data on what drill types can be used on specific days to balance the load [28], and what microcycle model should be applied, because in previous studies the patterns were different [12]. The aim of this study was to apply a training plan to four different-length microccycles (MIC) in soccer and analyze (a) the load within the training weeks and (b) the short-term effect on the matches that were played at the end of each microcycle.