## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **MEAN (SD)** & **COMPARATIVE** & **MEAN DIFFERENCE** & \(p\) & **Cohen’s \(d\) (95\% CI)** & **CV (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} wAW \\ **(AU)** \\ \end{tabular} } & **LDW**: 88.02 (16.15) & LDW vs. CDF & 6.3 (\(-\)21.3 to 34.0) & 1.000 & 0.26 (\(-\)0.76 to 1.28) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & **CDF**: 81.68 (29.37) & LDW vs. MDF & \(-\)9.0 (\(-\)37.9 to 19.9) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.62 (\(-\)1.70 to 0.47) & 22.80 \\ \cline{2-6}  & **MDF**: 97.01 (8.69) & CDF vs. MDF & \(-\)15.3 (\(-\)45.1 to 14.4) & 0.571 & \(-\)0.63 (\(-\)1.75 to 0.48) & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} wCW \\ **(AU)** \\ \end{tabular} } & **LDW**: 88.25 (16.57) & LDW vs. CDF & 6.3 (\(-\)21.4 to 34.0) & 1.000 & 0.25 (\(-\)0.77 to 1.27) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & **CDF**: 81.95 (29.48) & LDW vs. MDF & \(-\)7.3 (\(-\)36.2 to 21.6) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.50 (\(-\)1.58 to 0.57) & 22.64 \\ \cline{2-6}  & **MDF**: 95.55 (7.00) & CDF vs. MDF & \(-\)13.6 (\(-\)43.3 to 16.1) & 0.729 & \(-\)0.57 (\(-\)1.68 to 0.54) & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} wACWR \\ **(AU)** \\ \end{tabular} } & **LDW**: 1.05 (0.04) & LDW vs. CDF & 0.002 (\(-\)0.063 to 0.067) & 1.000 & 0.01 (\(-\)1.00 to 1.02) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & **CDF**: 1.05 (0.04) & LDW vs. MDF & \(-\)0.018 (\(-\)0.086 to 0.049) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.41 (\(-\)1.48 to 0.66) & 4.38 \\ \cline{2-6}  & **MDF**: 1.08 (0.07) & CDF vs. MDF & \(-\)0.020 (\(-\)0.090 to 0.049) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.40 (\(-\)1.51 to 0.70) & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} wTM \\ **(AU)** \\ \end{tabular} } & **LDW**: 1.71 (0.18) & LDW vs. CDF & \(-\)0.008 (\(-\)0.508 to 0.493) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.03 (\(-\)1.04 to 0.99) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & **CDF**: 1.72 (0.51) & LDW vs. MDF & \(-\)0.015 (\(-\)0.537 to 0.508) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.06 (\(-\)1.12 to 1.00) & 20.18 \\ \cline{2-6}  & **MDF**: 1.73 (0.36) & CDF vs. MDF & \(-\)0.007 (\(-\)0.545 to 0.531) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.01 (\(-\)1.10 to 1.08) & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} wTS \\ **(AU)** \\ \end{tabular} } & **LDW**: 964.24 (220.24) & LDW vs. CDF & 110.7 (\(-\)205.3 to 426.6) & 1.000 & 0.41 (\(-\)0.61 to 1.44) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & **CDF**: 853.55 (288.02) & LDW vs. MDF & \(-\)131.8 (\(-\)461.4 to 197.9) & 0.917 & \(-\)0.62 (\(-\)1.71 to 0.46) & 24.88 \\ \cline{2-6}  & **MDF**: 1095.99 (158.63) & CDF vs. MDF & \(-\)242.4 (\(-\)582.1 to 97.2) & 0.227 & \(-\)0.95 (\(-\)2.10 to 0.20) & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: AU, arbitrary units; wAW, weekly average acute workload in AU; wCW, weekly average chronic workload in AU; wACWR, weekly average acutetechnic workload ratio in AU; wTM, weekly average training monotony based on new body load in AU; wTS, weekly average training strain based on body load in AU; LDW, lateral defenders and wingers; CDF, central defenders and forwards; and MDF, midfielders; \(p\), \(p\)-value at alpha level 0.05, Cohen’s d (95% CI), Cohen’s d effect size magnitude with 95% confidence interval; CV, coefficient of variations for overall team as percentage. Significant differences (\(p\leq 0.05\)) are highlighted in bold.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Between-group differences in the full season weekly average for workload variables, training monotony, and training strain. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **MEAN (SD)** & **COMPARATIVE** & **MEAN DIFFERENCE** & \(p\) & **[PERSON]’s \(d\) (95\% CI)** & **CV (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} wTD (m) \\ \end{tabular}  } & **LDW**: 3842.51 & LDW vs. CDF & 255.2 (\(-\)254.8 to 765.1) & 0.610 & 0.58 (\(-\)0.45 to 1.62) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & **CDF**: 3587.32(507.56) & LDW vs. MDF & 177.3 (\(-\)354.8 to 709.5) & 1.000 & 0.58 (\(-\)0.50 to 1.66) & 10.03 \\ \cline{2-6}  & **MDF**: & & & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & **3665.16(246.22) & CDF vs. MDF & \(-\)77.8 (\(-\)626.0 to 470.4) & 1.000 & \(-\)0.18 (\(-\)1.27 to 0.92) & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} wSTD (m) \\ \end{tabular}