三人制篮球作为一项高强度、快节奏的运动，对运动员的负荷监测提出了新的挑战。本研究通过监测清华大学男子三人篮球队运动员在训练和比赛期间的内外负荷，对运动员在不同训练阶段、训练过程中模拟正式比赛、正式比赛中的负荷变化展开系统的记录和分析，并进一步探讨其与比赛结果、位置角色及技术表现之间的关系。本论文使用Catapult Vector S7可穿戴设备和Borg CR-10的RPE量表来收集运动员的外部和内部负荷数据。结果显示：三人制篮球运动员在训练过程中模拟正式比赛中表现出显著高于正式比赛的RPE（5.95 ± 0.97 vs 4.39 ± 1.31, P< 0.001, ES= -1.30）和PlayerLoadTM（136 ± 27 vs 83 ± 17, P< 0.001, ES= -2.50）；PlayerLoadTM和PlayerLoadTM/min存在显著周间差异（P< 0.001; P< 0.001）；RPE和PlayerLoadTM在输赢不同比赛结果下不存在显著差异（P= 0.812; P= 0.323）；替补球员的RPE（P= 0.030, ES= -1.06）和高强度活动（P= 0.013, ES= -1.05）显著低于先发球员；外线球员在防守篮板（P= 0.019, ES= -0.91）上显著优于内线球员。综上所述，本研究得出结论如下：（1）大学生三人篮球训练过程中模拟正式比赛相较于正式比赛提供了更高的运动强度和移动频率。其中，内线运动员注重提升爆发力和快速启动能力，而外线运动员则更注重提高灵活性和跳跃能力。（2）在大学生三人篮球训练中，在中周期负荷结构下，各负荷指标表现出显著的周间差异；微循环负荷结构中，运动员在赛前一周的总体活动量保持相对稳定，但身体活动强度的变化较大；内线运动员的急性慢性工作比（ACWR）略高于外线位置的运动员 ，这可能反映了内线位置在比赛中所需的身体对抗程度更高。（3）在正式比赛中，外线球员的防守篮板表现优于内线球员，这与五人篮球的传统观念形成对比，突显了三人篮球运动员角色的多样性和对全面技能的高要求。

Three-on-three basketball, as a high-intensity and fast-paced sport, presents new challenges in the monitoring of athletes' load. This study systematically records and analyzes the internal and external load of athletes from Tsinghua University's men's three-on-three basketball team during training and competitions, examining load variations across different training phases, simulated games, and official matches, and further explores the relationships between load dynamics and game outcomes, positional roles, and technical performance.This thesis employs the Catapult Vector S7 wearable device and the Borg CR-10 RPE scale to collect data on athletes' internal and external loads. The results indicate significant differences in RPE (5.95±0.97 vs 4.39±1.31, P<0.001, ES= -1.30) and PlayerLoad? (136±27 vs 83±17, P<0.001, ES= -2.50) between simulated and official matches, with higher intensities and movement frequencies in simulated games suggesting that training environments are designed to be more challenging. Notably, internal load metrics like ACWR were slightly higher in inside players throughout most of the study period, likely due to their frequent engagement in short sprints, jumps, and intense physical confrontations in games. Additionally, weekly variations in PlayerLoad? and PlayerLoad?/min were significant (P<0.001; P<0.001), while no significant differences were observed in RPE and PlayerLoad? across different game outcomes (P= 0.812; P= 0.323). Substitute players exhibited significantly lower RPE (P= 0.030, ES= -1.06) and high-intensity activities (P= 0.013, ES= -1.05) compared to starting players. Analysis of internal and external loads versus on-court technical indicators revealed significant differences: outside players outperformed inside players in defensive rebounds (P= 0.019, ES= -0.91), reflecting the diverse role positioning and comprehensive skill requirements in three-on-three basketball.In conclusion, this study has arrived at the following findings: (1) Collegiate 3x3 basketball simulation games provide higher movement frequency and intensity than official matches. In these games, interior players focus on enhancing explosiveness and quick-start abilities, while perimeter players concentrate on improving flexibility and jumping capabilities. (2) In collegiate 3x3 basketball training, load indicators show significant weekly variations under the mid-cycle load structure; in the microcycle load structure, athletes maintain relatively stable overall activity levels the week before a game, though the intensity of physical activity changes significantly; interior players have a slightly higher acute to chronic workload ratio (ACWR) than perimeter players, reflecting the higher degree of physical contact required for interior positions. (3) In official matches, perimeter players outperform interior players in defensive rebounding, contrasting with traditional concepts in 5-player basketball and highlighting the diversity of player roles and the high demands for comprehensive skills in 3x3 basketball.