Skip to content

Book A Strategy Call
March 5, 2025

Evidence-Based Sports Nutrition for Elite Athletes: Complete Performance Fueling, Recovery, and Precision Strategies

Posted In: Sports Nutrition

Table of Contents

Why Sports Nutrition Is Your Daily Operational Performance Variable

Introduction

Elite sports nutrition is measurable and repeatable. At the professional level, your nutrition strategy directly affects whether you can execute intensity, repeat high-quality sessions, and recover fast enough to sustain competitive demands across the season. This article provides specific, evidence-based protocols you can implement immediately.

Carbohydrates: Your Primary Performance Lever for Intensity and Sustained Output

Carbohydrates are a primary lever for performance where intensity, repeated surges, or sustained high work rates matter (Burke et al., 2011; Thomas et al., 2016). Carbohydrate intake during prolonged demands can improve performance or capacity across a range of durations (Stellingwerff & Cox, 2014), and maintaining carbohydrate availability is repeatedly emphasized for preserving output quality under fatigue (Williams & Rollo, 2015).

Daily Carbohydrate Targets (Grams Per Kilogram)

Use grams of carbohydrates per kilogram of body mass per day and match the target to the day’s load (Thomas et al., 2016):

  • Light load / lower intensity: 3–5 g/kg/day
  • Moderate load (~1 hour/day): 5–7 g/kg/day
  • High load (1–3 hours/day): 6–10 g/kg/day
  • Very high load (4–5 hours/day): 8–12 g/kg/day

When maximal glycogen restoration is the priority during heavy blocks, 8–12 g/kg/day aligns with glycogen-maximizing practice (Kerksick et al., 2017).

During-Demand Fueling (For Prolonged Demands)

When a single demand lasts longer than approximately 60 minutes, use (Kerksick et al., 2017):

  • 30–60 g carbohydrates/hour
  • Delivered as a 6–8% carbohydrate–electrolyte solution
  • Taken regularly across the demand (not all at once)

Rapid Restoration (When Recovery Time Is Short)

If you have less than 4 hours until the next demanding session, use one of these (Kerksick et al., 2017):

  • 1.2 g carbohydrates/kg/hour, or
  • 0.8 g carbohydrates/kg/hour + 0.2–0.4 g protein/kg/hour

Individualize the Plan (Tolerance + Response)

Athletes vary in tolerance and response to carbohydrates during demands. Individualizing intake is a practical step toward personalization (Jeukendrup, 2014), consistent with broader concepts of metabolic heterogeneity (Zeisel, 2020) and personalization approaches that increasingly combine biology and wearables in endurance contexts (Bedrač et al., 2024; Guest et al., 2019).

Carbohydrates Table

Daily Load / Situation What to Do Exact Target
Light load day Daily carbohydrates 3–5 g/kg/day (Thomas et al., 2016)
Moderate load day Daily carbohydrates 5–7 g/kg/day (Thomas et al., 2016)
High load day Daily carbohydrates 6–10 g/kg/day (Thomas et al., 2016)
Very high load day Daily carbohydrates 8–12 g/kg/day (Thomas et al., 2016; Kerksick et al., 2017)
Prolonged demand (>60 min) During-demand carbohydrates 30–60 g/hour + 6–8% solution (Kerksick et al., 2017)
Short recovery (<4 h) Rapid restoration 1.2 g/kg/hour or 0.8 g/kg/hour + 0.2–0.4 g/kg/hour protein (Kerksick et al., 2017)

Carbohydrates—Execution Checklist

  • Treat carbohydrates as a load-dependent variable, not a fixed habit (Thomas et al., 2016)
  • For prolonged demands, set a 30–60 g/hour plan and rehearse it until it’s automatic (Kerksick et al., 2017)
  • When recovery time is short, use hourly refueling targets, not vague “post-session” meals (Kerksick et al., 2017)

Protein: Daily Targets, Per-Feeding Targets, Overnight Strategy, and Restricted-Intake Phases

Protein supports remodeling and recovery across high-performance cycles (Phillips & Van Loon, 2011; Thomas et al., 2016). The practical advantage comes from having repeatable targets that still work when travel, appetite, and scheduling reduce precision.

Daily Protein Target

A practical daily protein range for athletes is (Phillips & Van Loon, 2011):

1.2–1.7 g protein/kg body mass/day

Per-Feeding Target After Demanding Training

A controlled dose-response protocol supports approximately 20 g high-quality protein as an effective recovery feeding target (Moore et al., 2009).

Immediate Recovery Template (Protein + Carbohydrates)

A repeatable template used after a demanding late-day session was (Res et al., 2012):

20 g protein + 60 g carbohydrates immediately after the session

Overnight Protein Option

A pre-sleep strategy used to support overnight recovery was (Res et al., 2012):

40 g casein protein approximately 30 minutes before sleep

Higher Protein During Restricted Intake

When energy intake is intentionally reduced, a higher protein target supported in lean trained athletes is (Helms et al., 2014):

2.3–3.1 g protein/kg fat-free mass/day

Protein timing should be applied based on the day’s context rather than rigid timing rules (Aragon & Schoenfeld, 2013; Kerksick et al., 2017).

Protein Table

Situation / Goal What to Do Exact Target
Baseline high-performance phase Daily protein 1.2–1.7 g/kg/day (Phillips & Van Loon, 2011)
Recovery feeding target Protein per feeding ~20 g high-quality protein (Moore et al., 2009)
When rapid restoration matters Protein + carbohydrates 20 g protein + 60 g carbohydrates (Res et al., 2012)
Overnight recovery support Pre-sleep protein 40 g casein (Res et al., 2012)
Restricted-intake phase Higher protein target 2.3–3.1 g/kg FFM/day (Helms et al., 2014)

Protein—Execution Checklist

  • Anchor the day with a 1.2–1.7 g/kg/day baseline (Phillips & Van Loon, 2011)
  • Use approximately 20 g as a repeatable recovery-feeding unit when you need precision without complexity (Moore et al., 2009)
  • When late schedules compress recovery, combine 20 g protein + 60 g carbohydrates and consider the 40 g pre-sleep option (Res et al., 2012)

Hydration and Electrolytes: Individualize to Losses, Use Context-Based Assessment

Hydration is a performance variable, but interpretation depends on context and assessment (Cheuvront & Kenefick, 2014). Sweat losses vary substantially between elite athletes, especially in heat (Shirreffs et al., 2005), so standardized “one plan for everyone” approaches often fail at the professional level.

Individualize to Sweat Losses and Conditions

Meaningful variability in sweat response supports individualized hydration planning (Shirreffs et al., 2005).

During-Demand Fuel + Fluid Option

For prolonged demands, carbohydrate–electrolyte solutions can deliver both fuel and fluid:

  • 30–60 g carbohydrates/hour
  • As a 6–8% carbohydrate–electrolyte solution (Kerksick et al., 2017)

Rehydration Nuance

Carbohydrate has a mild influence on fluid retention when electrolyte concentration is controlled (Osterberg et al., 2010). Treat carbohydrate primarily as a fueling variable; don’t expect carbohydrates alone to “solve” rehydration.

Avoid Unsupported Electrolyte Assumptions

A controlled comparison of pickle juice, water, and a carbohydrate–electrolyte solution did not support large plasma electrolyte changes from small-volume pickle juice ingestion under tested conditions (Miller et al., 2009).

Hydration Table

Situation What to Do Evidence-Grounded Action
Heat / high sweat losses Individualize hydration Sweat responses vary across elite athletes (Shirreffs et al., 2005)
Assessing hydration impact Use context-based interpretation Performance effects depend on context (Cheuvront & Kenefick, 2014)
Prolonged demands Fuel + fluid together 30–60 g/hour + 6–8% solution (Kerksick et al., 2017)
Post-dehydration retention Don’t overstate carbohydrate effect Mild influence when electrolytes controlled (Osterberg et al., 2010)
“Quick fix” electrolyte claims Avoid assumptions No large plasma electrolyte shifts in tested conditions (Miller et al., 2009)

Hydration—Execution Checklist

  • Plan hydration individually for heat blocks (Shirreffs et al., 2005)
  • Use carbohydrate–electrolyte solutions strategically during prolonged demands (Kerksick et al., 2017)
  • Don’t rely on small-volume “quick fixes” for electrolyte shifts (Miller et al., 2009)

Fats: Practical Recommendations That Fit Elite Performance and Energy Availability

Fats matter because they contribute to total energy intake, essential fatty acids, and fat-soluble vitamin intake (Thomas et al., 2016). The performance mistake is not “eating fat”—it’s using dietary fat in a way that displaces carbohydrate intake during phases where carbohydrate availability is a primary limiter (Burke et al., 2011; Thomas et al., 2016).

Fat Intake Range (Percent of Total Energy)

A practical range used in athlete nutrition guidance is (Thomas et al., 2016):

20–35% of total energy intake

Performance-Focused Fat Rules (What to Actually Do)

  1. Keep fat intake in a range that supports energy needs and nutrient requirements, while protecting carbohydrate availability for high-demand phases (Thomas et al., 2016; Burke et al., 2011)
  2. Avoid strategies that force very low carbohydrate intake when high-intensity output or sustained speed/economy is decisive. Performance impairments have been observed in elite athletes using ketogenic low-carbohydrate, high-fat approaches in endurance contexts (Burke et al., 2017; Burke et al., 2020)
  3. Use fats to help maintain energy availability when intake is challenged by appetite, travel, or schedule constraints, because inadequate energy availability is linked with performance and health consequences (Mountjoy et al., 2014; Thomas et al., 2016)

Fats Table

Goal What to Do Practical Target
Support energy + nutrient needs Set fat intake in a standard athlete range 20–35% total energy (Thomas et al., 2016)
Protect high-intensity capacity Don’t displace carbohydrates Keep carbohydrate strategy intact (Burke et al., 2011; Thomas et al., 2016)
Avoid performance trade-offs Be cautious with ketogenic LCHF approaches Performance/economy impairment reported in elite contexts (Burke et al., 2017; Burke et al., 2020)
Maintain availability Prevent chronic low intake Low energy availability has consequences (Mountjoy et al., 2014)

Fats—Execution Checklist

  • Use 20–35% of total energy as a practical range (Thomas et al., 2016)
  • Treat fats as a tool to support energy intake without sacrificing carbohydrate needs during demanding phases (Thomas et al., 2016; Burke et al., 2011)
  • Be cautious with ketogenic low-carbohydrate, high-fat approaches where economy and sustained speed matter (Burke et al., 2017; Burke et al., 2020)

Supplements: Purpose-Based Use, Protocol Accuracy, Individual Testing, and Risk Management

Supplements should never replace fundamentals (energy intake, carbohydrate availability, hydration, and recovery structure). A practical approach is to classify supplements by purpose: deficiency correction, sports foods for logistics, performance supplements with evidence in specific contexts, and indirect support products where evidence varies (Maughan et al., 2018; Thomas et al., 2016).

Deficiency Correction (Assessment-Led)

Common examples in elite settings include iron, calcium, and vitamin D (Maughan et al., 2018). Iron management is performance-relevant and requires informed monitoring (Sim et al., 2019). Vitamin D is discussed for plausible performance and recovery relevance (Dahlquist et al., 2015).

Performance Supplements With Protocol-Level Targets (Short List)

A short list is emphasized for performance contexts (Maughan et al., 2018):

Caffeine

Protocol: 3–6 mg/kg approximately 60 minutes before performance (Maughan et al., 2018)

Key rule: Trial and confirm tolerance in training before competition use

Creatine Monohydrate

Protocol: Loading approximately 20 g/day (split doses) for 5–7 days, then 3–5 g/day maintenance (Maughan et al., 2018)

Evidence base: Safety and efficacy supported across exercise and sport contexts (Kreider et al., 2017)

Key rule: Monitor body mass changes and positional considerations

Nitrate

Protocol: 5–9 mmol (approximately 310–560 mg) 2–3 hours before performance (Maughan et al., 2018)

Key rule: Trial and confirm tolerance; gastrointestinal responses vary

Sodium Bicarbonate

Protocol: Requires individualized testing due to gastrointestinal side effects (Maughan et al., 2018)

Key rule: Individual testing essential; GI effects can limit use

Beta-Alanine

Protocol: Context-dependent; select based on the performance problem and test individually (Maughan et al., 2018)

Key rule: Choose for the right performance demand, not as a default

Indirect Support and a Key Caution

A controlled human protocol found antioxidant supplementation prevented certain training-related effects observed in that context (Ristow et al., 2009). Avoid routine high-dose antioxidant supplementation as a default habit (Ristow et al., 2009). Nutrition is also discussed in relation to immune recovery following heavy exertion (Nieman & Mitmesser, 2017).

Non-Negotiable Supplement Rules

  1. Trial supplements in training that reflects performance conditions, not for the first time in high-stakes competition (Maughan et al., 2018)
  2. Assume variability: Response differs across athletes; genetics and microbiome are among factors linked to variability (Maughan et al., 2018; Guest et al., 2019; Zeisel, 2020)
  3. Manage contamination risk as part of the decision process (Maughan et al., 2018)

Supplements Table

Purpose Product Practical Protocol Key Rule
Deficiency correction Iron Assessment-led (Maughan et al., 2018) Monitor appropriately (Sim et al., 2019)
Deficiency correction Vitamin D Assessment-led (Maughan et al., 2018) Consider performance/recovery context (Dahlquist et al., 2015)
Performance Caffeine 3–6 mg/kg ~60 min pre (Maughan et al., 2018) Trial + confirm tolerance
Performance Creatine monohydrate ~20 g/day 5–7 d → 3–5 g/day (Maughan et al., 2018) Safety/efficacy supported (Kreider et al., 2017)
Performance Nitrate 5–9 mmol (310–560 mg) 2–3 h pre (Maughan et al., 2018) Trial + confirm tolerance
Performance Sodium bicarbonate Individual testing required (Maughan et al., 2018) GI effects can limit use
Performance Beta-alanine Context-dependent (Maughan et al., 2018) Choose for the right problem
Avoid default use High-dose antioxidants Avoid as routine habit (Ristow et al., 2009) Can alter training-related effects

Gut Function: What Elite Athletes Should Know and What to Do

High-level sport is associated with distinct gut microbiome profiles. Compared with more sedentary individuals, professional athletes show differences in gut microbiome composition and—especially—functional metabolic characteristics (Barton et al., 2018). Training can also shift gut microbiota composition and function, and these shifts can change when training load changes (Allen et al., 2018). In addition, training combined with dietary extremes has been associated with altered gut microbial diversity (Clarke et al., 2014). Practical athlete-focused work emphasizes that gut function is a performance issue because gastrointestinal tolerance directly affects the ability to execute fueling and hydration strategies consistently (Mohr et al., 2020).

What This Means Operationally (Elite Athlete Level)

At the professional level, “gut strategy” is not a wellness trend—it is the system that determines whether you can reliably deliver carbohydrates, fluids, and recovery nutrition under real performance constraints. When gut tolerance fails, performance nutrition becomes theoretical.

Practical Recommendations (Evidence-Grounded)

Treat fueling tolerance as trainable and monitored. Training has been associated with shifts in gut microbiota function and composition (Allen et al., 2018), and athlete gut profiles differ from sedentary profiles (Barton et al., 2018). In practice, that means you should deliberately monitor tolerance as part of performance preparation, not improvise on critical days (Mohr et al., 2020).

Avoid dietary extremes that disrupt consistency. Exercise plus dietary extremes are linked with changes in gut microbial diversity (Clarke et al., 2014). If a dietary approach increases gastrointestinal disruption or reduces the ability to meet carbohydrate targets, it becomes a performance risk (Mohr et al., 2020).

Individualize when recurring issues occur. Athlete-to-athlete variability is expected; precision nutrition frameworks emphasize metabolic heterogeneity (Zeisel, 2020) and sport nutrigenomics perspectives support individualized approaches (Guest et al., 2019). Emerging work highlights how wearable and omics technologies are being used to move from generic plans toward individualized execution in endurance settings (Bedrač et al., 2024).

Link gut management to your fueling/hydration targets. Athlete-focused work emphasizes that gut considerations matter because the gut is the gateway to executing carbohydrate and hydration strategies (Mohr et al., 2020). If your gut limits intake, your nutrition plan is not “aggressive”—it is simply not executable.

Weight Management and Energy Availability: Protect Output First, Then Make Changes

Weight management is common in elite sport, but it becomes performance-negative when it reduces energy availability, compresses recovery, or increases physiological and psychological strain. Weight loss strategies can produce measurable physiological, psychological, and performance effects in combat sports contexts (Franchini et al., 2012). Applied work on acute weight-loss strategies emphasizes structured planning rather than last-minute extremes (Reale et al., 2017), and documentation of elite practices shows that aggressive strategies are still widely used in some environments (Reale et al., 2018). Across sports, low energy availability is captured in the RED-S framework, describing health and performance consequences when energy intake does not meet demand (Mountjoy et al., 2014).

The Performance-First Rule

If weight management reduces your ability to hit training and competition outputs consistently, the strategy is failing—even if the scale moves in the desired direction.

Practical Recommendations (What Elite Athletes Should Do)

Start from energy availability, not weight targets. RED-S emphasizes that inadequate energy availability can have health and performance consequences (Mountjoy et al., 2014). In practice, you should treat energy intake as a performance variable and monitor whether performance output and recovery remain stable during any weight-change phase.

Avoid aggressive acute strategies unless they are planned, rehearsed, and controlled. Acute weight-loss strategies need structured planning and controlled execution rather than last-minute restriction (Reale et al., 2017). Real-world practices show that uncontrolled approaches remain common (Reale et al., 2018), which is exactly why disciplined planning matters for elite performance environments.

Recognize that rapid weight loss can affect more than physiology. Weight loss approaches in combat sports are associated with physiological, psychological, and performance effects (Franchini et al., 2012). That makes decision-making quality and execution under pressure part of the risk profile, not an afterthought.

Use nutrition targets that preserve performance while managing weight. When energy intake is reduced, maintain operational protein targets appropriate to restricted-intake contexts to support lean mass retention (Helms et al., 2014), and protect carbohydrate availability during demanding phases to preserve high-intensity output (Thomas et al., 2016; Burke et al., 2011).

FAQ for Professional and Elite Athletes

Q: How do I periodize carbohydrates without guessing?

Use 3–5, 5–7, 6–10, or 8–12 g/kg/day based on the day’s load (Thomas et al., 2016). When maximal restoration is required, 8–12 g/kg/day aligns with glycogen-maximizing practice (Kerksick et al., 2017).

Q: What is the simplest during-demand carbohydrate rule with numbers?

For prolonged demands: 30–60 g carbohydrates/hour via a 6–8% carbohydrate–electrolyte solution (Kerksick et al., 2017).

Q: What should I do when recovery time is under 4 hours?

Use 1.2 g/kg/hour carbohydrates, or 0.8 g/kg/hour carbohydrates + 0.2–0.4 g/kg/hour protein (Kerksick et al., 2017).

Q: What are the most operational protein targets?

Daily baseline: 1.2–1.7 g/kg/day (Phillips & Van Loon, 2011). Practical recovery feeding: approximately 20 g high-quality protein (Moore et al., 2009). Late-day recovery template: 20 g protein + 60 g carbohydrates plus 40 g casein pre-sleep when needed (Res et al., 2012).

Q: What are the actionable fat recommendations?

Use 20–35% of total energy as a practical range (Thomas et al., 2016). Protect carbohydrate availability during demanding phases (Burke et al., 2011; Thomas et al., 2016). Be cautious with ketogenic low-carbohydrate, high-fat approaches where sustained speed/economy matters (Burke et al., 2017; Burke et al., 2020).

Q: Which supplements deserve attention at elite level?

A short list has protocol-level use in performance contexts: caffeine (3–6 mg/kg approximately 60 min pre), creatine (loading then maintenance), nitrate (5–9 mmol 2–3 h pre), sodium bicarbonate (individual testing), and beta-alanine (context-dependent) (Maughan et al., 2018; Kreider et al., 2017).

Conclusion: Execution Under Pressure Separates Elite From Average

Elite performance nutrition is not about perfect meals—it is about repeatable execution under real constraints. The athletes who gain the most are not the ones with the most complicated plans, but the ones who can consistently hit the targets that matter: carbohydrate availability matched to load, protein delivered in repeatable recovery units, hydration individualized to losses and conditions, fat intake kept in a performance-compatible range, and supplements used only when the purpose is clear and the protocol is tested.

The decisive difference is discipline in the basics: your plan must be executable, not just “optimal” on paper. When your fueling and recovery strategies are reliable, you protect output, shorten recovery time, and make performance more repeatable across dense calendars—exactly what separates professional-level preparation from guesswork (Thomas et al., 2016; Kerksick et al., 2017; Maughan et al., 2018).

The future belongs to athletes and practitioners who embrace the science while respecting the art of optimal sports nutrition.

References

  1. Allen, J. M., Mailing, L. J., Niemiro, G. M., Moore, R., Cook, M. D., White, B. A., Holscher, H. D., & Woods, J. A. (2018). Exercise Alters Gut Microbiota Composition and Function in Lean and Obese Humans. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 50(4), 747–757. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000001495
  2. Aragon, A. A., & Schoenfeld, B. J. (2013). Nutrient timing revisited: is there a post-exercise anabolic window?. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 10(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1550-2783-10-5
  3. Bangsbo, J., Mohr, M., & Krustrup, P. (2006). Physical and metabolic demands of training and match-play in the elite football player. Journal of sports sciences, 24(7), 665–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410500482529
  4. Barton, W., Penney, N. C., Cronin, O., Garcia-Perez, I., Molloy, M. G., Holmes, E., Shanahan, F., Cotter, P. D., & O’Sullivan, O. (2018). The microbiome of professional athletes differs from that of more sedentary subjects in composition and particularly at the functional metabolic level. Gut, 67(4), 625–633. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313627
  5. Burke, L. M., Hawley, J. A., Wong, S. H., & Jeukendrup, A. E. (2011). Carbohydrates for training and competition. Journal of sports sciences, 29 Suppl 1, S17–S27. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2011.585473
  6. Burke, L. M., Ross, M. L., Garvican-Lewis, L. A., Welvaert, M., Heikura, I. A., Forbes, S. G., Mirtschin, J. G., Cato, L. E., Strobel, N., Sharma, A. P., & Hawley, J. A. (2017). Low carbohydrate, high fat diet impairs exercise economy and negates the performance benefit from intensified training in elite race walkers. The Journal of physiology, 595(9), 2785–2807. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP273230
  7. Burke, L. M., Sharma, A. P., Heikura, I. A., Forbes, S. F., Holloway, M., McKay, A. K. A., Bone, J. L., Leckey, J. J., Welvaert, M., & Ross, M. L. (2020). Crisis of confidence averted: Impairment of exercise economy and performance in elite race walkers by ketogenic low carbohydrate, high fat (LCHF) diet is reproducible. PloS one, 15(6), e0234027. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234027
  8. Cheuvront, S. N., & Kenefick, R. W. (2014). Dehydration: physiology, assessment, and performance effects. Comprehensive Physiology, 4(1), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/cphy.c130017
  9. Clarke, S. F., Murphy, E. F., O’Sullivan, O., Lucey, A. J., Humphreys, M., Hogan, A., Hayes, P., O’Reilly, M., Jeffery, I. B., Wood-Martin, R., Kerins, D. M., Quigley, E., Ross, R. P., O’Toole, P. W., Molloy, M. G., Falvey, E., Shanahan, F., & Cotter, P. D. (2014). Exercise and associated dietary extremes impact on gut microbial diversity. Gut, 63(12), 1913–1920. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2013-306541
  10. Dahlquist, D. T., Dieter, B. P., & Koehle, M. S. (2015). Plausible ergogenic effects of vitamin D on athletic performance and recovery. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 12, 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-015-0093-8
  11. Franchini, E., Brito, C. J., & Artioli, G. G. (2012). Weight loss in combat sports: physiological, psychological and performance effects. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 9(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/1550-2783-9-52
  12. Guest, N. S., Horne, J., Vanderhout, S. M., & El-Sohemy, A. (2019). Sport Nutrigenomics: Personalized Nutrition for Athletic Performance. Frontiers in nutrition, 6, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2019.00008
  13. Helms, E. R., Zinn, C., Rowlands, D. S., & Brown, S. R. (2014). A systematic review of dietary protein during caloric restriction in resistance trained lean athletes: a case for higher intakes. International journal of sport nutrition and exercise metabolism, 24(2), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijsnem.2013-0054
  14. Holway, F. E., & Spriet, L. L. (2011). Sport-specific nutrition: practical strategies for team sports. Journal of sports sciences, 29 Suppl 1, S115–S125. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2011.605459
  15. Jeukendrup A. (2014). A step towards personalized sports nutrition: carbohydrate intake during exercise. Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 44 Suppl 1(Suppl 1), S25–S33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0148-z
  16. Kerksick, C. M., Arent, S., Schoenfeld, B. J., Stout, J. R., Campbell, B., Wilborn, C. D., Taylor, L., Kalman, D., Smith-Ryan, A. E., Kreider, R. B., Willoughby, D., Arciero, P. J., VanDusseldorp, T. A., Ormsbee, M. J., Wildman, R., Greenwood, M., Ziegenfuss, T. N., Aragon, A. A., & Antonio, J. (2017). International society of sports nutrition position stand: nutrient timing. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 14, 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0189-4
  17. Kerksick, C. M., Wilborn, C. D., Roberts, M. D., Smith-Ryan, A., Kleiner, S. M., Jäger, R., Collins, R., Cooke, M., Davis, J. N., Galvan, E., Greenwood, M., Lowery, L. M., Wildman, R., Antonio, J., & Kreider, R. B. (2018). ISSN exercise & sports nutrition review update: research & recommendations. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 15(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-018-0242-y
  18. Kreider, R. B., Kalman, D. S., Antonio, J., Ziegenfuss, T. N., Wildman, R., Collins, R., Candow, D. G., Kleiner, S. M., Almada, A. L., & Lopez, H. L. (2017). International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: safety and efficacy of creatine supplementation in exercise, sport, and medicine. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 14, 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0173-z
  19. Krustrup, P., Mohr, M., Steensberg, A., Bencke, J., Kjaer, M., & Bangsbo, J. (2006). Muscle and blood metabolites during a soccer game: implications for sprint performance. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 38(6), 1165–1174. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000222845.89262.cd
  20. Maughan, R. J., Burke, L. M., Dvorak, J., Larson-Meyer, D. E., Peeling, P., Phillips, S. M., Rawson, E. S., Walsh, N. P., Garthe, I., Geyer, H., Meeusen, R., van Loon, L. J. C., Shirreffs, S. M., Spriet, L. L., Stuart, M., Vernec, A., Currell, K., Ali, V. M., Budgett, R. G., Ljungqvist, A., … Engebretsen, L. (2018). IOC consensus statement: dietary supplements and the high-performance athlete. British journal of sports medicine, 52(7), 439–455. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-099027
  21. Miller, K. C., Mack, G., & Knight, K. L. (2009). Electrolyte and plasma changes after ingestion of pickle juice, water, and a common carbohydrate-electrolyte solution. Journal of athletic training, 44(5), 454–461. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-44.5.454
  22. Mohr, A. E., Jäger, R., Carpenter, K. C., Kerksick, C. M., Purpura, M., Townsend, J. R., West, N. P., Black, K., Gleeson, M., Pyne, D. B., Wells, S. D., Arent, S. M., Kreider, R. B., Campbell, B. I., Bannock, L., Scheiman, J., Wissent, C. J., Pane, M., Kalman, D. S., Pugh, J. N., … Antonio, J. (2020). The athletic gut microbiota. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 17(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-020-00353-w
  23. Moore, D. R., Robinson, M. J., Fry, J. L., Tang, J. E., Glover, E. I., Wilkinson, S. B., Prior, T., Tarnopolsky, M. A., & Phillips, S. M. (2009). Ingested protein dose response of muscle and albumin protein synthesis after resistance exercise in young men. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 89(1), 161–168. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.2008.26401
  24. Mountjoy, M., Sundgot-Borgen, J., Burke, L., Carter, S., Constantini, N., Lebrun, C., Meyer, N., Sherman, R., Steffen, K., Budgett, R., & Ljungqvist, A. (2014). The IOC consensus statement: beyond the Female Athlete Triad–Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S). British journal of sports medicine, 48(7), 491–497. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-093502
  25. Nieman, D. C., & Mitmesser, S. H. (2017). Potential Impact of Nutrition on Immune System Recovery from Heavy Exertion: A Metabolomics Perspective. Nutrients, 9(5), 513. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9050513
  26. Osterberg, K. L., Pallardy, S. E., Johnson, R. J., & Horswill, C. A. (2010). Carbohydrate exerts a mild influence on fluid retention following exercise-induced dehydration. Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985), 108(2), 245–250. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.91275.2008
  27. Phillips, S. M., & Van Loon, L. J. (2011). Dietary protein for athletes: from requirements to optimum adaptation. Journal of sports sciences, 29 Suppl 1, S29–S38. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2011.619204
  28. Reale, R., Slater, G., & Burke, L. M. (2017). Acute-Weight-Loss Strategies for Combat Sports and Applications to Olympic Success. International journal of sports physiology and performance, 12(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0211
  29. Reale, R., Slater, G., & Burke, L. M. (2018). Weight Management Practices of Australian Olympic Combat Sport Athletes. International journal of sports physiology and performance, 13(4), 459–466. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0553
  30. Res, P. T., Groen, B., Pennings, B., Beelen, M., Wallis, G. A., Gijsen, A. P., Senden, J. M., & VAN Loon, L. J. (2012). Protein ingestion before sleep improves postexercise overnight recovery. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 44(8), 1560–1569. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e31824cc363
  31. Ristow, M., Zarse, K., Oberbach, A., Klöting, N., Birringer, M., Kiehntopf, M., Stumvoll, M., Kahn, C. R., & Blüher, M. (2009). Antioxidants prevent health-promoting effects of physical exercise in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(21), 8665–8670. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903485106
  32. Russell, M., & Pennock, A. (2011). Dietary analysis of young professional soccer players for 1 week during the competitive season. Journal of strength and conditioning research, 25(7), 1816–1823. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181e7fbdd
  33. Shirreffs, S. M., Aragon-Vargas, L. F., Chamorro, M., Maughan, R. J., Serratosa, L., & Zachwieja, J. J. (2005). The sweating response of elite professional soccer players to training in the heat. International journal of sports medicine, 26(2), 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-821112
  34. Sim, M., Garvican-Lewis, L. A., Cox, G. R., Govus, A., McKay, A. K. A., Stellingwerff, T., & Peeling, P. (2019). Iron considerations for the athlete: a narrative review. European journal of applied physiology, 119(7), 1463–1478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-019-04157-y
  35. Spencer, M., Bishop, D., Dawson, B. et al. Physiological and Metabolic Responses of Repeated-Sprint Activities. Sports Med 35, 1025–1044 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200535120-00003
  36. Stellingwerff, T., & Cox, G. R. (2014). Systematic review: Carbohydrate supplementation on exercise performance or capacity of varying durations. Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism = Physiologie appliquee, nutrition et metabolisme, 39(9), 998–1011. https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2014-0027
  37. Bedrač, L., Deutsch, L., Terzić, S., Červek, M., Šelb, J., Ašič, U., Verstraeten, L. M. G., Kuščer, E., & Cvetko, F. (2024). Towards Precision Sports Nutrition for Endurance Athletes: A Scoping Review of Application of Omics and Wearables Technologies. Nutrients, 16(22), 3943. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16223943
  38. Thomas, D. T., Erdman, K. A., & Burke, L. M. (2016). Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Dietitians of Canada, and the American College of Sports Medicine: Nutrition and Athletic Performance. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 116(3), 501–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2015.12.006
  39. Williams, C., & Rollo, I. (2015). Carbohydrate Nutrition and Team Sport Performance. Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 45 Suppl 1(Suppl 1), S13–S22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0399-3
  40. Zeisel S. H. (2020). Precision (Personalized) Nutrition: Understanding Metabolic Heterogeneity. Annual review of food science and technology, 11, 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-032519-051736