Effects of Taurine-, Caffeine-, and Phosphatidylserine-Containing Supplementation Protocols on Physical and Cognitive Performance in Professional Male Football Players

Background: Nutritional supplementation is widely used to support physical and cognitive performance in football. However, evidence on multi-ingredient protocols combining taurine, caffeine, and phosphatidylserine (PS) remains limited in professional athletes. Methods: Eighty-one professional male football players (19-32 years) were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 27): placebo (P), taurine + caffeine (TC; 1500 mg taurine + 200 mg caffeine), and taurine + caffeine + PS (TCP; 1500 mg taurine + 150 mg caffeine + 300 mg PS) in a randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blind trial. Supplementation lasted 10 days, with a final dose administered 60 min before a standardized 105 min training session. Reaction time, sprint performance, GPS-derived variables, and technical/tactical indicators were assessed. Data were analyzed using ANOVA with post hoc tests, and pairwise comparisons were additionally adjusted using the Holm-Bonferroni correction due to the exploratory nature of the analysis. Results: Compared with placebo, the TCP group was associated with more favorable physical, cognitive, and selected game-related outcomes (p 2 = 0.13-0.20) and smaller fatigue-related declines in sprint performance (-18% vs. -34%) and speed (-10% vs. -19%) (η2 = 0.18-0.22). Reaction time and technical indicators, including passing accuracy (84% vs. 75%) and dribbling success (73% vs. 62%), were also improved. Higher coach-rated tactical performance scores were observed in TCP (η2 = 0.19-0.25). Conclusions: A short-term multi-ingredient protocol including taurine, caffeine, and PS may be associated with improved physical, cognitive, and selected game-related outcomes in professional football players. However, due to differences in caffeine dosage between groups, the independent effect of PS cannot be determined. Further double-blind studies are warranted. Given the exploratory nature of the analysis, the multiple assessed outcomes, and the partly subjective coach-rated tactical evaluations, the cognitive and tactical findings should be interpreted cautiously and regarded as preliminary rather than confirmatory evidence.