Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Resisted sprint training improves acceleration and jump performance in athletes across multiple metricsResisted sprint training improves acceleration and jumping for athletes

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that resisted sprint training improves acceleration and jump performance, but evidence is limited by a male-heavy sample.

This meta-analysis evaluated the effects of resisted sprint training (RST) on athletic performance in a sample of 1945 athletes. The analysis found that RST favored acceleration (g = 0.32; 95% CI [0.16, 0.49]) and change of direction performance (g = 0.46; 95% CI [0.09, 0.82]). Additionally, RST favored vertical jump (g = 0.25; 95% CI [0.06, 0.44]) and horizontal jump (g = 0.24; 95% CI [0.11, 0.37]). When compared to unresisted sprint training, the additional mean effects were small (g = 0.22 to 0.30).

The authors noted several limitations, including the fact that prediction intervals crossed zero for acceleration, vertical jump, and change of direction performance. Furthermore, the evidence base is predominantly male, which may limit the generalizability of these findings to female athletes. The GRADE certainty was moderate for acceleration and low for other outcomes.

Clinically, RST is best viewed as a targeted overload method to complement high-speed sprinting and task-specific training. However, the authors note that benefits in new training contexts remain uncertain, and no universal load, dose, or superior modality was identified. Practitioners should consider the specific training goals when incorporating RST into athletic programs.

Athletes looking to shave seconds off their sprint times or increase their jumping power often turn to resisted sprint training. This method involves adding resistance to sprints to build explosive power. A review of data from 1,945 athletes shows that this training helps with acceleration, vertical jumps, and horizontal jumps. It also improved performance when changing direction.

While the results are positive, the evidence is not perfectly clear for everyone. The study notes that the data mostly comes from male athletes, so we do not know if the results are the same for women. Also, the researchers could not find a specific amount of weight or a perfect training routine that works for everyone.

Think of resisted sprint training as a targeted tool. It works best when used to complement high-speed sprinting and specific task training. Because the evidence for some outcomes is less certain, athletes should work with a coach to find the right balance for their specific goals.

What this means for you:
Resisted sprint training can improve acceleration and jumping, but results may differ for female athletes.

Common questions

What specific movements does resisted sprint training improve?

The study found that resisted sprint training helped with acceleration, vertical jumps, and horizontal jumps. It also showed positive results for change of direction performance. These movements are key for athletes who need to move quickly and explosively.

Is this training better than regular sprinting?

When compared to unresisted sprint training, the added benefits of resistance were small but positive. It is best used as a targeted way to add extra power to a standard sprinting routine.

Can women see the same results as men?

The evidence is currently limited because most of the data came from male athletes. Because of this, the results might not be the same for female athletes. You should talk to a coach to determine the best plan for your specific needs.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
Sample sizen = 1,945
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedOct 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
Resisted sprint training (RST) is widely used to improve acceleration, but transfer to jumping and changing direction remains unclear. This review examined RST effects on acceleration, vertical and horizontal jump, and change of direction performance, with variation by comparator and training characteristics. Eight databases were searched to 7 July 2026. The review included 66 independent studies and 1945 participants; 31 controlled studies contributed 179 effect sizes to the primary analysis. Three-level random-effects models accounted for dependence within studies. RST favored acceleration (g = 0.32, 95% CI [0.16, 0.49]), vertical jump (g = 0.25, 95% CI [0.06, 0.44]), horizontal jump (g = 0.24, 95% CI [0.11, 0.37]), and change of direction performance (g = 0.46, 95% CI [0.09, 0.82]). Prediction intervals crossed zero for acceleration, vertical jump, and change of direction performance, but not horizontal jump. After adjustment for comparator type, effects did not clearly differ among domains (p = 0.699). Compared with unresisted sprint training, additional mean effects were small (g = 0.22-0.30). Exploratory moderator analyses found no clear associations with comparator type, external load, training dose, or RST modality. GRADE certainty was moderate for acceleration and low for other outcomes. RST showed favorable mean effects across all four domains, although benefits in new training contexts remain uncertain. Evidence identifies no universal load, dose, or superior modality, and the predominantly male evidence base limits generalizability to female athletes. RST is best viewed as a targeted overload method complementing sprinting at high speed and training specific to the task.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.