Repeated Sprint Ability Part II : Training Considerations

The need for replicating the specific ‘repeated sprint demands’ within strength and conditioning practice were previously explored within part one of this article series, including the beneficial adaptations associated with repeated sprint ability training (see ‘Repeated Sprint Ability Part I : Bioenergetic Adaptations). The training considerations when programming repeated sprint ability training is explored within part two of this article series.            

Linear Based RSA

Little and Williams (2007) previously reported that a repeated sprint protocol of 40x15m sprints with a work : rest ratio of 1:4 or 1:6 most closely replicated the repeat physiological demands of competitive soccer. However, the authors also reported that the reduction in sprint performance when implementing a 1:4 work : rest ratio was too great when applied with soccer athletes, suggesting that a greater rest period may be required between sets (e.g. 1:6 work : rest ratio). Furthermore, the authors also recommended that a supra-maximal repeat sprint protocol of 15x40m sprints (with a work : rest ratio of 1:4) may be applicable when periodised appropriately within soccer performance programs. These findings demonstrate the benefits of repeated sprint training protocols that replicate the specific physiological demands of sports performance, and how repeated sprint training can be programmed with the occasional aim of overreaching an athlete as part of an overall periodised plan.   

Change of Direction Based RSA

A potential limitation of such linear ‘straight-line’ repeated sprint protocols is the lack of change of direction during each completed sprint effort. Buchheit et al (2010) previously reported a 30% reduction in sprint performance when comparing 25 m linear sprint performance vs 2 x 12.5 m shuttle sprint performance with the inclusion of a 180 degree turn. Furthermore, the authors also reported variances in measured performance variables between both sprint protocols, with the greater (and therefore more demanding) scores being recorded during the shuttle sprint efforts. The authors suggested that the greater time taken to complete each sprint was a result of the athlete participants having less time to accelerate due to the shorter distance being covered, and the need to decelerate and perform a change of direction before re-accelerating.

The authors also suggested that the differences in sprint performance and the physiological performance variables observed were an indication that the change of direction requirement within the sprint shuttle protocol placed a greater physiological demand on the bodily systems when compared to the linear sprint protocol. Therefore, strength and conditioning coaches should consider implementing repeat sprint training methods that involve a change of direction when working with athlete’s who’s chosen sports involve repeated changes of direction, or as a form of progressive overload within an overall periodised plan.

Aerobic Capacity 

Bogdanis et al (1996) previously demonstrated that aerobic metabolism significantly contributes to repeated sprint performance beyond the first performed sprint. The authors reported that aerobic metabolism demands increased from 31% to 50% beyond the first sprint effort when performing repeated 30 second maximal sprints. The significant increase in aerobic contributions even occurred after a four minute rest period between each repeated sprint. These findings demonstrate that aerobic capacity contributes significantly to repeated high intensity performance, both in the form of recovery and high intensity performance, despite the anaerobic nature such explosive movements Hoff (2005) previously reported a reduction in distance covered and repeated sprint efforts during the second half of competitive games, suggesting a depletion in glycogen scores may contribute to such a reduction in performance. The authors concluded that an improvement in an athlete’s aerobic capacity would lead to an improvement stored fat utilisation, therefore reserving stored glycogen stores for more high intensity efforts.

These findings demonstrate the need for athletes that require repeat high intensity effort capabilities to improve their relative aerobic capacity before embarking on a repeated sprint training protocol, therefore enhancing their aerobic metabolism contribution levels, intermittent recovery performance and glycogen reservation.