It is unclear if a constant sprint-to-rest ratio allows full performance recovery between repeated sprints over different distances. This is important for the development of sprinttraining programs. Additionally, there is conflicting evidence on whether active recovery enhances sprint performance. Three repeated sprint protocols were used (22 × 15, 13 × 30, and 8 × 50 m), with each having an active and passive recovery. Each trial was conducted with an initial sprint-to-rest ratio of 1:10. Repeated sprints were analyzed by comparing the first sprint to the last sprint. For the 15-m trials, there were no significant main effects for recovery or time and no significant interaction. For the 30-m trials, there was no main effect for recovery, but a main effect for time (F[1,10] = 15.995, p = 0.003; mean difference = 0.20 seconds, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.09-0.31 seconds, d = 1.4 [large effect]). There was no interaction of recovery and time in the 30-m trials. For the 50-m trials, there was no main effect for recovery, but a main effect for time (F[1,10] = 34.225, p = 0.0002; mean difference = 0.39 seconds, 95% CI = 0.24-0.55 seconds, d = 1.3 [large effect]). There was no interaction of recovery and time in the 50-m trials. The results demonstrate that a 1:10 sprint-torest ratio allows full performance recovery between 15-m sprints, but not between sprints of 30 or 50 m, and that recovery mode did not influence repeated sprint performance.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
- Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation