Randomized trial compares two repeated-sprint protocols' impact on sprint performance in youth soccer players, suggesting both are effective.
Fernández-Penedo, D, Padrón-Cabo, A, Costa, PB, and Rey, E. Effects of repeated-sprint training set structure on sprint performance, force–velocity profile, and repeated-sprint ability in youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2026—This study compared the effects of 2 repeated-sprint training (RST) protocols of equal total volume, differing in the number of sprint repetitions per set—low (RST-LRS: 4–6 reps) vs. high (RST-HRS: 8–16 reps)—on sprint performance, horizontal force–velocity (F–V) profile, and repeated-sprint ability (RSA) in youth male soccer players. Nineteen under-16 players were randomly assigned to 1 of the protocols, with both groups completing 12 RST sessions over 6 weeks. Sprint times (5–30 m), F–V profile variables (F 0 , V 0 , Pmax, RFmax, and DRF), and RSA indices (average time, fastest time, total time, and % decrement) were assessed pre- and post-training. Significant improvements were observed in 20-m (−2.3%, p = 0.041) and 30-m (−2.1%, p = 0.026) sprint times, in Pmax (+7.2%, p = 0.037), and in RSA metrics (−3.8% to −4.7%, p < 0.01), with no significant group × time interactions for any variable. These findings indicate that both RST protocols are effective for enhancing sprint performance, maximal horizontal power, and RSA in young soccer players. From a practical perspective, coaches may select either protocol, depending on time constraints and training context, as both produced comparable adaptations when total sprint volume was equalized.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fernández-Penedo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: