Sled Training Research

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of resisted sprint training (RST) using both weighted vests and sleds on sprint performance in young soccer players under 20 years of age. The authors stratified results by equipment type (vest vs sled) and resistance magnitude (above and below 20% body mass).

The analysis found meaningful improvements in the acceleration phase (SMD = -0.41) and full sprint time (SMD = -0.36), but negligible, non-significant improvements in the maximum-velocity phase (SMD = -0.25). Interestingly, vest training outperformed sled training for acceleration (vest SMD = -0.70 vs sled SMD = -0.27), while sled training produced slightly better full sprint improvements (sled SMD = -0.44 vs vest SMD = -0.26).

Both lighter (<20% BM) and heavier (>=20% BM) loads produced similar acceleration benefits, with lighter loads showing a slight edge (SMD = -0.55 vs -0.31). Critically, when compared to unresisted training control groups, no significant differences were found, suggesting that while RST is effective, it does not offer clear superiority over conventional sprint training in this population.

This randomized controlled trial examined 50 male high school athletes to determine the effects of different sled-push loading intensities on sprint performance and the force-velocity profile. Participants were assigned to four groups: unresisted sprinting, or resisted sled pushing at light (25%), moderate (50%), or heavy (75%) velocity decrements. All groups trained twice weekly for 8 weeks.

The results clearly favored resisted training. Split times improved significantly across all three resisted groups (p<0.05) but not in the unresisted training group. The greatest gains occurred in the first 5 meters of sprinting, with effect sizes ranging from 0.67 to 0.84. Heavy loads produced the largest increases in force and power output.

This study is notable because it is one of the first to examine sled pushing (rather than pulling) and to use a youth population. The finding that any resisted load outperformed unresisted training is particularly strong, and the dose-response relationship favoring heavier loads for short-distance acceleration has practical implications for coaches working with developing athletes.

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined 13 studies with 32 resisted sled training (RST) groups and 15 control groups to determine the effectiveness of sled training for sprint performance. The authors searched PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed experimental studies where participants towed or pulled a sled while running at maximum intensity.

The meta-analysis found significant improvements in the acceleration phase (effect size 0.61, p=0.0001) between baseline and post-training. Full sprint times also showed significant but smaller improvements. However, improvements in the maximum-velocity phase were non-significant, confirming that sled training primarily targets the early acceleration portion of a sprint.

When compared to control groups performing unresisted training, the differences were not statistically significant, suggesting that sled training is effective but not definitively superior to conventional sprint training. The authors recommended specific protocols for best results: total volume exceeding 160 meters per session (approximately 2,680m across the program), 2-3 sessions per week, and a minimum duration of 6 weeks. Training on rigid surfaces enhanced effectiveness.

This systematic review examined eleven peer-reviewed studies on resisted sled sprint (RSS) training to determine its effectiveness for improving sprint acceleration and maximal velocity. The authors searched PubMed and SPORTDiscus for longitudinal interventions using sled towing devices and calculated effect sizes using Cohen's d.

The review found that load magnitude matters considerably. Light loads below 10% body mass produced small decrements in acceleration (-1.5%) but moderate improvements in maximal velocity (2.4%) among sprint-trained individuals. Moderate to very heavy loads (10%+ body mass) generated much larger acceleration improvements ranging from 0.5% to 9.1% in strength-trained or team sport athletes.

However, whether RSS training is truly superior to conventional unresisted sprint training remains equivocal based on the available evidence. The authors concluded that future research needs to better define optimal loading parameters based on specific performance goals and athlete populations.

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the transfer of lower-body strength training methods, including resisted sprinting with sleds, to sprint performance outcomes.

This randomized prospective study examined 22 male university students to compare the effects of resisted sled-pulling versus unresisted sprint training on different phases of sprint performance. Participants were divided into a resisted sprint group (n=11) using 5kg sled pulling and an unresisted sprint group (n=11). Both groups performed identical protocols of 4x20m and 4x50m maximal runs, three times per week for 8 weeks.

The key finding was a clear phase-specific training effect. Resisted sled-pulling significantly improved early acceleration (running velocity at 0-10m and 0-20m), while unresisted sprint training enhanced maximum speed performance (velocity at 20-40m and 40-50m). The mechanisms differed as well: stride rate increased only with resisted training in the acceleration phase (+7.1%), while stride length increased only with unresisted training at maximum speed (+5.5%).

This study provides foundational evidence that sprint training is phase-specific. Coaches seeking to improve acceleration should incorporate sled pulling, while those targeting maximum velocity should emphasize unresisted sprints. An integrated program using both methods may be optimal for developing all phases of sprint performance.