Strides and sprints make you more efficient
High confidence
Running economy is how much energy you burn to hold a given pace. Trained runners improved theirs by 3 to 8 percent in 6 to 9 weeks of short fast efforts, and cut about 2 to 5 percent off their 5K times.
Why it works
Short fast efforts train the nervous system to recruit more muscle fibers at once. The legs also grow stiffer and springier. Each stride then reuses more stored energy through the stretch-shortening cycle, where a muscle loads like a spring and rebounds. None of this changes the aerobic engine. The runner simply gets faster at the same oxygen cost.
What it means in practice
Most plans fold in strides 1 to 2 times per week on easy days from week 3 onward, at any experience level. They cost little and ask little, yet carry the strongest evidence-to-effort ratio of any speed tool.
The evidence
-
The explosive-strength group ran 5 km faster with no change in VO2max, so the gains traced to running economy and neuromuscular changes rather than aerobic power. Economy improved and maximal anaerobic running velocity rose, each correlating with the 5K gain (r = -0.54 and r = 0.55). The endurance-only control group did not get faster. This remains the seminal evidence that short, high-velocity work transfers to distance performance through non-cardiorespiratory pathways.
n=18
-
Six weeks of plyometric training improved running economy in the plyometric group (p<0.05), while controls showed no change. VO2max held steady, so the efficiency gain traces to neuromuscular changes rather than aerobic capacity. The result replicates Paavolainen 1999 in recreational runners instead of well-trained ones. The small sample (n=18) and short duration keep it preliminary.
n=18
-
In trained distance runners, both heavy resistance and plyometric training improved running economy and time-trial performance. Heavy resistance produced the larger effect on economy (g = -0.32 versus g = -0.13 for plyometrics). Either modality transfers to distance performance, so a runner can pick the one they will actually keep doing. The pooled studies used only trained populations and varied enough that the effect sizes carry real heterogeneity.
-
Strength training improves running economy in highly trained middle- and long-distance runners. This meta-analysis pooled 5 controlled trials (n=93), all with VO2max above 60 ml/kg/min, in which runners added low-to-high intensity resistance work plus plyometrics 2 to 3 times per week for 8 to 12 weeks. The authors note how rarely elite runners do this: at the 2008 US Olympic Marathon Trials, nearly half reported no strength training at all. That VO2max threshold excludes typical recreational runners, so the effect at lower fitness levels stays an open question.
n=93
-
Several intrinsic factors track with better running economy: preferred stride length or up to 3% shorter (but not longer); lower vertical oscillation; greater leg stiffness; lower lower-limb moment of inertia; less leg extension at toe-off; larger stride angles (the angle of the parabolic tangent of the center of mass at toe-off); ground reaction force aligned with the leg axis during propulsion; maintained arm swing; low thigh antagonist-agonist coactivation; and low lower-limb muscle activation through the propulsive phase. Moore cautions against prescribing one 'ideal' form, because individual variation is large and many of these features emerge naturally with training rather than from explicit cueing. Beginners who improved their economy over 10 weeks did so through kinematic changes (knee and ankle angle at toe-off), not a dramatic form overhaul.
Why we call confidence high
The effect shows up in controlled trials on both ends of the ability range: Paavolainen (1999) in well-trained runners and Turner (2003) in recreational runners. A 2022 meta-analysis by Eihara pooled both heavy-resistance and plyometric training and found the same. Narrative reviews (Moore 2016) trace the mechanism through running economy, leg stiffness, and neuromuscular activation.
Where it applies
Distance runners from recreational to well-trained, both sexes. Trials covered ages 18 to 30. Broader ages are a plausible extension, not yet a direct finding.
Does not apply to: complete beginners with <6 months running history (form/load tolerance not yet adapted); runners managing acute injury where high-velocity efforts contraindicated.
Plans that respect this
Plans that scored well on the rubric measures informed by this claim.
- 10-Week Run Your First 10k (3 days)
- 10-Week Run Your First 10k (4 days)
- 10-Week Run Your First Half Marathon (3 days)
- 10-Week Run Your First Half Marathon (4 days)
- 10-Week Sub-1:30 Half Marathon (4 days)
- 10-Week Sub-1:30 Half Marathon (5 days)
- 10-Week Sub-1:30 Half Marathon (6 days)
- 10-Week Sub-1:45 Half Marathon (4 days)
- 10-Week Sub-1:45 Half Marathon (5 days)
- 10-Week Sub-1:45 Half Marathon (6 days)
- 10-Week Sub-2 Half Marathon (3 days)
- 10-Week Sub-2 Half Marathon (4 days)
Last reviewed May 7, 2026. See how we score.