Menu

HomeHow it worksContact UsContact Us

Comparative effects of short- and long-distance sprint training on speed, change-of-direction ability, and intermittent aerobic endurance in collegiate basketball players

Yang Zhang, Jiayi WANG, Zhihai Wang · Frontiers in Physiology · 2026

This study compared short-distance sprint training versus long-distance sprint training in collegiate basketball players over 6 weeks, using the same total training volume for both groups. Both training approaches improved sprint speed, change-of-direction ability, and aerobic endurance similarly, with only the short-distance sprint group showing significantly greater gains in 5-meter sprinting.
Takeaway: Choose short-distance sprint training if you want faster acceleration over 5 meters, but expect similar improvements in longer sprints and agility from either approach.
Abstract (source)

Background: This study compared the effects of short-distance sprint training (SST) and long-distance sprint training (LST), under matched total training volume, on sprint performance, change-of-direction (COD) performance and intermittent aerobic endurance in collegiate basketball players.

Methods: Thirty male collegiate basketball players were stratified by playing position before being randomly assigned to either the SST group (n = 15) or the LST group (n = 15). Both groups completed a 6-week sprint training intervention twice weekly. Before and after the intervention assessments included sprint performance (5 m, 10 m, 20 m, and 30 m sprint tests), COD performance (505 test, T-test, and COD deficit (CODD)), and intermittent aerobic endurance (Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 1 (Yo-Yo IR1)). Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was monitored throughout the intervention. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and two-way repeated-measures ANOVA.

Results: A significant group × time interaction observed only for 5 m sprint performance ( F = 7.99, p = 0.022, η² p = 0.222). No significant interaction effects or group main effects were observed for the remaining sprint, COD, intermittent aerobic endurance, or RPE variables ( p > 0.05). However, significant time main effects were found for 10 m, 20 m, and 30 m sprint performance, 505 test, T-test, CODD, and Yo-Yo IR1 ( p < 0.05), indicating that both training protocols improved these outcomes over time. Although the SST group showed descriptively greater percentage improvements in 5 m and 10 m sprint performance, and the LST group demonstrated larger percentage improvements in 20 m and 30 m sprint performance, COD performance, and Yo-Yo IR1, these differences were not statistically significant. RPE responses were similar between groups throughout the intervention.

Conclusions: Under matched training volume conditions, both SST and LST effectively improved sprint, COD, and intermittent aerobic endurance performance after 6 weeks in male collegiate basketball players. SST elicited significantly greater improvements only in 5 m sprint performance, whereas both training protocols produced comparable improvements in the remaining outcomes. Our

Findings: suggest that sprint distance is a meaningful programming variable that may shape basketball-specific physical adaptations. Clinical trial registration https://www.chictr.org.cn , identifier ChiCTR2600122073.

Primary studyOpen accessRecovery & SleepProgramming & Periodization
Read the original →

Related in Recovery & Sleep

The Resistance Training Dose Response: Meta-Regressions Exploring the Effects of Weekly Volume and Frequency on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength GainsShort-term creatine supplementation enhances strength, reduces fatigue, and accelerates recovery in resistance-trained athletes: a double-blind, randomized, crossover trialSleep and Athletic Performance: A Multidimensional Review of Physiological and Molecular MechanismsEffects of sleep deprivation on sports performance and perceived exertion in athletes and non-athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysisEvidence for Periodizing Strength and/or Endurance TrainingInter-Set Blood-Flow Restriction Increases Peripheral Physiological Stress While Preserving Repeated-Sprint Mechanical Output in Trained Athletes.