See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309965181

Very-Heavy Sled Training for Improving Horizontal Force Output in Soccer

Players

Article  in  International journal of sports physiology and performance · November 2016

DOI: 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0444

CITATIONS READS
15 8,299

6 authors, including:

Jean-Benoît Morin George Petrakos

University of Nice Sophia Antipolis Glasgow Warriors
232 PUBLICATIONS   3,597 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   57 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Pedro Jimenez-Reyes Scott Randall Brown

King Juan Carlos University Auckland University of Technology
89 PUBLICATIONS   507 CITATIONS    62 PUBLICATIONS   266 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Exercise Adaptations to the Achilles tendon: Impact on rehabilitation of Achilles tendinopathy, ankle joint stiffness and performance in runners. View project

2. Sprint mechanical profile in sprint-related Hamstring injury management View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Matt R Cross on 07 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2017, 12, 840  
http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0444
© 2017 Human Kinetics, Inc. BRIEF REPORT

Very-Heavy Sled Training for Improving Horizontal-Force

Output in Soccer Players
Jean-Benoît Morin, George Petrakos, Pedro Jiménez-Reyes, Scott R. Brown,
Pierre Samozino, and Matt R. Cross

Background: Sprint running acceleration is a key feature of physical performance in team sports, and recent literature shows
that the ability to generate large magnitudes of horizontal ground-reaction force and mechanical effectiveness of force applica-
tion are paramount. The authors tested the hypothesis that very-heavy loaded sled sprint training would induce an improvement
in horizontal-force production, via an increased effectiveness of application. Methods: Training-induced changes in sprint
performance and mechanical outputs were computed using a field method based on velocity–time data, before and after an
8-wk protocol (16 sessions of 10- × 20-m sprints). Sixteen male amateur soccer players were assigned to either a very-heavy
sled (80% body mass sled load) or a control group (unresisted sprints). Results: The main outcome of this pilot study is that
very-heavy sled-resisted sprint training, using much greater loads than traditionally recommended, clearly increased maximal
horizontal-force production compared with standard unloaded sprint training (effect size of 0.80 vs 0.20 for controls, unclear
between-groups difference) and mechanical effectiveness (ie, more horizontally applied force; effect size of 0.95 vs –0.11,
moderate between-groups difference). In addition, 5-m and 20-m sprint performance improvements were moderate and small
for the very-heavy sled group and small and trivial for the control group, respectively. Practical Applications: This brief report
highlights the usefulness of very-heavy sled (80% body mass) training, which may suggest value for practical improvement of
mechanical effectiveness and maximal horizontal-force capabilities in soccer players and other team-sport athletes. Conclusion:
This study may encourage further research to confirm the usefulness of very-heavy sled in this context.

Keywords: resistance training, acceleration, performance, power, football

Sprint running acceleration is a key feature of physical per-
formance in team sports (eg, soccer, rugby). Recent literature have
shown that the ability to generate large magnitudes of ground reac-
tion force in the horizontal direction, particularly with respect to
the mechanical efficiency of overall capacity, is key in determining
acceleration performance.1,2
Resisted sled training provides a specific means of providing
overload to horizontal-force capacities.3 Moreover, this practical
and cost-effective training modality can be used very easily by
soccer players of all levels, from elite to amateur. Authors using
the latter methods have used comparatively light loading pro-
tocols (5–7% of body mass [BM]), based on misinterpretation
of guidelines suggesting selection of loading parameters that
minimize kinematic changes.4 Contrastingly, a recent review of
literature,3 and notably a study showing horizontal power output
was maximized at much greater loads (69–96% BM),5 highlight
heavier loads may represent a more effective stimulus for improv-
ing sprinting acceleration. This has also been suggested in an
experimental training study6 showing the potential benefit of
using heavier loads. Our own observations (unpublished) show
Morin is with Université Côte d’Azur, LAMHESS, Nice, France. Brown
and Cross are with the Sports Performance Research Inst New Zealand
(SPRINZ), Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Petrakos is with the Glasgow Warriors, Glasgow, UK. Jiménez-Reyes is
with the Faculty of Physical Sciences and Sport, Catholic University of San
Antonio, Murcia, Spain. Samozino is with the Laboratoire Interuniversitaire
de Biologie de la Motricité, Université Savoie Mont Blanc, Chambéry,
France. Morin (jean-benoit.morin@unice.fr) is corresponding author.
that resisted sprint acceleration training with very-heavy loaded
sleds (VHS) clearly force the athlete to run slow, and thus allow
for an enhanced opportunity to produce force during a forward-
oriented body position throughout the sprint, which is not possible
during free or light load sled sprint accelerations. Consequently,
we propose that VHS could provide a practical solution to develop
both the specific force output and the ability to orient this force
output with effectiveness. To our knowledge no research has used
greater loads than 43%6 for longitudinal adaptations.
A recent experimental study indicates that the hip exten-
sor muscles (hamstrings in particular) play a crucial role in the
production of horizontal force during acceleration bouts.7 Sprint-
related hamstring injuries have been the focus of many studies in
recent years, with no clear reduction in injury rates.8 Recently,
a retrospective study9 showed that the maximal net horizontal
ground reaction force produced during sprint acceleration (F0)
was clearly impaired in soccer athletes proceeding their return-
to-sport after hamstring injury, compared with their noninjured
counterparts. Furthermore, a prospective pilot study involving 2
athletes showed similar results, with a clearly lower F0 observed
preinjury occurrence in a soccer player, and a lower-than-the-
average F0 in a rugby player directly preceding injury (compared
with their teammates).10 Although more prospective evidence is
currently in development (works in progress), it is possible that a
reduced F0 may indicate a greater risk of sprint-related hamstring
injury. It stands to reason that the targeted development of the
ability to produce and effectively apply high amounts of F0 could
both improve sprint performance and reduce injury risk in soccer
players. Our rationale is that VHS towing is better at affecting F0
than typically recommended light load sled towing or unresisted

840

sprinting because the higher resistance in itself constitutes a higher
force overload and it allows the athlete to keep on pushing onto the
ground in a more incline, horizontally oriented and thus mechani-
cally effective body posture, over a longer time, which is not pos-
sible with lighter loads or unresisted sprints. The results of a study
investigating the specific overload, and subsequent improvement
in these capacities, would be of interest to all team-sport athletes
and practitioners in which these injuries are common.
The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that VHS
sprint training would induce an improvement in horizontal-force
production, mainly via a more effective ground force application,
in amateur soccer players.
Methods
Downloaded by Ebsco Publishing aellsworth@ebsco.com on 08/24/17, Volume 12, Article Number 6
Athletes
Twenty male amateur soccer players initially volunteered to par-
ticipate in this study. Due to injuries (unrelated) or personal reasons
(studies, work), 4 athletes in the original control group could not
perform the entire protocol and/or the posttesting session, and were
removed from the study. Consequently, the outcome statistics were
performed on 10 players in the VHS group (age: 26.3 ± 4.0 y; body
height: 1.77 ± 0.08 m; BM: 74.5 ± 5.3 kg) versus 6 controls (age:
26.8 ± 4.2 y; body height: 1.75 ± 0.08 m; BM: 70.7 ± 6.5 kg), which
was performed in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki, and
received the approval of the local ethics committee. All players had
over 10 year of competitive practice in soccer, and were performing
two 2-hour training sessions a week plus 1 game at the time of the
study. They were not involved in any type of weight training at the
time of the study.
Design
Athletes were randomly assigned to the VHS or control group.
Both groups performed the same sprinting program after col-
lective standardized warm-up at the beginning of each training
session (on Tuesdays and Thursdays) during 8 consecutive
weeks (16 sessions in total). Pre- and posttraining testing of
sprint performance and mechanics occurred, respectively, 1
week before and 1 week after the first and last training sessions.
During each training session, the control group performed 2
blocks of 5- × 20-m sprints with no resistance (2-min recovery
between sprints and 5-min recovery between the 2 blocks). The
VHS group performed the same sprint protocol as the control
group, except that they ran towing a resisted sled attached to
their waist, with a load corresponding to 80% BM. This relative
load common to all athletes was selected for means of practical-
ity, and due to the homogeneity of the athlete sample character-
istics on the relative load needed to induce a similar decrement
in maximal running speed among players (preliminary test-
ing). The magnitude of loading was selected based on speed
decrement pilot data to approximate resistance for maximizing
power.5 The VHS was assigned a mixed content of unresisted
and resisted sprints with an increasing amount of resisted sprint
over the training intervention: 5 VHS sprints out of 10 during
sessions 1 to 4, 6 during sessions 5 to 8, 7 during sessions 9 to
12, and 8 during the last 4 sessions. This progressive program
was used to gradually introduce the stimulus of sled towing and
avoid potentially challenging increases in training load for the
athletes. During each session, the VHS were performed before
the unresisted ones.
IJSPP Vol. 12, No. 6, 2017
Sled Training to Improve Horizontal-Force Output   841
Methodology
After an appropriate warm-up, athletes performed two 30-m
maximal accelerations from a standing split start with 4 minutes
of passive recovery between sprints. For the best time trial, sprint
performance and mechanical outputs were computed pretraining
and posttraining using a recently developed field method.11 Briefly,
this computation method is based on a macroscopic inverse dynam-
ics analysis of the center-of-mass motion, and has been shown
valid and reliable in comparison with ground-embedded force
plate measurements.11 Raw velocity–time (v) data measured with
a radar device (Stalker ATS Pro II, Applied Concepts, TX, USA)
were fitted by an exponential function. Instantaneous velocity
was then derived to compute the net horizontal anteroposterior
ground-reaction force (FH), and the power output in the horizontal
direction (P). Individual linear force–velocity relationships were
then extrapolated to calculate theoretical maximal force (F0) and
velocity (v0) capabilities.11,12 Finally, the mechanical effectiveness
of force application was quantified over each step by the ratio of
FH to the corresponding resultant GRF (RF in %), and over the
entire acceleration phase by the slope of the linear decrease in RF
when velocity increases (DRF).1,12 The maximal RF value obtained
was termed RFmax.
Statistical Analysis
Within- and between-groups changes were analyzed using
magnitude-based inferences; implementing a smallest worthwhile
change value equal to a Cohen d of 0.20.13 Standardized effects
were then interpreted using threshold values of Cohen d < 0.2, 0.2,
0.6, and 1.2 representing trivial, small, moderate, and large differ-
ences, respectively.13 If the probabilities of the true effect being
substantially positive and negative were both >5%, the effect was
expressed as unclear; otherwise the effect was clear and expressed
as a magnitude of its observed value. Analysis was performed on
both raw and log transformed data, with no meaningful difference
in outcome variables or interpretation. The resultant analysis from
the raw dataset is presented for the reader.
Results
Table 1 shows the outcomes of the main measurements and both
within- and between-groups changes comparison. Figure 1 shows
the magnitude of prepost changes in both groups for the main sprint
performance and mechanical outputs.
Discussion
The main outcome of this pilot study is that VHS training using
much greater loads than traditionally recommended clearly
increased maximal horizontal-force production and mechanical
effectiveness (ie, more horizontally applied force). This confirms
our initial hypothesis that VHS resistance sprint training is an
effective and practical method to improve F0 and RFmax in soccer
players. The 2 latter variables showed small to moderate changes
in the VHS group versus unclear ones in the control group,
and unclear to moderate (ES of 0.57 ± 0.84 and 0.96 ± 0.86,
respectively) between group differences in the prepost changes.
Furthermore, prepost changes were of moderate magnitude,
initial sprint acceleration performance (5-m) improvement was
moderate in the VHS group versus small in the control group
(Figure 1).
 Downloaded by Ebsco Publishing aellsworth@ebsco.com on 08/24/17, Volume 12, Article Number 6

842
Table 1  Athlete Body Mass, Mechanical, Technical, and Performance Sprint-Variable Comparisons of Post–Pre Changes Within and Between the
Control and Very-Heavy Sled Groups
Control Group (n = 6) Very-Heavy Sled Group (n = 10) Post–Pre Group Change,
Very-Heavy Sled Group–
Post–pre Post–pre Control Group
ES; ES; ES;
Pre X ± SD Post X ± SD %Δ ± SD ±90% CL Inference Pre X ± SD Post X ± SD %Δ ± SD ±90% CL Inference ±90% CL Inference
Body mass 70.7 ± 70.5 ± –0.22 ± –0.02; Trivial*** 74.5 ± 74.8 ± 0.41 ± 0.05; Trivial** 0.08; Trivial**
(kg) 6.5 6.3 1.70 ±0.13 (neutral) 5.3 5.4 2.08 ±0.15 (neutral) ±0.19 (neutral)
v0 (m/s) 8.67 ± 8.72 ± 0.60 ± 0.09; Unclear 8.56 ± 8.49 ± –0.77 ± –0.16; Trivial* –0.28; Unclear
0.45 0.71 6.55 ±0.86 0.41 0.34 2.75 ±0.30 (negative) ±1.07
F0 (N/kg) 6.99 ± 7.12 ± 1.86 ± 0.20; Unclear 6.91 ± 7.33 ± 6.12 ± 0.80; Moderate** 0.57; Unclear
0.53 0.63 6.14 ±0.53 0.47 0.66 7.99 ±0.61 (positive) ±0.84
Pmax (W/kg) 15.1 ± 15.4 ± 2.14 ± 0.14; Trivial** 14.7 ± 15.4 ± 5.30 ± 0.59; Small** 0.32; Small*
1.8 1.6 1.51 ±0.08 (positive) 1.2 1.7 7.86 ±0.50 (positive) ±0.45 (positive)
RFmax (%) 48.6 ± 48.2 ± –0.73 ± –0.11; Unclear 46.8 ± 49.1 ± 5.13 ± 0.95; Moderate*** 0.96; Moderate**
3.2 3.4 5.30 ±0.54 2.3 3.0 6.09 ±0.66 (positive) ±0.86 (positive)

IJSPP Vol. 12, No. 6, 2017

DRF –0.073 ± –0.075 ± 2.06 ± –0.30; Unclear –0.074 ± –0.079 ± 6.09 ± –0.61; Moderate** –0.46; Unclear
0.004 0.009 11.34 ±1.30 0.006 0.006 8.48 ±0.52 (negative) ±1.23
5-m (s) 1.42 ± 1.41 ± –0.98 ± –0.23; Small* 1.43 ± 1.40 ± –2.10 ± –0.68; Moderate** –0.36; Unclear
0.05 0.06 1.37 ±0.27 (positive) 0.04 0.06 3.12 ±0.59 (positive) ±0.64
20-m (s) 3.51 ± 3.49 ± –0.58 ± –0.12; Trivial** 3.54 ± 3.50 ± –1.21 ± –0.40; Small** –0.19; Unclear
0.14 0.13 0.77 ±0.13 (positive) 0.10 0.13 2.27 ±0.44 (positive) ±0.42
Note: Values are mean ± SD, percent change ± SD, and standardized effect size; ±90% confidence limits. Qualitative inferences are trivial (<0.20), small (0.20–<0.60), and moderate (0.60–<1.20): *possibly, 25–< 75%; **likely,
75–<95%; ***very likely, 95–<99.5%. Positive, neutral, and negative descriptors qualitatively describe the change between post and pre values and its importance relative to the specific variable.
Abbreviations: Χ, mean; Δ, change; ES, effect size; 90% CL, 90% confidence limits; v0, maximal theoretical running velocity; F0, maximal theoretical horizontal force; Pmax, maximal power output; RFmax, maximal ratio of
force after 0.3 s; DRF, decrease in the ratio of force.
 Sled Training to Improve Horizontal-Force Output   843
Downloaded by Ebsco Publishing aellsworth@ebsco.com on 08/24/17, Volume 12, Article Number 6

Figure 1 — Magnitude of prepost changes in the main sprint acceleration performance and mechanical outputs. The standardized differences are
expressed as a factor of the smallest worthwhile change [SWC = effect size (Cohen d) of 0.2]. Bars indicate the 90% confidence limits. Abbreviations:
BM, body mass; v0, maximal theoretical running velocity; F0, theoretical maximal horizontal force; Pmax, maximal power; RFmax, maximal ratio of force;
DRF, decrease in the ratio of force; 5m, 5-m sprint time; 20m, 20-m sprint time.

To our knowledge, no study has tested the training effect of
sleds using resistance of a high magnitude than 43% of BM6 on
sprint performance and its underpinning mechanical determinants
(eg, F0 and RFmax). This is likely due, in part, to common practice
and recommendation discouraging conditions that modify acute
technique (eg, >10–12.6% of BM, or >10% velocity decrement3,4),
suggesting training would present negative adaptations. Contrast-
ingly, our results show that if one considers resisted sled training as
a method of increasing movement specific horizontal force, power,
and effectiveness, much heavier loads may present an effective
training stimulus.5 This is particularly justified in amateur players
without access to strength-training facilities.
VHS training resulted in specific improvements in the F0 and
RFmax variables, with only trivial effect on v0, and a decrease in
the ability to maintain the mechanical effectiveness throughout the
acceleration (DRF). Since VHS training at the magnitudes used in
this study may be considered as a training method to specifically
develop the F0 and RFmax variables, it could be interesting to use
it in the context of individualized training based on the force–
velocity profile in sprinting for those athletes who are deficient
in maximal horizontal force or mechanical effectiveness.12 Fur-
ther studies are necessary to test methods aiming at specifically
improving the opposing end of the force–velocity spectrum (v0)
and the DRF index.
Our primary purpose was to provide pilot data on the effects
of training at resistance of magnitudes far outstripping the heavi-
est in current literature (~43% BM).6 Given the recommendations
from recent authors,3,5 and the unclear to small effects shown by
the between-groups comparison (Table 1), future studies should
look to test the effects of individualized loading prescription on
horizontal-force and sprint-performance measures, and clarify
the interindividual variability of responses observed for some
variables.
Practical Applications
VHS training may be used to specifically improve sprint maximal
horizontal-force production. These results may not only have
important implications regarding short distance acceleration perfor-
mance,12 but also hamstring injury prevention.9,10 We invite further
research to consider and address some limitations of the current
study, and investigate the effect of individualized loading prescrip-
tion using speed decrement instead of BM, and the generalizability
of these results to higher-level athletes and other sports.
Conclusions
Very-heavy sled training (80% BM) is effective in improving 5-m
and 20-m sprint performance and mechanical effectiveness and
maximal horizontal-force capabilities in soccer players.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the athletes of this study and their coaching staff for
their commitment and enthusiasm in performing the assigned training and
testing. We also thank Satya Vesseron for his help in recruiting the athletes
and supervising the training program. Scott R. Brown was partly funded
by the International Society of Biomechanics (ISB) Student International
Travel Grant.
References
1. Morin JB, Edouard P, Samozino P. Technical ability of force applica-
tion as a determinant factor of sprint performance. Med Sci Sports
Exerc. 2011;43(9):1680–1688. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e318216ea37
PubMed

IJSPP Vol. 12, No. 6, 2017

 844  Morin et al
2. Rabita G, Dorel S, Slawinski J, et al. Sprint mechanics in world-class
athletes: a new insight into the limits of human locomotion. Scand J
Med Sci Sports. 2015;25(5):583–594. doi:10.1111/sms.12389 PubMed
3. Petrakos G, Morin JB, Egan B. Resisted sled sprint training to improve
sprint performance: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2016;46(3):381–
400. doi:10.1007/s40279-015-0422-8 PubMed
4. Alcaraz PE, Palao JM, Elvira JLL. Determining the optimal load
for resisted sprint training with sled towing. J Strength Cond Res.
2009;23(2):480–485. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318198f92c PubMed
5. Cross MR, Brughelli ME, Samozino P, Morin J-B. Optimal loading
for maximizing power in resisted sled sprinting. In: European College
of Sport Sciences, 6–9 July. Vienna, Austria; 2016.
6. Kawamori N, Newton RU, Hori N, Nosaka K. Effects of weighted
sled towing with heavy versus light load on sprint acceleration abil-
ity. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28(10):2738–2745. doi:10.1519/
JSC.0b013e3182915ed4 PubMed
Downloaded by Ebsco Publishing aellsworth@ebsco.com on 08/24/17, Volume 12, Article Number 6
7. Morin J-B, Gimenez P, Edouard P, et al. Sprint acceleration mechan-
ics: the major role of hamstrings in horizontal force production. Front
Physiol. 2015;6:e404. PubMed
8. Ekstrand J, Waldén M, Hägglund M. Hamstring injuries have increased
by 4% annually in men’s professional football, since 2001: a 13-year
IJSPP Vol. 12, No. 6, 2017
longitudinal analysis of the UEFA Elite Club injury study. Br J Sports
Med. 2016;50(12):731–7:1–8. PubMed
9. Mendiguchia J, Samozino P, Martinez-Ruiz E, et al. Progression of
mechanical properties during on-field sprint running after returning to
sports from a hamstring muscle injury in soccer players. Int J Sports
Med. 2014;35(8):690–695. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1363192 PubMed
10. Mendiguchia J, Edouard P, Samozino P, et al. Field monitoring of
sprinting power-force-velocity profile before, during and after ham-
string injury: two case reports. J Sports Sci. 2016;34(6):535–541. doi
:10.1080/02640414.2015.1122207 PubMed
11. Samozino P, Rabita G, Dorel S, et al. A simple method for measur-
ing power, force, velocity properties, and mechanical effectiveness
in sprint running. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016;26(6):648–658.
doi:10.1111/sms.12490 PubMed
12. Morin JB, Samozino P. Interpreting power-force-velocity profiles for
individualized and specific training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform.
2016;11(2):267–272 doi:10.1123/ijspp.2015-0638. PubMed
13. Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive
statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 2009;41(1):3–13. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e31818cb278
PubMed
 Copyright of International Journal of Sports Physiology & Performance is the property of
Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

View publication stats