International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2012, 7, 285-289
© 2012 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Repeated-sprint ability (RSA) is now well accepted as an important fitness component in team-sport performance. It is broadly described as the ability to perform repeated short (~3–4 s, 20–30 m) sprints with only brief
(~10–30 s) recovery between bouts. Over the past 25 y a plethora of RSA tests have been trialed and reported in the literature. These range from a single set of ~6–10 short sprints, departing every 20–30 s, to team-sport game simulations involving repeating cycles of walk-jog-stride-sprint movements over 45–90 min. Such a wide range of RSA tests has not assisted the synthesis of research findings in this area, and questions remain regarding the optimal methods of training to best improve RSA. In addition, how RSA test scores relate to player “work rate,” match performance, or both requires further investigation to improve the application of
RSA testing and training to elite team-sport athletes.
Keywords: team sports, recovery, training, testing
In 1976, the late Tom Reilly and his colleague
Vaughan Thomas 1 reported that the ability to perform repeated maximal short-duration sprints during a game is an integral fitness component in team sports. However, back then, no tests of repeated-sprint ability (RSA) had been developed. In 1984, as young and enthusiastic sports scientists, we trialed what we tentatively termed the Phosphate Recovery Test, 2 which was designed to evaluate a player’s ability to repeatedly produce shortduration, high-intensity efforts, interspersed with brief recovery periods. The test involved 20 × 7-second running sprints, on a departure time of 30 seconds. We reasoned that the test would stress the phosphate energy system and the associated recovery mechanisms necessary to allow repeated short-duration, high-intensity efforts, as research into the physiology and metabolism of RSA had not yet been conducted. We continued to tweak the test over the next few years, slowly coming to understand some of its flaws and shortcomings, and by 1991 3 we had revisited it, presenting evidence of pacing (necessary to survive the test in its initial format!) and high blood lactate accumulation (13–14 mmol/L) as inevitable consequences of the high number of sprints (20) and duration (7 s) involved.
Our suggestion was to modify the test back to 8 to 10 sprints of 5 seconds duration (or 30- to 35-m distance) departing every 30 seconds and to include a “% decrement score,” along with a total score for the test, to rate player performance. This type of test format is similar to what is commonplace today in RSA testing, with increased knowledge of sport-specific movement demands from time-motion studies 4–7 providing good scientific rationale for deciding on sprint times (or distance), length and type
The author is with the School of Sport Science, Exercise and
Health, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
(active or passive) of recovery, and total number of sprints to be performed. Time–motion data from many team sports have also been used to develop game-simulation exercise protocols 8,9 lasting up to 90 minutes, involving repeating cycles of walk-jog-stride-sprint activity and, in some cases, sport-specific skills.
10
The eminent 19th-century scientist, Lord Kelvin, has the following quotes attributed to him: “To measure is to know” and “if you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it.”
In the 1980s and 1990s some further research into the physiology and testing of RSA was done, with 5 to 10 ×
6-second running (~35–40 m) and cycling sprints departing every 30 to 36 seconds being most popular.
11–15 These early studies showed that RSA tests of this type required significant energy contributions from the phosphate, anaerobic glycolytic, and aerobic systems and that high muscle (>100 mmol/kg DM) and blood lactate (12–17 mmol/L) levels were recorded. Results also suggested that anaerobic power scores were major determinants of total
RSA scores (repeated power or speed) and that aerobic power was more closely associated with % decrement scores (recovery between sprints).
14
In the 2000s, research into RSA gathered considerable pace and new tests were developed, replicating the specific time–motion data now available on a range of team sports. Spencer et al 5 provided compelling data about the duration and number of sprint efforts typical in international field hockey matches. Mean sprint duration was 1.8 ± 0.45 seconds and the mean number of sprints in a game (71 min duration) was 30 ± 14, which produced a mean recovery time between sprints of ~2 minutes.
285

286 Dawson
However, these “average” time–motion values are of limited value, as team sports have a completely unpredictable nature, with sprinting requirements unevenly distributed throughout a game. Here, repeated sprint “clusters” were defined as a minimum of 3 sprints, with a mean recovery period between sprints of less than 21 seconds, which were found to occur 17 times during a game. Preparing for the “worst case scenario” likely to occur in a game intuitively makes much more sense for testing and training RSA than using average values. In this study, on 4
(of 17) occasions repeated sprint clusters comprised 6 or 7 sprints, mean maximal sprint duration was 4.1 ±
2.1 seconds, ~25% of the time intervals between sprints were <21 seconds, and 95% of recovery time between sprints was active in nature.
5 These data were used 16 as a basis for the development of an RSA test for field hockey, comprising 6 × 30-m (~4 s) running sprints, with an active jog recovery between, departing every 25 seconds. This test format appears suitable for use with other team sports, which have similar time–motion data.
7,17,18
Notwithstanding the findings of Spencer et al, 5 it is evident that there are currently many variations of RSA tests in the literature. Broadly, 3 main formats have been used (sport-specific skills such as passing and shooting accuracy, jumps, and changes of direction are sometimes included, especially in multiple-set/match-simulation tests):
• Single-set tests (short duration: 3–5 min): 5–15 repetitions of 3–6 s duration (15–40 m) departing every 20–30 s with active recovery between 13,16,19–22
• Multiple-set (3-5) tests (medium duration: 15–40 min): 5–10 repetitions of 3–6 s duration (20–40 m) departing every 20–30 s in “hard” sets, sometimes alternated with “easy” sets, departing every 60–120 s, with active recovery between 23–26
• Match simulations/Multiple-set (6–10) tests (long duration: 45–90 min): Repeated cycles or sets of sprints of 3–6 s duration interspersed with walkingjogging-striding (running) or prescribed power outputs (cycling), departing every 60–120 s, often split into 4 × 15- to 20-min quarters or 2 × 30- to 45-min halves 8–10,27–31
Having such a wide range of sprint and recovery times, sprint and set numbers, and overall test durations has no doubt complicated this area, confounding the interpretation of the research findings. In selecting an
RSA test for use in experimental work, researchers should carefully consider their questions and aims and decide whether these are best evaluated by a short-, medium-, or long-duration RSA test. If the focus is on a “pure” assessment of RSA, perhaps before or after a training program, it is suggested that a single set test of the type trialed by Spencer et al 16 would be preferred. Alternatively, if the focus is on a team-sport match simulation, where the effectiveness of an intervention (eg, precooling/heat acclimation 27,32 supplements such as caffeine, 10,23,24,33 creatine, 28 and bicarbonate 34 ; preexercise stretching 25,26 ; or postexercise recovery procedures 19,35 ) is being evaluated, multiple sets across a medium or long duration may be more appropriate, so that a half- to full-game scenario is replicated. In these types of tests the energetics and metabolism will be different from single-set RSA tests, as multiple set or match simulations often allow longer
(~60–120 s) recovery periods between sprints, meaning that less acute challenges to homeostasis are likely with regard to phosphocreatine degradation and resynthesis, anaerobic glycolytic energy contribution, and muscle/ blood pH and lactate changes. Performing multiple sets or cycles over medium to long durations, especially when interspersed with lower intensity (aerobic) exercise, will increase the overall aerobic energy contribution, as well as the opportunity (or risk?) of “pacing” in the test. The physiology and metabolism of single-set RSA tests has been reasonably well investigated, 11,12,15,36–39 but much less is known about multiple-sets or match simulations, 8,9 which remain a fertile area for future research.
In parallel with a wide variation of existing RSA test formats, the scoring of these tests has also been somewhat variable. The most common scoring methods are shown in Table 1. An overall test score, where every sprint performed is counted in the final score, is recommended as the primary result. Whether this is calculated as a total sprint or mean sprint score may not matter too much in regard to interpreting the test results. Similarly, a percent decrement score in which every sprint is counted 13,16,22,31 is common and preferred to a change (fatigue) score between first and last sprints, 41 as these may not necessarily be the best and worst efforts. However, total or mean sprint scores have been shown to have much smaller coefficients of variation and typical error values than percent decrement and fatigue scores, 16,31 which may range from
10% to 50%.
31 Therefore, the usefulness of these scores
Table 1 Common Scoring Methods in
Repeated-Sprint-Ability Tests
Method
Overall test scores
Decrement scores
Examples
Total sprint time/work: sum of time/kJ for every sprint done.
13,16,19,24,28
Mean sprint time/power: average time/W for all sprints done.
10,22,29–31
Best/first sprint time/work: often used in studies using multiple sets or a nutritional/ exercise intervention.
22,25,26,40
% decrement A: total sprint time/work divided by “ideal” total × 100. Ideal total is best sprint score × number of sprints in a set.
13,16,37,38
% decrement B: mean sprint time/work divided by best sprint × 100 (– 100).
22
% decrement C: % change from first to last sprint in each set.
41

Repeated-Sprint Ability 287 in interpreting RSA test performance and improvement has been rightly questioned.
16,31 In match simulations the long duration and large number of sprints will likely increase the element of “pacing” for participants, which may promote “first” and “best” sprint scores as useful data for this type of test, although an overall total (or mean) sprint score, based on as many sprints as possible
(as not all may be measured), should still be calculated.
The popularity and profile of team sports throughout the world ensure that RSA will continue to be an important exercise model for future research. A compelling question is whether RSA (as measured by single set, multiple sets, or match simulations) relates well to team-sport performance (in an overall sense) or only to work rate.
Indeed, whether player work rates or movement patterns are strongly related to individual and/or team performance is intriguing, as greater work rates are often not associated with more successful individual 42 or team performance.
18,43 Incorporating skill and decision-making assessments in RSA tests, as has been done recently, 10,29,44 has intuitive appeal and represents a good way forward.
The link between single-set RSA performance and medium- and long-duration multiple-set/match-simulation test scores also requires more investigation, 45 as do
RSA relationships with actual team-sport competition performance. Data on RSA and Yo- Yo-Yo Intermittent
Recovery Test (level 2) test scores 46 in elite team-sport populations should also be collected; if a strong relationship is demonstrated, one or the other of these tests may not be necessary in team-sport fitness-testing batteries.
The other compelling question about RSA is what sort of training it will improve most. Previously, 6 weeks of short-sprint (<80 m) training significantly improved 6
× 40-m (departing every 30 s) RSA performance, 47 and 5 weeks of high-intensity interval training (2-min efforts,
1-min recoveries between) improved cycle 5 × 6-second
(departing every 30 s) RSA test performance more than moderate-intensity continuous training.
36 In addition, 12 weeks of specific repeated short-sprint (20 m) training, but not high-intensity interval training, improved 6 ×
40-m (20-m shuttles, departing every ~25 s) RSA performance.
48 More recently, 4 weeks of sustained (30-s) sprint training did not improve 6 × 30-m (15-m shuttles, departing every ~25 s) RSA performance, whereas short sprint/agility (5-s efforts) did improve it.
22 These studies suggest that repeated short-sprint efforts over 4 to 12 weeks can improve single-set RSA performance, but much more research is needed before any definitive conclusions can be made. Future studies should explore training effects in medium- and long-term (as well as single-set) RSA tests, perhaps with skill and decisionmaking tasks embedded in them, and also examine the physiology and metabolism (especially the aerobic energy contribution) of these multiple-set RSA tests and match simulations.
1. Reilly T, Thomas V. A motion analysis of work-rate in different positional roles in professional football match-play.
J Hum Mov Stud . 1976;2:87–97.
2. Dawson B, Ackland TR, Roberts CR. A new fitness test for team and individual sports. Sports Coach. 1984;8(2):42–
44.
3. Dawson B, Roberts CR, Ackland TR, Lawrence SR.
Repeated effort testing: the phosphate recovery test revisited. Sports Coach. 1991;14(2):12–17.
4. Duthie G, Pyne D, Hooper S. Time-motion analysis of
2001 and 2002 super 12 rugby. J Sports Sci. 2005;23:523–
530.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640410410001730188
5. Spencer M, Lawrence S, Rechichi C, Bishop D, Dawson
B, Goodman C. Time-motion analysis of elite field hockey, with special reference to repeated-sprint activity. J Sports
Sci . 2004;22:843–850.
PubMed doi:10.1080/0264041041
0001716715
6. Rienzi E, Drust B, Reilly T, et al. Investigation of anthropometric and work-rate profiles of elite South American international soccer players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness.
2000;40(2):162–169.
PubMed
7. Dawson B, Hopkinson R, Appelby B, Stewart G, Roberts C. Player movement patterns and game activities in the Australian Football League. J Sci Med Sport.
2004;7(3):278–291.
PubMed doi:10.1016/S1440-
2440(04)80023-9
8. Drust B, Reilly T, Cable NT. Physiological responses to laboratory-based soccer-specific intermittent and continuous exercise. J Sports Sci. 2000;18:885–892.
PubMed doi:10.1080/026404100750017814
9. Sirotic AC, Coutts AJ. The reliability of physiological and performance measures during simulated team-sport running on a non-motorised treadmill. J Sci Med Sport.
2008;11(5):500–509. doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2007.04.008
10. Stuart GR, Hopkins WG, Cook C, Cairns SP. Multiple effects of caffeine on simulated high-intensity team-sport performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(11):1998–
2005.
PubMed doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000177216.21847.8a
11. Holmyard DJ, Cheetham ME, Lakomy HKA, Williams C.
Effect of recovery duration on performance during multiple treadmill sprints. In: Reilly T, Lees A, Davids K, Murphy
W, eds. Proceedings of the 1st World Congress of Science and Football . Spon Press; 1987:134–144.
12. Gaitanos GC, Williams C, Boobis LH, Brooks S. Human muscle metabolism during intermittent maximal exercise.
J Appl Physiol . 1993;75(2):712–719.
PubMed
13. Fitzsimons M, Dawson B, Ward D, Wilkinson A. Cycling and running tests of sprint repeated effort ability. Aust J
Sci Med Sport . 1993;25(4):82–87.
14. Dawson B, Fitzsimons M, Ward D. Sprint repeated effort ability: its relationship to aerobic power, and performance measures of anaerobic power and anaerobic work capacity.
Aust J Sci Med Sport . 1993;25(4):88–93.
15. Hamilton AL, Neville ME, Brooks S, Williams C.
Physiological responses to maximal intermittent exercise: differences between endurance-trained runners and

288 Dawson games players. J Sports Sci. 1991;9:371–382.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640419108729897
16. Spencer M, Fitzsimons M, Dawson B, Bishop D, Goodman
C. Reliability of a repeated-sprint test for field hockey. J
Sci Med Sport . 2006;9:181–184.
PubMed doi:10.1016/j.
jsams.2005.05.001
17. Sirotic AC, Coutts A, Knowles H, Catterick C. A comparison of match demands between elite and semi-elite rugby league competition. J Sports Sci. 2009;27(3):203–211.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640410802520802
18. Di Salvo V, Gregson W, Atkinson G, Tordoff P, Drust
B. Analysis of high intensity activity in Premier League
Soccer. Int J Sports Med. 2009;30:205–212.
PubMed doi:10.1055/s-0028-1105950
19. Ingram J, Dawson B, Goodman C, Wallman K, Beilby
J. Effects of water immersion methods on post-exercise recovery from simulated team sport exercise. J Sci
Med Sport . 2009;12:417–421.
PubMed doi:10.1016/j.
jsams.2007.12.011
20. Hill-Haas SV, Coutts A, Dawson B, Rowsell G.
Generic versus small-sided game training in soccer.
Int J Sports Med . 2009;30(9):636–642.
PubMed doi:10.1055/s-0029-1220730
21. Carling C, Reilly T, Williams AM. Anaerobic and musculoskeletal performance. In: Performance Assessment for
Field Sports . Routledge; 2009:133–169.
22. Buchheit M, Mendez-Villanueva A, Quod M, Quesmel T,
Ahmaidi S. Improving acceleration and repeated sprint ability in well-trained adolescent handball players: speed versus sprint interval training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform.
2010;5:152–164.
PubMed
23. Pontifex KJ, Wallman KE, Dawson B, Goodman C. Effects of caffeine on repeated sprint ability, reactive agility time, sleep and next day performance. J Sports Med Phys Fit- ness . 2010;50(4):455–464.
PubMed
24. Carr A, Dawson B, Schneiker KT, Goodman C, Lay B.
Effect of caffeine supplementation on repeated sprint running performance. J Sports Med Phys Fitness.
2008;48:472–478.
PubMed
25. Sim AY, Dawson B, Guelfi KJ, Wallman KE, Young WB.
Effects of static stretching in warm-up on repeated sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23(7):2155–
2162.
PubMed doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b438f3
26. Beckett JR, Schneiker KT, Wallman KE, Dawson B,
Guelfi KJ. Effects of static stretching on repeated sprint and change of direction performance. Med Sci Sports
Exerc . 2009;41(2):444–450.
PubMed doi:10.1249/
MSS.0b013e3181867b95
27. Duffield R, Dawson B, Bishop D, Fitzsimons M, Lawrence S. Effect of wearing an ice cooling jacket on repeat sprint performance in warm/humid conditions. Br J
Sports Med . 2003;37:164–169.
PubMed doi:10.1136/ bjsm.37.2.164
28. Preen D, Dawson B, Goodman C, Lawrence S, Beilby J,
Ching S. Effect of creatine loading on long term sprint exercise performance and metabolism. Med Sci Sports
Exerc . 2001;33(5):814–821.
PubMed
29. Russell M, Benton D, Kingsley M. The effects of fatigue on soccer skills performed during a soccer match simulation.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform . 2011;6:221–233.
PubMed
30. Stone KJ, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, Stembridge MR, Newcombe DJ, Meyers RW. Development of a soccer simulation protocol to include repeated sprints and agility. Int J
Sports Physiol Perform . 2011;6:427–431.
PubMed
31. Oliver JL. Is a fatigue index a worthwhile measure of repeated sprint ability? J Sci Med Sport. 2009;12:20–23.
PubMed doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2007.10.010
32. Castle P, MacKenzie RW, Maxwell N, Webborn ADJ,
Watt PW. Heat acclimation improves intermittent sprinting in the heat but additional pre-cooling offers no further ergogenic effect. J Sports Sci. 2011;29(11):1125–1134.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640414.2011.583673
33. Schneiker KT, Bishop D, Dawson B, Hackett P. Effects of caffeine on prolonged intermittent sprint ability in team sport athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38(3):578–585.
PubMed doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000188449.18968.62
34. Gaitanos GC, Nevill ME, Brooks S, Williams C.
Repeated bouts of sprint running after induced alkalosis. J Sports Sci. 1991;9:355–370.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640419108729896
35. King M, Duffield R. The effects of recovery interventions on consecutive days of intermittent sprint exercise.
J Strength Cond Res . 2009;23(6):1795–1802.
PubMed doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b3f81f
36. Edge J, Bishop D, Goodman C, Dawson B. Effects of high and moderate-intensity training on metabolism and repeated sprints. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(11):1975–
1982.
PubMed doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000175855.35403.4c
37. Edg E J, Bishop D, Hill-Haas S, Dawson B, Goodman C.
Comparison of muscle buffer capacity and repeated sprint ability of untrained, endurance trained and team sport athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2006;96:225–234.
PubMed doi:10.1007/s00421-005-0056-x
38. Spencer M, Bishop D, Dawson B, Goodman C, Duffield R. Metabolism and performance in repeated cycle sprints: active versus passive recovery. Med Sci Sports
Exerc . 2006;38(8):1492–1499.
PubMed doi:10.1249/01.
mss.0000228944.62776.a7
39. Spencer M, Bishop D, Dawson B, Goodman C. Physiological and metabolic responses of repeated-sprint activities: specific to field-based team sports. Sports Med.
2005;35(12):1025–1044.
PubMed doi:10.2165/00007256-
200535120-00003
40. Singh TKR, Guelfi KJ, Landers G, Dawson B, Bishop D.
A comparison of muscle damage, soreness and performance following a simulated contact and non-contact team sport activity circuit. J Sci Med Sport. 2011;14:441–446.
PubMed doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2011.03.008
41. Pyne DB, Saunders PU, Montgomery PG, Hewitt A, Sheehan K. Relationships between repeated sprint testing, speed and endurance. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22(5):1633–
1637.
PubMed doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318181fe7a
42. Johnston RJ, Watsford ML, Pine MJ, Spurrs RW, Murphy
A, Pruyn EC. Movement demands and match performance

Repeated-Sprint Ability 289 in professional Australian football. Int J Sports Med.
2012;33:89–93.
PubMed doi:10.1055/s-0031-1287798
43. Wisbey B, Montgomery PG, Pyne DB, Rattray B. Quantifying movement demands of AFL football using GPS tracking. J Sci Med Sport. 2010;13:531–536.
PubMed doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2009.09.002
44. Royal KA, Farrow D, Mujika I, Halson SL, Pyne
DB, Abernethy B. The effects of fatigue on decision making and shooting skill performance in water polo players. J Sports Sci. 2006;24(8):807–815.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640410500188928
45. Oliver JL, Armstrong N, Williams CA. Relationship between brief and prolonged repeated sprint ability. J Sci
Med Sport . 2009;12:238–243.
PubMed doi:10.1016/j.
jsams.2007.09.006
46. Bangsbo J, Iaia FM, Krustrup P. The Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test: a useful tool for evaluation of physical performance in intermittent sports. Sports Med.
2008;38(1):37–51.
PubMed doi:10.2165/00007256-
200838010-00004
47. Dawson B, Fitzsimons M, Green S, Goodman C, Carey M.
Changes in performance, muscle metabolites, enzymes and fibre types after short sprint training. Eur J Appl Physiol
Occup Physiol . 1998;78:163–169.
PubMed doi:10.1007/ s004210050402
48. Ferrari Bravo D, Impellizzeri FM, Rampanini E, Castagna C, Bishop D, Wisloff U. Sprint vs interval training in football. Int J Sports Med. 2008;29:668–674.
PubMed doi:10.1055/s-2007-989371