Why Acceleration Is the Real Performance Driver in Sprinting
Rethinking sprint performance through mechanics, timing and constraints
Sprint acceleration accounts for more than half of 100m sprint race performance.
And yet, in everyday coaching practice, it is still often treated as a preparatory phase — something to “get through” before real sprinting begins.
Strength improves. Gym numbers go up. Exercises look solid.
But when athletes return to the track, the first steps often look frustratingly similar. Acceleration remains slow, ground contact times stay long, and performance stagnates.
This disconnect is not a matter of motivation or effort.
It is a model problem.
Acceleration is not separate from max velocity
A common mistake in sprint training is treating acceleration, maximal velocity and technique as separate qualities. In reality, sprinting is a continuous mechanical process.
Acceleration is simply the first expression of the same system that will later determine upright sprint speed. What happens in the first few steps directly shapes what is possible later in the race. Poor early mechanics do not stay confined to acceleration — they propagate forward.
This is why improvements (or limitations) in acceleration often have a disproportionate impact on overall sprint performance.
A constrained problem, not a force problem
From a mechanical perspective, sprint acceleration is not primarily about how much force an athlete can produce. It is an impulse- and time-constrained problem.
Performance depends on:
- how much horizontally oriented force can be applied
- within extremely short ground-contact times
- while posture, center of mass and force direction change step by step
This is where many training approaches fall short. Absolute strength can increase, yet the athlete remains unable to express that force efficiently under the specific constraints of acceleration.
“Just get stronger” often fails because it does not address the conditions under which force must be applied.
Why acceleration is non-cyclic
Unlike upright sprinting, acceleration is non-cyclic.
Every step is mechanically different.
With each contact:
- posture evolves
- the center of mass rises and moves forward
- the balance between horizontal and vertical force shifts
This is why there is no single ideal block position or universal acceleration technique. What works depends on constraints such as anthropometrics, strength profile, coordination and intent.
When coaches search for fixed technical templates, they often miss the adaptive nature of acceleration itself.
Ground contact, COM and performance risk
One of the most decisive factors in acceleration is where the foot strikes relative to the center of mass.
Foot strike location governs:
- braking versus propulsion
- how force is transmitted through the system
- and indirectly, injury risk — particularly at the hamstring level
When contact occurs too far ahead of the center of mass, braking forces increase. Strong athletes can still decelerate themselves if force direction is poorly managed.
Acceleration, therefore, is not just about pushing harder. It is about pushing at the right place, at the right time, with the right intent.
The often-missed role of the upper body
Acceleration is frequently framed as a lower-body task. In reality, the trunk, pelvis and upper body play an active role in sprint performance.
They contribute to:
- stabilizing posture under forward lean
- transmitting force efficiently
- allowing the system to express power rather than leak it
When trunk and pelvic control are insufficient, even high force outputs fail to reach the ground effectively. Strength exists, but the system cannot organize it.
Ignoring the upper body often means creating strength that never fully transfers to the track.
Rethinking common training tools
Viewed through this mechanical lens, many commonly used training methods need to be re-evaluated.
Heavy lifting can improve general force capacity, but it does not automatically transfer to acceleration. Plyometrics can support sprinting only when contact times and intent align with acceleration demands. Hill sprinting may look specific, yet subtly alter force orientation. Resisted sprinting can be highly effective — but only when loads are selected based on velocity loss and intent, not guesswork.
None of these tools are inherently good or bad. Their value depends on how well they respect the constraints of acceleration.
Coaching implications: changing the model
The key coaching challenge is not finding new drills.
It is adopting a better model.
Acceleration improves when training:
- respects realistic mechanical constraints
- preserves rhythm and intent
- allows technique to self-organize rather than be forced into static positions
When coaches shift their focus from isolated qualities to system behavior, transfer becomes more likely — and performance more robust.
Acceleration is not just a phase of the race.
It is the foundation of sprint performance.
These concepts will be explored in depth in the upcoming webinar with Håkan Andersson on 19th February at 12.30PM, using biomechanical principles, elite sprint data and applied coaching examples to clarify what truly limits sprint acceleration — and how to train it more effectively.
Register here to attend Live Webinar or to access the recording.
This is not about changing drills. It’s about changing how you see acceleration.
Visualizza questo post su Instagram
