Published October 14, 2026 01:09PM
My benchmark for what counts as a big deal in sports science is four percent. That’s the margin by which Nike’s Vaporfly, the original supershoe released back in 2017, improved running economy. All hell broke loose following the Vaporfly’s release, and the sport was changed forever. So when someone credibly promises me four percent, I listen.
Sweat Science 101
Sign up for a ten-part email series from Alex Hutchinson on how to train, fuel, and recover. Each week, Alex covers a new topic, including strength training, supplements, and more!
That’s the background for a new study of plyometric exercises to improve running economy in masters runners, from a research team at Ritsumeikan University in Japan led by Yuuri Eihara and Sumiaki Maeo. Cutting straight to the chase, they found an average improvement of 3.9 percent after ten weeks of relatively quick and simple plyometrics. This is not a big surprise: previous studies have found comparable improvements. The actual goal of this study was to understand why plyometrics make runners more efficient rather than simply adding to the evidence that they work. But the scale of the effect, juxtaposed against the ongoing hype about shoes, was a reminder that this is a topic worth paying attention to.
Why Plyometrics?
Some background: plyometrics are a category of quick, explosive exercises like hops, jumps, and skipping. In broad strokes, the goal is to improve neuromuscular function—how efficiently and effectively your brain transmits signals to recruit muscle fibers—rather than simply strengthening the muscles themselves.
There’s overlap between strength training and plyometrics, and both have been shown to improve running economy (which is a measure of efficiency: how much energy it takes to run at a given pace). But it’s not clear whether the two forms of training improve economy in the same way, or through different mechanisms. It’s also not clear whether the benefits come from promoting visible changes in how you run, or whether they’re “invisible” thanks to subtle alterations in muscle recruitment.
The new study, which appears in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, explored this question by putting 35 male masters runners between the ages of 30 and 50 through a ten-week plyometric program on top of their usual running routine. Before and after the plyometric regimen, they underwent a series of tests to assess their strength and explosiveness (e.g. jump heights), as well as detailed analysis of their running stride and joint movements.
What Changed?
I’ve already given away the punchline, which is that the runners improved their economy by 3.9 percent on average. This is a much bigger margin than the usual variability on repeated tests, which for this protocol was about 1.5 percent. More than three-quarters of the runners improved by more than 1.5 percent, which is impressive. You can see the individual changes in this graph, with running economy on the vertical axis:
Among all the pre- and post-tests, two main factors predicted how much individual runners improved their economy: higher reactive jump height and lower cadence.
Reactive jumps are where you land and take off in a single quick motion—just like running. In this study, they tested drop jumps (step off a step and immediately explode upward as high as possible) and rebound jumps (take three consecutive jumps without stopping). These reactive jump tests predicted improvement in running economy. In contrast, countermovement jump improvement (bend your knees and jump as high as possible) didn’t predict anything.
Cadence is how many steps per minute you take. Lots of discussion about running form encourages runners to try to increase their cadence, taking shorter, quicker steps. But in this study, the opposite was true: switching to a slightly slower cadence was associated with better economy. Or more to the point, the interaction between reactive jump strength and cadence mattered: runners who improved their explosiveness could float a little farther with each step, lowering their cadence at a given pace and improving their economy.
There’s an interesting nuance in the results. Previous studies with younger runners have suggested that plyometrics can alter running form for the better. In this study, running form didn’t change in any significant way. The researchers suggest that older, more experienced runners have ingrained their running stride so thoroughly that it’s harder to change. Instead, the benefits here come from improving propulsion without altering running form.
How Can I Apply This?
This is the good part: the plyo routine the runners used is relatively modest, with sessions performed just twice a week.
Week one started with jump rope (both legs 3 x 30 seconds), scissors jump (3 x 15 seconds), and hopping (both legs, 3 x 15 seconds). The amount of time gradually increases, and after six weeks they shift to single-leg exercises.
The final session, in week ten, is jump rope (single leg, 3 x 20 seconds each leg), hopping (3 x 10 seconds each leg), and alternating lunge jumps (3 x 30 seconds).
An obvious shortcoming of the study is that it focused on male masters runners. The researchers say that they expect similar results in female runners, but it obviously would have been better to test this claim directly. Younger runners, too, would likely benefit from this regimen, even if the mechanisms are slightly different. The big takeaway that I’m left with, after reading the study, is: If a routine that’s this short and simple is as good as supershoes, why have I been slacking on plyos for all these years?
For more Sweat Science, sign up for the email newsletter and check out my new book The Explorer’s Gene: Why We Seek Big Challenges, New Flavors, and the Blank Spots on the Map.