Static and dynamic stretching trade off running economy against performance in opposite directions — the right choice depends on which one matters right before this specific session
Interpretation
Konrad et al.'s scoping review of 11 studies found dynamic stretching produced a large running-performance improvement (+9.8%) with negligible economy cost, while static stretching (≤90s/muscle group) produced a small economy gain (+1.0%) but a performance cost (-1.4%). These are opposite trade-offs, not a simple 'stretching helps/hurts' answer.
Practical implication
Recommend dynamic stretching before performance-oriented sessions (races, intervals) and reserve static stretching, kept brief, for contexts where economy matters more than immediate output.
Sources
1 source, independently verified.
Dynamic stretching produced a large running-performance improvement (+9.8%) with a negligible running-economy change (-0.79%); static stretching (≤90s/muscle group) produced a small economy gain (+1.0%) but a performance cost (-1.4%) — the right choice depends on duration and which outcome matters more right before the session.