Skipping for Speed: What Jump Rope Can and Can't Do for Your Run

Skipping has had a revival. Runners post videos of rapid double-unders, coaches recommend a few minutes of jump rope before runs, and the claims range from better running economy to fewer injuries. It is cheap, takes up almost no space and can be done anywhere, so it's easy to see the appeal for triathletes short on time.

TriForward's "Jumps or Iron?" covers plyometric training in general, and "Calf and Achilles Capacity" covers loading the lower leg. This article asks a narrower question: is the rope worth it? What does the evidence on skipping itself show, what can be reasonably inferred from wider plyometric research, and how could a triathlete add it without getting hurt?

The short answer is that there is one encouraging trial in amateur runners, a handful of trials in other groups, and a broader plyometric literature showing small effects. That is enough to say jump rope is worth trying as part of a warm-up. It isn't enough to say it will make you faster.

What skipping is, mechanically

In broad terms, drawn from general biomechanics rather than a single study, skipping involves:

• Many short, quick ground contacts, mostly on the balls of the feet.
• Low jump heights, usually just enough to clear the rope.
• Repeated stretch and recoil of the Achilles tendon and calf muscles, the stretch-shortening cycle that also happens in running.
• Work for the small muscles of the foot, which help stiffen the arch on landing.

This is a form of low-intensity plyometric training. Compared with box jumps or bounding, each contact involves less force, but there are far more of them. That's why skipping is often described as training "reactivity", the ability to spend little time on the ground while producing force.

The key study: jump rope in runners

The only randomised trial of jump rope in runners is a 2020 study by García-Pinillos and colleagues in the International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance.

• Participants: 96 amateur endurance runners, randomised to a jump rope group (51) or a control group (45). The abstract doesn't report the sex split or ages.
• The intervention: the jump rope group replaced part of their usual warm-up with skipping, 2 to 4 sessions a week, for a total of 10 to 20 minutes a week. In the authors' words, this took the place of about 5 minutes of their regular warm-up activities.
• The control group kept their usual routines.
• Duration: 10 weeks.
• Tests: countermovement, squat and drop jumps, reactive strength index from a 30 cm drop jump, foot-arch stiffness and a 3 km time trial.

The results:

• The jump rope group improved in every measure, including the 3 km time trial, jump height, reactive strength index and foot-arch stiffness.
• The control group didn't change significantly in any measure.
• Improvements in 3 km time were related to improvements in reactive strength (correlation r = −0.481) and foot-arch stiffness (r = −0.336). Together, these changes accounted for about 39% of the variation in time-trial improvement.

The authors concluded that 10 weeks of jump rope training, in place of 5 minutes of regular warm-up activities, was effective in improving 3 km time-trial performance, jumping ability, reactive strength and arch stiffness.

What the trial doesn't tell you

• How much faster the runners got. The abstract reports statistical significance and correlations, not the size of the improvement in seconds.
• Who the runners were, beyond amateur endurance runners, since the abstract doesn't give sex, age or weekly training volume.
• Whether any warm-up change would have helped. The control group kept their usual routine, so it isn't possible to separate the effect of skipping from the effect of doing something new and more dynamic.
• Whether the effect lasts, or applies over longer distances. A 3 km time trial is very different from a triathlon run.
• Anything about triathletes. Triathletes run off the bike, often at lower intensity, and may have less running background.

Jump rope in other groups

Most other jump rope research is in children, adolescents and team-sport players. For example, a 2015 trial by Trecroci and colleagues in the Journal of Sports Science and Medicine involved 24 preadolescent soccer players over 8 weeks. The group that did jump rope exercises at the start of training improved their time on a coordination circuit by 9%, and their dynamic balance improved compared with a group doing soccer drills.

These findings suggest skipping can improve coordination and balance, but they come from young athletes whose coordination is still developing. Inference: an adult runner or triathlete with years of training is unlikely to see changes of the same size.

What the plyometric research suggests

Because jump rope research in runners is so limited, the broader plyometric literature is the next best guide. Two recent meta-analyses are relevant.

A 2022 meta-analysis by Eihara and colleagues in Sports Medicine – Open compared heavy resistance training with plyometric training in long-distance runners, pooling 22 studies.

• Plyometric training had a trivial effect on running economy (g = −0.13, with a confidence interval from −0.47 to 0.21 that crosses zero).
• Plyometric training had a trivial effect on time-trial performance (g = −0.17).
• Heavy resistance training had larger effects on running economy (g = −0.32) and time-trial performance (g = −0.24), particularly with loads of at least 90% of one-repetition maximum.

A 2024 meta-analysis by Llanos-Lagos and colleagues in Sports Medicine looked at different strength-training methods and running economy at different speeds. It included 195 moderately trained, 272 well-trained and 185 highly trained middle- and long-distance runners.

• Plyometric training improved running economy at speeds of up to 12 km/h, with a small effect (effect size −0.307).
• High-load training also had a small effect (−0.266), and combined methods a moderate one (−0.426).
• Isometric and submaximal strength training didn't improve running economy.

Inference: plyometric training appears to produce small improvements in running economy, perhaps more at slower speeds, which are typical of many age-group triathletes' race pace. Jump rope is a lower-intensity form of plyometric training than most of the programmes in these analyses, so its effect is unlikely to be larger. And neither analysis suggests plyometrics should replace heavy strength training.

A possible bonus: bone

Skipping is impact loading, which matters for triathletes who spend much of their training swimming and cycling. TriForward's "Lifting for Bone" covers this in detail. One trial is particularly relevant: Bailey and Brooke-Wavell's 2010 study of 61 premenopausal women found that 50 multidirectional hops on one leg every day for 6 months increased femoral neck bone density by 1.8%, while hopping two or four days a week wasn't clearly effective.

Inference: skipping isn't the same as single-leg multidirectional hopping, and nobody has tested whether it improves bone density in adult triathletes. But short, frequent bouts of impact are the pattern that bone research favours, and skipping is an easy way to add them.

What jump rope can't do

• Replace running. Skipping trains the lower leg's reactivity, not running fitness. The 2020 trial added skipping to the runners' training; it didn't replace any running.
• Replace heavy strength training. In runners, heavy resistance training had larger effects on economy than plyometrics.
• Prevent injury on its own. There is no trial showing jump rope reduces running injuries.
• Make up for missing aerobic fitness. Ten to twenty minutes a week of skipping is a neuromuscular stimulus, not an endurance session, and it won't replace the easy running volume that underpins a triathlon run.
• Fix the run off the bike. Running after cycling is a different problem; TriForward's "The Bike-to-Run 'Brick' Problem" covers it.

Why reactivity might matter for runners

The 2020 trial offers a plausible explanation for its result. The runners whose reactive strength index and arch stiffness improved most tended to improve their 3 km time most. Reactive strength reflects how well you can absorb and return force in a short ground contact, which is part of what the calf, Achilles and foot do on every running stride.

Inference: if skipping makes the lower leg a slightly stiffer, more responsive spring, each stride may need a little less muscular work. That is the same mechanism usually proposed for plyometric effects on running economy. But a correlation in one trial doesn't prove the mechanism, and the size of any benefit for a triathlete running off the bike, at a steady pace, for an hour or more, is unknown.

Women, masters and the evidence gap

The single runner trial doesn't report its sex split in the abstract, the plyometric meta-analyses don't break their results down by sex, and the bone trial was only in women. None of this research focused on older athletes. Inference: masters athletes, who tend to lose reactive strength and tendon stiffness with age, might have the most to gain from short, regular plyometric work, but they may also need longer to build tolerance to it. This batch's "Strength Training After 50: Why Power Matters More Than Strength" covers the evidence on power in older athletes. Women with pelvic floor symptoms during impact should get specialist advice before adding skipping.

Fitting it into a triathlon week

Skipping is short enough to fit anywhere, which is part of its appeal. Some practical options, which are inference rather than tested schedules:

• Before easy or steady runs, as part of the warm-up, as in the trial.
• Before a strength session, as an alternative to other jumping warm-ups.
• Not before key interval sessions at first, until you know how your calves respond.
• Less during heavy training blocks and race weeks, when your legs already have plenty to recover from.

Practical application

These suggestions are based on the 2020 trial's dose and general plyometric principles. They are inference for triathletes, not a tested programme:

1. Use the trial's dose as a ceiling to build towards, not a starting point: 10 to 20 minutes a week, split across 2 to 4 sessions.
2. Start with short bouts. Perhaps 30 seconds of skipping followed by 30 seconds of rest, repeated a few times, before your run.
3. Use it as part of your warm-up, as in the trial, rather than as a separate session.
4. Keep the jumps low and the contacts quick and quiet. Clear the rope by a small margin.
5. Choose a forgiving surface, such as a sprung floor, rubber matting or a running track, rather than concrete.
6. Progress slowly. Add time before you add difficulty, such as single-leg skipping or double-unders.
7. Watch the next day. Increasing calf or Achilles stiffness or pain the morning after is a sign to back off.

A triathlon scenario

The following example is illustrative, not drawn from a study. A 35-year-old woman training for her first 70.3 runs three times a week. She came to triathlon from swimming, has never done any jumping or plyometric work, and feels "flat-footed" when running. She has no current injuries.

Based on the evidence above, she might:

• Add 2 to 3 minutes of skipping in short bouts to the warm-up before two of her weekly runs.
• Build towards 5 minutes per warm-up over 4 to 6 weeks if her calves and Achilles tolerate it.
• Keep her strength training, including heavy lower-body work and calf raises, rather than swapping it for skipping.
• Treat any improvement in running feel as a bonus, since the evidence for a performance effect is limited.

Common mistakes

• Doing too much too soon. Hundreds of quick contacts can overload calves and tendons unused to impact.
• Jumping too high, which increases the load without adding to the reactivity the rope trains.
• Skipping on concrete in worn-out shoes.
• Replacing runs or strength sessions with skipping.
• Expecting large performance gains from a modest, low-intensity tool.

What we don't know

• Whether jump rope improves triathlon running, or running over longer distances than 3 km.
• How much faster runners get, since the one trial's abstract doesn't report the size of the effect.
• Whether women and men respond differently, since the trial's abstract doesn't report the sex split.
• Whether skipping reduces injury risk or improves bone density in adult athletes.
• How skipping compares with other short plyometric warm-ups, such as hops, pogo jumps or strides. This batch's "Strides and Hill Sprints" covers another low-cost speed option.

References

• García-Pinillos F, Lago-Fuentes C, Latorre-Román PA, Pantoja-Vallejo A, Ramírez-Campillo R. Jump-rope training: improved 3-km time-trial performance in endurance runners via enhanced lower-limb reactivity and foot-arch stiffness. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2020;15(7):927–933. doi:10.1123/ijspp.2019-0529
• Trecroci A, Cavaggioni L, Caccia R, Alberti G. Jump rope training: balance and motor coordination in preadolescent soccer players. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 2015;14(4):792–798. jssm.org/jssm-14-792.xml-Fulltext
• Eihara Y, Takao K, Sugiyama T, Maeo S, Terada M, Kanehisa H, Isaka T. Heavy resistance training versus plyometric training for improving running economy and running time trial performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine – Open, 2022;8:138. doi:10.1186/s40798-022-00511-1
• Llanos-Lagos C, Ramirez-Campillo R, Moran J, Sáez de Villarreal E. Effect of strength training programs in middle- and long-distance runners' economy at different running speeds: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 2024;54(4):895–932. doi:10.1007/s40279-023-01978-y
• Bailey CA, Brooke-Wavell K. Optimum frequency of exercise for bone health: randomised controlled trial of a high-impact unilateral intervention. Bone, 2010;46(4):1043–1049. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2009.12.001