How stretching affects recovery and performance for running, OCR, and endurance sports
Thomas Solomon, PhD.
Updated onReading time approx 5 minutes (1200 words).
What you’ll learn:
Stretching reliably increases flexibility, but runners usually don’t need to chase extreme “human rubber band” range of motion.
Stretching is unlikely to meaningfully speed up recovery after training (think soreness or strength recovery).
If you do a lot of static stretching right before exercise, it can slightly reduce performance — especially if you don’t follow it with dynamic stretching movements.
Curious about the how and why? Scroll down for the details, the nuances, and the nerdy bits.
The information I provide is not medical advice. Before making any changes to your habits of daily living based on any information I provide, always ensure it is safe for you to do so and consult your doctor if you are unsure.
What is stretching?
Stretching is simply moving a joint to the end of its comfortable range and holding it (static stretching) or moving in and out of that range in a controlled way (dynamic stretching). It’s a mainstay in sports that reward serious bendiness, like gymnastics. After years of gymnastics as a kid, 20 years on my wife could still basically market herself as a human slinky.
But runners (and people doing obstacle course racing / OCR) usually don’t need extreme flexibility to perform well. Most of us just need “enough” range of motion to run efficiently and stay comfortable—without our hips sounding like a bowl of Rice Krispies. Still, stretching gets recommended all the time for big promises like “prevent injury,” “reduce muscle soreness,” and “boost performance.”
A lot of the debate focuses on static stretching right before exercise, often defined as holding a stretch for about 30 to 60 seconds. Some studies (especially in people new to training) suggest that doing static stretching immediately before lifting can reduce how many repetitions you get and how much total work you do, and might even blunt muscle growth. But other studies find that the outcome depends on the exact stretching method (static vs. ballistic vs. proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation), and some even show odd twists like stretching the hamstrings between squat sets increasing hamstring muscle thickness. Timing matters too: stretching the quadriceps between sets can reduce strength output in trained lifters, while in people who are untrained, between-set stretching might help early strength and muscle gains. And some work suggests that doing static stretching on the days between lifting sessions might even help strength gains in novice lifters.
Confused? You should be!
This messy picture has been discussed in several narrative reviews. One by James Nuzzo went full send and proposed, “The Case for Retiring Flexibility as a Major Component of Physical Fitness”. Nuzzo’s argument (in plain English) is: you can often maintain or improve flexibility through other training methods—strength training, for example—that also come with big health benefits.
Also, not everyone stretches to become bendy. Some people stretch to prevent injuries. A few narrative reviews suggest there’s some support that pre-exercise stretching might reduce muscle strains, but there’s little support for stretching as a broad injury-prevention tool overall (see McHugh et al. 2010 & Chaabene et al. 2019).
So, yes, patterns are emerging, but individual studies and narrative reviews can still leave you feeling like you need a whiteboard, a snack, and a mild sedative. Let’s level up to stronger evidence: meta-analysesA meta-analysis quantifies the overall effect size of a treatment by compiling effect sizes from all known studies of that treatment. of randomised controlled trialsThe “gold standard” approach for determining whether a treatment has a causal effect on an outcome of interest. In such a study, a sample of people representing the population of interest is randomised to receive the treatment or a no-treatment placebo (control), and the outcome of interest is measured before and after exposure to the treatment and control.. So… what do they say?
What is the scientific evidence on the effect of stretching on recovery and athletic performance?
Quick note: This post examines stretching for recovery and performance, not rehab after injury or surgery.
Stretching (one session or a regular routine) is genuinely good at increasing flexibility. That matters a lot in sports where range of motion is a performance limiter (see Ingram et al. 2024, Behm et al. 2021, Cayco et al. 2019, Medeiros et al. 2018, & Medeiros et al. 2016).
For runners, having extra flexibility in certain joints can be useful in specific events (hurdlers and steeplechase athletes, for example), but for most runners it’s unlikely to be the thing holding you back. In line with that, the current evidence suggests that flexibility (joint range of motion) is not linked to lower injury risk in runners (see Sanfillippo et al. 2021, Hamstra-Wright et al. 2021, & Hamstra-Wright et al. 2014), and stretching does not prevent running injuries (see Alexander et al. 2019, Baxter et al. 2017, & Yeung et al. 2011). That said, the overall evidence base is generally low quality and results vary a lot between studies, so better studies could shift the details.
If your goal is more range of motion, strength training is a solid alternative to stretching. It can increase flexibility (see Alizadeh et al. 2023, Kay et al. 2022, Vetter et al. 2022, Afonso et al. 2021) and it also improves running economyThe rate of energy expenditure (measured in kiloJoules [KJ], kilocalories [kcal] or oxygen consumption [V̇O2]) per kilogram body mass (kg) per unit of distance i.e. per 1 kilometer traveled. A runner with a lower energy cost per kilometer has a higher economy than a runner with a higher energy cost. (see O’Sullivan et al. 2019, Denadai et al. 2016, & Balsalobre-Fernández et al. 2016) and running performance (see Cuthbert et al. 2021, Trowel et al. 2019, Lum et al. 2019, Alcaraz-Ibañez et al. 2018, Blagrove et al. 2017, Beattie et al. 2014, & Yamamoto et al. 2008). It’s also associated with a lower risk of chronic disease (see Coleman et al. 2022, Momma et al. 2021, & Yanghui et al. 2019).
Stretching before or after exercise (or both) does not meaningfully reduce delayed-onset muscle soreness in a way most people would actually notice (see Afonso et al. 2021, & Herbert et al. 2011).
Stretching before or after exercise also does not speed up the recovery of muscle strength (see Afonso et al. 2021). And right now, there is insufficient data to make confident conclusions about stretching and the recovery of endurance performance.
So, it’s pretty clear stretching is unlikely to help recovery. The murkiness shows up when we talk about performance:
Doing static stretching immediately before exercise has a trivial-to-small, but potentially meaningful, negative effect on strength, power, speed, and agility performance (see Simic et al. 2012, Kallerud et al. 2013, & Peck et al. 2014). The good news: this negative effect seems short-lived (think minutes, not hours; see Peck et al. 2014 & Chaabene et al. 2019). Narrative reviews by Chaabene et al. 2019 and Rubini et al. 2007 also conclude pre-exercise stretching probably reduces strength, but protocols vary so much that it’s hard to be super definitive. And for endurance performance, the evidence is still too thin to call with confidence (see Peck et al. 2014).
Dynamic stretching is a good alternative to static stretching in a warm-up. It does not impair performance (see Kallerud et al. 2013, Peck et al. 2014, & Opplert et al. 2018), and including it in a warm-up can improve performance, especially for strength- and power-heavy efforts (see Peck et al. 2014, & Opplert et al. 2018).
The negative effect of pre-exercise static stretching can probably be avoided if the stretches are brief or if you follow them with dynamic movements (see Simic et al. 2012, & Peck et al. 2014).
So, if the performance “dip” from static stretching only lasts a few minutes and gets overridden by dynamic warm-up work, then a quick static stretch inside a proper warm-up is unlikely to ruin anything. If you fancy a brief quad stretch on the start line because it feels good, you’re probably gonna be fine.
Regular static stretching (flexibility training) done alongside training does not seem to blunt gains in strength, as long as it’s not done immediately before the strength session (see Thomas et al. 2022). If you do both and want to be cautious, separating them (even just different times of day) is a sensible move.
Regular static stretching does not seem to change jumping or sprinting performance (see Warneke et al. 2024).
Interestingly, regular static stretching can have a trivial-to-small effect on increasing muscle strength and power in people who are not doing strength training (see Warneke et al. 2024, Arntz et al. 2023 & Thomas et al. 2022). This is often called stretch-mediated hypertrophy and strength. But the quality of evidence is low, and these effects show up much more clearly in sedentary or older adults than in trained athletes (see Arntz et al. 2023). Also, there is currently insufficient evidence to make firm conclusions about regular stretching and endurance performance changes.
One big reason this field stays muddy: lots of studies don’t clearly report what they actually did. Stretch duration, frequency, whether it was static or dynamic, and the exact method (static, ballistic, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation, etc.) are often reported inconsistently. Better reporting and cleaner study designs would make future conclusions much stronger.
Can stretching enhance recovery and athletic performance?
Stretching is unlikely to speed up recovery (soreness or strength recovery), but dynamic stretching as part of a warm-up is likely to help performance.
Static stretching right before exercise is likely to slightly impair performance, especially for strength and power efforts. The effect sizeA standardized measure of the magnitude of an effect of an intervention. Unlike p-values, effect sizes show how large the effect is and indicate how meaningful it might be. Common effect size measures include standardised mean difference (SMD), Cohen’s d, Hedges’ g, eta-squared, and correlation coefficients. is trivial to small, but it may still be clinically significantReflects how meaningful a change is to a person’s health or performance. A small change can be statistically significant but not clinically significant; but, if a change is big enough to matter to people in real life, then it is clinically significant (and doesn’t just tick a statistical significance box). (translation: you might actually notice it). You can usually prevent this by keeping static stretching brief and/or following it with dynamic movements.
Regular static stretching alongside strength training is unlikely to blunt strength gains unless you do the static stretching immediately before the strength session.
These effects appear similar in trained and untrained people, and in males and females; however, most studies include young trained males, so we still need more data for better comparisons.
Keep in mind: there is high heterogeneityHeterogeneity shows how much the results in different studies in a meta-analysis vary from each other. It is measured as the percentage of variation (the I2 value). A rule of thumb: if I2 is roughly 25%, that indicates low heterogeneity (good), 50% is moderate, and 75% indicates high heterogeneity (bad). High heterogeneity means there’s more variability in effects between studies and, therefore, a less precise overall effect estimate. (variability) between study designs and results, a small number of small studies, and a moderate risk of biasRisk of bias in a meta-analysis refers to the potential for systematic errors in the studies included in the analysis. Such errors can lead to misleading/invalid results, and unreliable conclusions. This can arise because of issues with the way participants are selected (randomisation), how data is collected and analysed, and how the results are reported.. So, the overall certainty of evidenceCertainty of evidence tells us how confident we are that the published results accurately reflect the true effect. It’s based on factors like study design, risk of bias, consistency, directness, precision, and publication bias. Low certainty means more doubt and less confidence, and that future studies could easily change the conclusions. High certainty means that the current evidence is so strong and consistent that future studies are unlikely to change conclusions. is lowA low quality of evidence means that, in general, studies in this field have several limitations. This could be due to inconsistency in effects between studies, a large range of effect sizes between studies, and/or a high risk of bias (caused by inappropriate controls, a small number of studies, small numbers of participants, poor/absent randomization processes, missing data, inappropriate methods/statistics). When the quality of evidence is low, there is more doubt and less confidence in the overall effect of an intervention, and future studies could easily change overall conclusions. The best way to improve the quality of evidence is for scientists to conduct large, well-controlled, high-quality randomized controlled trials.. Therefore, additional high-quality randomised controlled trials are needed to increase confidence in the effect sizes reported in meta-analysesA meta-analysis quantifies the overall effect size of a treatment by compiling effect sizes from all known studies of that treatment..
How to use this: If stretching feels good, keep it — just don’t expect it to “recover” you. For best performance, build your warm-up around dynamic stretches; save longer static stretching for after training or a separate session (especially if you’re lifting later).
Information you can trust. All content on Veohtu is meticulously researched and written by Thomas Solomon, PhD. He does not sell supplements, recovery products, or ad space, and he has no sponsorships, brand affiliations, or ambassador roles. Everything you read reflects his independent views, shaped solely by peer-reviewed scientific evidence — and that will never change.
Full list of meta-analyses examining stretching for recovery
Here are the meta-analyses I've summarised above:
Effects of Chronic Static Stretching on Maximal Strength and Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regression. Warneke et al. Sports Med Open. (2024)
Effects of chronic static stretching interventions on jumping and sprinting performance-a systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis. Warneke et al. Front Physiol. (2024)
Examining the Influence of Warm-Up Static and Dynamic Stretching, as well as Post-Activation Potentiation Effects, on the Acute Enhancement of Gymnastic Performance: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Yu et al. J Sports Sci Med. (2024)
Chronic Effects of Static Stretching Exercises on Muscle Strength and Power in Healthy Individuals Across the Lifespan: A Systematic Review with Multi-level Meta-analysis. Fabian Arntz, Adrian Markov, David G. Behm, Martin Behrens, Yassine Negra, Masatoshi Nakamura, Jason Moran & Helmi Chaabene. Sports Med. 2023
Does Stretching Training Influence Muscular Strength? A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression. Ewan Thomas, Salvatore Ficarra, João Pedro Nunes, Antonio Paoli, Marianna Bellafiore, Antonio Palma, Antonino Bianco. J Strength Cond Res. 2022
A Comparison of the Effects of Foam Rolling and Stretching on Physical Performance. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Andreas Konrad, Markus Tilp, Masatoshi Nakamura. Front Physiol. 2021
The Effectiveness of Post-exercise Stretching in Short-Term and Delayed Recovery of Strength, Range of Motion and Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Afonso J, Clemente FM, Nakamura FY, Morouço P, Sarmento H, Inman RA, Ramirez-Campillo R. Front Physiol. 2021
The Effectiveness of Post-exercise Stretching in Short-Term and Delayed Recovery of Strength, Range of Motion and Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Afonso J, Clemente FM, Nakamura FY, Morouço P, Sarmento H, Inman RA, Ramirez-Campillo R. Front Physiol. 2021
Do alterations in muscle strength, flexibility, range of motion, and alignment predict lower extremity injury in runners: a systematic review. Christopher SM, McCullough J, Snodgrass SJ, Cook C. Arch Physiother. 2019
Acute Effects of Static Stretching on Muscle Strength and Power: An Attempt to Clarify Previous Caveats. Chaabene H, Behm DG, Negra Y, Granacher U. Front Physiol. 2019
Acute Effects of Dynamic Stretching on Muscle Flexibility and Performance: An Analysis of the Current Literature. Opplert J, Babault N. Sports Med. 2018
Influence of chronic stretching on muscle performance: Systematic review. Medeiros DM, Lima CS. Hum Mov Sci. 2017
The effects of stretching on performance. Peck E, Chomko G, Gaz DV, Farrell AM. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2014
Effects of stretching on performances involving stretch-shortening cycles. Kallerud H, Gleeson N. Sports Med. 2013
Does pre-exercise static stretching inhibit maximal muscular performance? A meta-analytical review. Simic L, Sarabon N, Markovic G. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2013
Stretching to prevent or reduce muscle soreness after exercise. Herbert RD, de Noronha M, Kamper SJ Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2011
Share this article with your people:
Who is Thomas Solomon?
My knowledge has been honed following 20+ years of running, cycling, hiking, cross-country skiing, lifting, and climbing, 15+ years of academic research at world-leading universities and hospitals, and 10+ years advising and coaching in athletic performance and lifestyle change.
I have a BSc in Biochemistry, a PhD in Exercise Science, and over 90 peer-reviewed publications in medical journals.
I'm also an ACSM-certified Exercise Physiologist (ACSM-EP), an ACSM-certified Personal Trainer (ACSM-CPT), a VDOT-certified Distance Running Coach, and a UKVRN Registered Nutritionist (RNutr).
Since 2002, I’ve conducted biomedical research in exercise and nutrition and have taught and led university courses in exercise physiology, active recovery, biochemistry, and molecular medicine.
And, with my personal experience of competing on the track (800m to 10,000m), the road (5 k to marathon), on the trails, and in the mountains, by foot, bicycle, cross-country ski, and during obstacle course races (OCR), I deeply understand what it's like to train and compete — I've been there, done it, and gotten sweat, mud, and tears on my t-shirt.
Disclaimer: I occasionally mention brands and products, but it is important to know that I don't sell recovery products, supplements, or ad space, and I'm not affiliated with / sponsored by / an ambassador for / receiving advertisement royalties from any brands. I have conducted biomedical research for which I’ve received research money from publicly-funded national research councils and medical charities, and also from private companies, including Novo Nordisk Foundation, AstraZeneca, Amylin, the A.P. Møller Foundation, and the Augustinus Foundation. I’ve also consulted for Boost Treadmills and Gu Energy on R&D grant applications, and I provide research and scientific writing services for Examine.com. Some of my articles contain links to information provided by Examine.com but I do not receive any royalties or bonuses from those links. Importantly, none of the companies described above have had any control over the research design, data analysis, or publication outcomes of my work. I research and write my content using state-of-the-art, consensus, peer reviewed, and published scientific evidence combined with my empirical evidence observed in practice and feedback from athletes. My advice is, and always will be, based on my own views and opinions shaped by the scientific evidence available. The information I provide is not medical advice. Before making any changes to your habits of daily living based on any information I provide, always ensure it is safe for you to do so and consult your doctor if you are unsure.