Study Design: Optimal Strategy for Timed, Known Distance Rucking Performance

By Jackson Mann

Overview

Rucking is a core movement pattern for military and tactical athletes, yet little empirical data exists on optimal pacing strategies under load. This four-week study compares two 6-mile ruck approaches:

• Approach A: Continuous ruck run
• Approach B: 2-minute run / 1-minute walk intervals

All trials will be conducted with a 50-lb ruck on a flat 400-meter track in Ogden, Utah (24 laps ≈ 6 miles).

Objective

To determine if a continuous ruck run or a 2:1 run-walk interval is faster over 6 miles with a 50-lb load while holding terrain and environmental conditions constant.

---

Selection of Ruck Strategies

• Ruck Run (Approach A) represents a continuous, sustained pace that balances running efficiency with load tolerance.
• 2:1 Interval (Approach B) allows built-in recovery and may mitigate fatigue buildup, especially under cumulative stress.

We opted for time-based rather than distance-based intervals for several reasons:

• Time-based intervals encourage maximal effort during the run phase and limit over-resting during walks.
• Distance-based intervals can vary significantly due to terrain—e.g., walking 400 meters uphill takes longer than on flat ground.
• If the walk segment is too long, the athlete may recover before completing the interval, decreasing training efficiency.
• From a logistical standpoint, distance intervals can be impractical. Soldiers may not have access to GPS or sub-mile markers during an event. Conversely, a wristwatch allows for simple and accurate time-tracking, making time intervals more field-adaptable.

We selected the 2:1 interval ratio (2 minutes running, 1 minute walking) as it is a common strategy for some soldiers in the U.S Army. If this approach proves to be equal to or faster than trotting, future studies can investigate which interval ratios are most effective while conserving energy.

It’s worth noting that some tactical athletes prefer a terrain-based rucking strategy—running on downhills and flat sections, and walking on uphills. While this approach is valid in varied terrain, it was excluded from our study because ruck assessment courses vary significantly in terrain, making it impractical to prescribe a terrain-based strategy for flatter courses.

---

Participant Profile

Attribute	Description
Sample Size	4 well-conditioned male athletes
Training Background	2 familiar with rucking, 1 experienced with light-load uphill movement, 1 unfamiliar
Health Status	3 injury-free; 1 had minor lower-back complications
Load Carriage	Identical rucksacks loaded to 50 lbs with sandbags

---

Study Structure & Intent

Training Sessions 1 and 2 serve two purposes. First, they allow participants to become familiar with each approach so the assessment is not their first exposure. Second, for those unfamiliar with rucking 50 lbs over 6 miles, these sessions provide acclimatization to both the load and distance.

During Assessments 1 and 2, participants are split into two groups: Group A and Group B. In Assessment 1, Group A ruck runs while Group B follows the interval strategy. In Assessment 2, they switch. This crossover design helps control for any fitness gains between assessments and ensures each strategy is evaluated equally. Even if all participants improve in speed between assessments, this format enables fair comparison between strategies.

Cycle Duration: 4 weeks, 1 session per week

Date (Tuesday)	Session	Purpose	Assigned Approach
July 7	Training 1	Familiarization	All participants → Approach A (ruck run)
July 14	Training 2	Familiarization	All participants → Approach B (2:1 intervals)
July 21	Assessment 1	Performance Test	2 participants → Approach A 2 participants → Approach B
July 28	Assessment 2	Performance Test	Participants switch strategies

---

Assessment Protocol

Variable	Method
Performance Metric	Time to complete 6 miles (tracked via phone timers and wristwatches)
Environment	Flat 400 m track with simultaneous starts; rucks will begin at 05:00 to minimize the impact of heat on athletes’ performance
Controls	– Identical pack setup
	– Standardized warm-up
	– Hydration station (athletes bring their own water)
	– No additional ruck training above 30 lbs outside of sessions during July
	– Same start time for all athletes to ensure consistent environmental conditions

---

Equipment / Logistics

• 4 × 50-lb ruck systems (sandbag-loaded; weight verified by digital scale)
• 4 smartphones with stopwatch apps (with wristwatches as backups) and lap counters

---

Conclusion & Next Steps

This study aims to provide practical insight for tactical athletes and training programs regarding the fastest ruck pacing strategy. If the interval strategy demonstrates a clear advantage in performance, MTI will conduct further studies to explore optimal interval ratios for speed, as well as assess whether the interval strategy remains effective on varied terrain.

The results of this study will help determine the merit of interval rucking and will serve as a baseline for future research on rucking techniques and strategies.