See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313146826

Importance of Horizontally Loaded Movements to Sports Performance

Article  in  Strength and conditioning journal · February 2017

DOI: 10.1519/SSC.0000000000000272

CITATION READS

1 4,325

1 author:

Michael Bryan Zweifel

Building Better Athletes
2 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Re-Defining Agility View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Michael Bryan Zweifel on 04 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Importance of
Horizontally Loaded
Movements to Sports
Performance
Michael Zweifel, MS, CSCS
Building Better Athletes, Dubuque, Iowa
Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided
in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s Web site (http://journals.lww.com/nsca-scj).
ABSTRACT
THE USE OF VERTICALLY LOADED
EXERCISES, SUCH AS THE BACK
SQUAT, DEADLIFT, AND OLYMPIC-
STYLE LIFTS, ARE COMMONLY
PRESCRIBED BY STRENGTH AND
CONDITIONING PROFESSIONALS
TO ENHANCE THE PHYSICAL
QUALITIES OF ATHLETES. THESE
METHODS HAVE BEEN SUP-
PORTED AS EFFECTIVE MEANS,
MAINLY FOR NOVICE SUBJECTS,
BUT THEIR EFFECTIVENESS AND
TRANSFER HAS BEEN QUES-
TIONED IN MORE ADVANCED
ATHLETES AND IN TRANSFER TO
SPECIFIC PHYSICAL QUALITIES.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF VERTI-
CALLY LOADED EXERCISE TO
ENHANCE SPRINTING SPEED AND
CHANGE OF DIRECTION (COD)
SPEED IS EQUIVOCAL IN
ADVANCED ATHLETES, AND THE
USE OF HORIZONTALLY LOADED
MOVEMENT MAY HAVE BETTER
TRANSFER FOR SPRINTING SPEED
AND COD SPEED.
Address correspondence to Michael Zweifel,
Buildingbetterathletes.bba@gmail.com.
Copyright Ó National Strength and Conditioning Association
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
INTRODUCTION may be beneficial to emphasize hori-
hree of the most popular meth- zontally based movements in strength
T ods to increase lower-body
strength and power are the
squat, deadlift, and the Olympic-style
and conditioning programs. This liter-
ature review addresses this contention
by (a) investigating the literature on the
lifts (5,17,18). These methods are fre- back squat, deadlift, and Olympic-style
quently used by strength and condi- lifts, (b) investigating the literature on
tioning coaches to enhance the shortcomings of the back squat, dead-
physical qualities of athletes in hopes lift, Olympic-style lifts, and potential
to transfer to sporting actions such as for horizontally loaded exercises, and
sprinting speed, change of direction (c) suggestions for coaches and future
(COD) speed, and jumping perfor- research.
mance. These lifts have been
supported in many cases in past litera-
BACK SQUAT
ture (9–11,18–21,26,32,35,40,44,46–48)
The back squat is regarded as one of
but may be limited in their transfer
the most effective exercises to enhance
in advanced athletes because of
athletic performance because of it
their vertically loaded nature
being a multijoint movement that
(1,6,12,14,23,41,43,49,50). A possible
strengthens the prime movers needed
shortcoming of these exercises is that
to express explosive athletic move-
they are all vertically loaded; the load is
ments (17). Recently, Seitz et al. (44)
applied in a vertical manner to the
conducted a meta-analysis on the
body. This differs from horizontally
transfer of back squat training to sprint-
loaded movements, where the load is
ing. This meta-analysis included 15
applied perpendicular to the body.
studies, consisting of 510 subjects [no
Horizontally loaded movements may
sex or age restrictions]. Inclusion based
be beneficial for more horizontally
on (1) randomized control studies, (2)
based movements such as horizontal
studies using instruments with high
jumping, acceleration, and sprinting
(2,6,12,41), whereas vertical-based
KEY WORDS:
movements may be better for vertically
horizontal; back squat; deadlift;
oriented movements. Athletes must be
Olympic-style lifts; speed; change of
able to express strength, power, and
direction speed
speed in multiple directions, and it
21
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
 Importance of Horizontally Loaded Movements to Performance
reliability and validity, (3) studies
where the sprint test was conducted
pretraining and posttraining, and (4)
studies where the strength test was
conducted using a free-weight [full,
parallel, or half ] back squat exercise)
and found that back squat strength sig-
nificantly correlated (r 5 20.77; P 5
0.0001) with sprinting speed. The re-
searchers concluded lower-body
strength, via the back squat, should
be a relevant training regimen for ath-
letes (44). López-Segovia et al. (32)
studied 14 under-21 soccer players
and showed power produced in the full
squat is an important factor to explain
short sprint performance (r 5 20.79;
P # 0.01). Also, McBride et al. (35)
performed a study with 17 male Divi-
sion I-AA football athletes and re-
corded 1-repetition maximum (1RM)
in the back squat in comparison with
sprint times in the 5-, 10-, and 40-yard
sprints. The overall results suggest that
athletes with a 1RM/body mass of 2.10
or higher had significantly faster sprint
times than those with a 1RM/body
mass of 1.90 or below. These findings
support other cross-sectional studies
showing a close association between
relative strength in the back squat
and sprinting speed (10,11,48). The
back squat has also been shown to be
effective at improving vertical jump
and COD speed (9,11,26,40,48). Chelly
et al. (9) demonstrated training with
heavy half back squats, twice a week
for 2 months, increased jump perfor-
mance, sprint performance (0–40 m),
and peak power output in junior soccer
players. Keiner et al. (26) studied 112
soccer players, aged 13–18, in a 2-year
long-term strength development pro-
gram. Subjects in the control group on-
ly participated in normal soccer
training, whereas the experimental
group performed strength training
(back squats, front squat, and deadlifts)
in addition to normal soccer training.
After 2-years, the strength trained
group showed significantly faster
COD times, and the researchers con-
cluded that long-term strength devel-
opment in the squat is related to
improved performance in COD sprints
for adolescent athletes. Peterson, Alvar,
22 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 1 | FEBRUARY 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
and Rhea (40) investigated 54 men and
women freshman collegiate athletes
(men’s and women’s basketball, base-
ball, softball, and volleyball) and com-
pared 1RM strength in the back squat
with vertical jump, standing broad
jump, cone t test, 20-yard acceleration,
and 40-yard sprint. Peterson, Alvar,
and Rhea determined that there was
correlation between relative back squat
strength and all the performance tests.
Peterson, Alvar, and Rhea concluded
that the relative strength in the back
squat and measures of power, jumping
ability, agility, linear sprint accelera-
tion, and sprinting speed were strong.
DEADLIFT
The deadlift is popular among power-
lifters and is regarded as an important
exercise for athletes seeking to improve
strength and power (5). A recent study
by Laffaye et al. (28) examined 273
elite (college and professional) athletes
(primarily football, basketball, baseball,
and volleyball players) and the different
variables that make up a successful ver-
tical jump. The researchers determined
that concentric force and eccentric rate
of force development are the 2 most
important qualities to determine jump-
ing height, and therefore, suggested the
deadlift as being a major exercise in
improving concentric force develop-
ment. This supports Robbins (42) who
concluded that peak muscle activation
in the deadlift is very similar to the peak
muscle activation of a countermove-
ment jump. Swinton et al. (46) studied
30 male rugby union players and dem-
onstrated that relative strength in the
deadlift was associated with faster
sprinting speeds and higher vertical
jumps. In fact, the researchers con-
cluded that for the 30-m sprints and
vertical leap, as much as 90% of the
performance variation can be explained
by relative strength and average/peak
power output in the deadlift. Last,
Thompson et al. (47) studied 34 novice
subjects through a 10-week, twice per
week, deadlift training protocol.
Posttraining testing resulted in a 7.4%
increase in vertical jump and an
18.8–49.0% increase in rate of torque
development (47).
OLYMPIC-STYLE LIFTS
The Olympic-style lifts are pro-
grammed to improve power and speed
as they are performed at very high
speeds and produce high-power out-
puts that are thought to have good
transfer to athletic movements
(18,21). A classic study by Garhammer
(18) determined that peak power out-
put during the Olympic-style lifts, spe-
cifically the second pull, produced far
greater peak power outputs (400%
greater) than the back squat, deadlift,
or bench press. Hackett et al. (19)
performed a systematic review to
compare the effects of weightlifting,
traditional resistance training, and
plyometrics on vertical jump height.
The researchers included 232 subjects
(175 athletes and 57 physical education
students) with resistance training expe-
rience and concluded that weightlifting
results in an average of 5.1% greater
vertical jump when compared with
traditional resistance training. Hoffman
et al. (20) explored 20 Division III
collegiate football players on the effects
of a 15-week training program of lifting
compared with a program of powerlift-
ing on 40-yard sprint times, vertical
jump, agility, and strength. The research-
ers concluded that the weightlifting
group improved 40-yard sprint (0.07 6
0.22 seconds versus 0.04 6 0.19 sec-
onds), vertical jump (6.8 cm 6 6.1 versus
0.5 6 6.8), and lower-body strength
(22.5 6 31.5 kg versus 18.9 6 33.1 kg)
to a greater extent than the powerlifting
group (20). In another study, McBride
et al. (34) recruited national level Olym-
pic weightlifters (n 5 6), powerlifters
(n 5 8), and sprinters (n 5 6) and tested
each group in 1RM back squat, jump
squat tests, and vertical jumps with var-
ious loads performed. The researchers
suggested that the weightlifting group
produced significantly higher peak
forces, power outputs, velocities, and
jump heights in comparison with the
powerlifting group and were significantly
stronger than the sprinter group (34).
The researchers concluded that strength
and power characteristics are specific to
each group and are influenced by the
training protocols used (34).
 SHORTCOMINGS OF VERTICAL
EXERCISES
Direct transfer to improve sports
performance using the back
squat, deadlift, or Olympic-style lifts
may be limited by the nature of
the exercise and/or by the experience
level of more advanced athletes
(1,6,12,14,23,41,43,49,50). Young (50)
reviewed the transfer of traditional
strength exercises, such as the back
squat, deadlift, and Olympic-style lifts,
on sports performance. Young (50)
stated that exercises involving bilateral
contractions of the leg muscles result-
ing in vertical movement, such as
squats, deadlifts, and Olympic-style
lifts, have minimal transfer to perfor-
mance in advanced athletes. Although
general strength training might be ben-
eficial for athletes because of the poten-
tial to enhance the force-generating
capabilities of muscle, direct transfer
to improve sports performance might
be limited in experienced athletes (50).
To maximize transfer to on-field per-
formance, training should be as specific
as possible, especially with regard to
movement pattern and contraction
velocity (6,14,50). The efficiency and
effectiveness of bilateral, vertical exer-
cises have been questioned as it has
been shown that it takes exceptionally
large increases in 1RM back squat
strength (;23 to 27%) to only slightly
increase sprinting speed (2–3%)
(14,23). Rumpf et al. (43) performed
a review looking at the effects of vari-
ous types of training on sprint perfor-
mance in highly trained athletes
(international level) versus recreational
athletes. They grouped training meth-
ods into specific (sprinting or resisted
sprinting) and nonspecific (resistance
training). Although nonspecific train-
ing methods were found to be effective,
mainly for recreational subjects, they
were much less effective for highly
trained athletes. Specific training meth-
ods proved to be superior for high-level
athletes, leaving the researchers calling
for the use of specific training methods
to enhance performance in highly
trained subjects (43). Barr et al. (1)
showed that significant increases in
power clean strength in elite rugby
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
players over the course of 1 year did
not yield any improvements in sprint-
ing speed. They concluded that while
increasing strength is likely important
for players with low training experi-
ence, it may not have the same effect
with highly trained athletes (1). When
it comes to transfer to sporting move-
ments such as COD speed, Jullien et al.
(24) demonstrated that lower-body
strengthening, via the back squat, failed
to improve COD when compared with
technique and coordination work in
young professional male soccer ath-
letes. These findings support the
Brughelli et al. (6) review of training
studies on COD ability. This review
concluded that traditional strength
and power training, performed bilater-
ally in the vertical direction, have
mostly failed to elicit improvements
in COD performance. Instead, utiliza-
tion of exercises that more closely
mimic the demands of COD, such as
horizontal jump training, lateral jump
training, and specific COD training
have shown to be effective at improv-
ing COD performance (6). Hori et al.
(22) investigated whether the athlete
who has high performance in hang
power clean also has high performan-
ces in sprinting, jumping, and COD.
Twenty-nine semiprofessional Austra-
lian rules football players were tested
for 1RM strength in the hang power
clean and were separated into 2
groups—strongest 14 into the higher
performance group; weakest 14 into
the lower performance group (excluded
the middle athlete). Overall, there was
no significant difference between groups
in 5-5 COD time. The researchers con-
cluded that strength characteristics of
the hang power clean differ from those
needed for successful COD perfor-
mance (22). Young et al. (49) studied
15 males aged 18–28 and compared var-
ious COD speed cuts with lower-body
strength and power, measured by an
isokinetic squat. The authors deduced
that there was no significant correlation
between the 2 measures and therefore
suggested that training designed to
increase leg strength and power as
a means to enhance COD is not con-
clusively supported (49).
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
A potential reason for the gap
between strength in vertically ori-
ented exercises, such as the squat,
deadlift, and Olympic-style lifts, is
the lack of specificity to horizontal
planar movement. Several research
studies have concluded that horizon-
tal force application is related to fast-
er sprinting speeds (7,15,25,37,38,41).
Buchheit et al. (8) analyzed the hori-
zontal forces of 86 elite youth soccer
players during sprinting. The re-
searchers found that horizontal force
was significantly correlated with
acceleration speed (10 m), suggesting
that horizontal forces may be impor-
tant for acceleration performance.
Lockie et al. (31) echoed this by sum-
marizing, in order to increase acceler-
ation speed, it is important to develop
specific horizontal strength and
power. Randell et al. (41) highlighted
the concern to the possible shortcom-
ings of vertically loaded exercises,
such as the back squat, deadlift, and
Olympic-style lifts, and noted that the
effectiveness of a gym-based lower-
body resistance-training program
with a horizontal component has
not been fully investigated, citing
a gap in strength and conditioning
research. This gap in the literature,
potentially, means that horizontally
loaded movements may have greater
transfer and benefit for acceleration
and sprinting speed than vertically
loaded exercises.
A training quality of both horizontally
and vertically oriented exercises is full
hip extension, which has been pro-
posed as a key factor for improved
sprinting, jumping, and lateral move-
ment speed (3,12,45). The gluteal and
hamstring musculature are the main
drivers of powerful hip extension, and
increasing strength and power in these
muscles, may help horizontal-based
movements (13). This may be of
importance because as sprinting speeds
increase, the activity of the gluteal and
hamstring musculature also increase
(2,3,7,16,27,30). It is proposed that hor-
izontally loaded movements may be
superior to vertically oriented move-
ments in eliciting gluteal and hamstring
23
 Importance of Horizontally Loaded Movements to Performance
activation, which may lead to greater
transfer to horizontal strength and
power (12). Recently, a study recorded
electromyography (EMG) in 13
trained females during a horizontally
based exercise, the hip thrust, and a ver-
tically based exercise, the back squat
(13). The barbell hip thrust elicited sig-
nificantly greater mean (69.5 versus
29.4%) and peak (172 versus 84.9%)
upper gluteus maximus, mean (86.8
versus 45.4%) and peak (216 versus
130%) lower gluteus maximus, and
mean (40.8 versus 14.9%) and peak
(86.9 versus 37.5%) biceps femoris
EMG activity than the back squat.
The researchers concluded the need
for further investigation to see if this
increased activation of muscle tissue
would lead to greater hypertrophy,
strength, and performance benefits
(13). McGill et al. (36) demonstrated
a horizontally based exercise, the ket-
tlebell (KB) swing, with just 16 kg eli-
cited as a maximal voluntary
contraction of 80% for the gluteal
muscles. The KB swing has also been
shown to be equally effective as
Olympic-style lifts and squats at
improving vertical jump, despite using
lighter loads (29,39). Lake et al. (29)
determined that peak and mean power
during the KB swing were greater than
the back squat and comparable with
the jump squat. The KB swing also
recorded the highest net impulse with
32 kg (276.1 6 45.3 N$s versus 60%
1RM back squat: 182.8 6 43.1 N$s,
and 40% jump squat: 231.3 6 47.1
N$s). These findings indicate that the
large mechanical demand during the
KB swing could make the KB swing
a useful addition to strength and con-
ditioning programs that aim to develop
the ability to rapidly apply horizontal
force (29). Not only is horizontal hip
extension good for sagittal plane-based
movements, but Shimokochi et al. (45)
assessed 28 female college basketball
players and concluded that greater
hip extension velocity explained better
lateral cutting and sliding maneuvers,
and training hip extension velocity
may be crucial for better lateral accel-
eration and deceleration. Finally,
McGill et al. (36) also noted that the
24 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 1 | FEBRUARY 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
unique horizontal loading pattern
during the KB swing puts forces on
the spine which is opposite to tradi-
tional lifts such as deadlift, back
squat, and Olympic-style lifts. This
may be why many individuals credit
KB swings with restoring and
enhancing back health and func-
tion (36).
CONCLUSION
Although general strength training,
such as vertically oriented exercises,
is beneficial for athletes because of
the potential to enhance the force-
generating capabilities of muscle, the
direct transfer of such exercises to
improve sports performance might be
limited in experienced athletes or ath-
letes requiring horizontally dominated
movements (50). Young (50) reviewed
the transfer of traditional strength
training on sports performance and
stated that exercises in the vertical
plane, such as squats, deadlifts, and
Olympic-style lifts, have minimal trans-
fer to performance in advanced ath-
letes (50). To maximize transfer to
on-field performance, training should
be as specific as possible, especially
with regard to movement pattern and
contraction velocity (6,14,50).
It is proposed that horizontally ori-
ented movements may be superior to
vertically oriented movements in elic-
iting gluteal and hamstring activation,
which may lead to greater transfer to
horizontal strength and power (12).
Contreras et al. (2015) demonstrated
that a horizontal-based movement eli-
cited significantly greater mean (69.5
versus 29.4%) and peak (172 versus
84.9%) upper gluteus maximus, mean
(86.8 versus 45.4%) and peak (216 ver-
sus 130%) lower gluteus maximus,
and mean (40.8 versus 14.9%) and
peak (86.9 versus 37.5%) biceps fem-
oris EMG activity than the back
squat. This is important as several pre-
vious research studies have shown that
as sprinting speeds increase, the activity
of gluteal and hamstring musculature
also increases (2,3,7,16,27,30). In addi-
tion, several research studies have con-
cluded that horizontal force application
is related to faster sprinting speeds and
COD (7,15,25,37,38,41,45). This leads
to the need for further investigation
whether these relationships exist in
training studies with high-level athletes.
In conclusion, the effectiveness of
a gym-based lower-body resistance-
training program with a horizontal
component has not been fully investi-
gated (41). Further research needs to
be conducted to determine whether
recent EMG research showing
increased muscle activation during
horizontally oriented movements (13)
leads to superior strength, power,
speed, and on-field transference com-
pared with vertically loaded exercises.
PRACTICAL APPLICATION
The use of a horizontally based training
regimen has yet to be investigated and
compared against a vertically based train-
ing regimen. Vertically oriented exercises
have been demonstrated to be effective
(9–11,18–21,26,32,35,40,44,46–48), but
this effectiveness is diminished in
experienced athletes and in transfer
to specific physical qualities
(1,6,12,14,23,41,43,49,50). This does
not mean that vertically loaded move-
ments should be omitted. They are
important and have their place in any
strength and conditioning program,
but the use of horizontal-based move-
ments may have greater transfer to
certain aspects of sports performance.
It should be noted that athletes who
require specific performance in the
horizontal, vertical, lateral, and/or
rotational planes, engage in exercises
containing those specific movements.
The following are practical exercises to
maximize horizontal strength, power,
and speed. Further research needs to
be conducted in athletic populations
to continue to distinguish differences
in performance of horizontal move-
ments versus vertical movements.
These weight room exercises would
be in addition to movement exercises
such as sprinting, bounding, horizontal
jumping, and sled pushing/towing.
1. Hip thrust/barbell glute bridge—
Contreras et al. (13) performed
EMG on the hip thrust and back
 squat and demonstrated that the hip
thrust activated greater levels of glu-
teal and hamstring musculature
compared with the back squat, giv-
ing reason for future research to
continue investigation of the hip
thrust’s effects on performance.
Just as the back squat and deadlift are
loaded for various goals, the same is
applied for the hip thrust. It should be
loaded and subscribed volume for vari-
ous goals from hypertrophy, strength,
and even power, just as one would for
the back squat or deadlift (see Video,
Supplemental Digital Content 1,
http://links.lww.com/SCJ/A200).
2. KB swings—KB swings may be
a great alternative to Olympic-style
lifts in their ability to create violent
hip extension (29,33,36,39).
The KB swing is an explosive move-
ment and should be performed at high
velocities for 3–6 sets for 5–12 reps with
adequate recovery (90–120 seconds)
between sets. The use of bands can also
be applied to provide higher eccentric
forces and greater power output.
3. Reverse hyperextensions—Reverse
hyperextensions are unique and
they are open chained, and the hip
extensors must work “in the air” not
through the ground. In sprinting, the
hip extensors are vitally important
during flight to accelerate the leg-
to-ground contact (4), so training
the hip extensors without ground
support may be a valuable tool to
carryover to this action.
Reverse hyperextensions can be per-
formed with both legs or a single leg
for 2–5 sets of 8–15 reps with 60–90
seconds of rest between sets. They can
be loaded using a traditional reverse
hyperextension machine or can be
loaded with bands or manual resistance
by a partner.
4. Hip extension—Commonly known
as back extensions, but the intent
of this movement is hip extension
by gluteal and hamstring contrac-
tion rather than using the erectors
to extend the lumbar spine.
The hip extension is great for addressing
strength at length for the hamstrings and
is optimal for 2–5 sets of 8–20 with
60–90 seconds of rest between sets.
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
5. Pivot press—The pivot press uses the
common landmine bar positioning
to allow a horizontal bar path to
occur. The pivot press expresses
horizontal force transmission from
the lower body to the upper body
and closely mimics the demands of
blocking and tackling in football
and rugby.
The pivot press should be performed
for sets of 2–5 for reps of 4–8 with
2 minutes of rest between sets. The
intent should be to move the
weight as fast as possible (see Video,
Supplemental Digital Content 2,
http://links.lww.com/SCJ/A201).
6. Jammer sprint—The jammer machine
allows horizontal resistance in a sin-
gle leg action that mimics accelera-
tion action. The jammer sprint
should be used for 4–6 reps each
leg for 2–4 sets with full recovery
(2+ minutes) between sets (see Video,
Supplemental Digital Content 3,
http://links.lww.com/SCJ/A202).
Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding:
The author reports no conflicts of interest
and no source of funding.
Michael
Zweifel is Owner
and Head of
Sports Perfor-
mance of Build-
ing Better
Athletes, LLC.
REFERENCES
1. Barr MJ, Sheppard JM, Agar-Newman DJ,
and Newton RU. Transfer effect of strength
and power training to the sprinting kinematics
of international rugby players. J Strength
Cond Res 28: 2585–2596, 2014.
2. Bartlett JL, Sumner B, Ellis RG, and
Kram R. Activity and functions of the human
gluteal muscles in walking, running,
sprinting, and climbing. Am J Phys
Anthropol 153: 124–131, 2014.
3. Beardsley C and Contreras B. The
increasing role of the hip extensor
musculature with heavier compound lower-
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
body movements and more explosive sport
actions. Strength Cond J 36: 49–55,
2014.
4. Bezodis I, Salo A, and Kerwin D. Joint
kinetics in maximum velocity sprint running.
ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive.
Ouro Preto, Brazil. 1(1): 2007.
5. Bird S and Barrington-Higgs B. Exploring
the deadlift. Strength Cond J 32: 46–51,
2010.
6. Brughelli M, Cronin J, Levin G, and
Chaouachi A. Understanding change of
direction ability in sport. Sports Med 38:
1045–1063, 2008.
7. Brughelli M, Cronin J, and Chaouachi A.
Effects of running velocity on running
kinetics and kinematics. J Strength Cond
Res 25: 933–939, 2011.
8. Buchheit M, Samozino P, Glynn JA, Michael
BS, Al Haddad H, Mendez-Villanueva A,
and Morin JB. Mechanical determinants of
acceleration and maximal sprinting speed
in highly trained young soccer players.
J Sports Sci 32: 1906–1913, 2014.
9. Chelly MS, Fathloun M, Cherif N, Amar MB,
Tabka Z, and Van Praagh E. Effects of
a back squat training program on leg
power, jump, and sprint performances in
junior soccer players. J Strength Cond Res
23: 2241–2249, 2009.
10. Comfort P, Haigh A, and Matthews MJ. Are
changes in maximal squat strength during
preseason training reflected in changes in
sprint performance in rugby league
players? J Strength Cond Res 26: 772–
776, 2012.
11. Comfort P, Stewart A, Bloom L, and
Clarkson B. Relationships between
strength, sprint, and jump performance in
well-trained youth soccer players.
J Strength Cond Res 28: 173–177, 2014.
12. Contreras BM, Cronin JB, Schoenfeld BJ,
Nates RJ, and Sonmez GT. Are all hip
extension exercises created equal?
Strength Cond J 35: 17–22, 2013.
13. Contreras B, Vigotsky AD, Schoenfeld BJ,
Beardsley C, and Cronin J. A comparison
of gluteus maximus, biceps femoris, and
vastus lateralis electromyographic activity
in the back squat and barbell hip thrust
exercises. J Appl Biomech 31: 452–458,
2015.
14. Cronin J, Ogden T, Lawton T, and
Brughelli M. Does increasing maximal
strength improve sprint running
performance? Strength Cond J 29: 86–95,
2007.
15. De Lacey J, Brughelli ME, McGuigan MR,
and Hansen KT. Strength, speed and
power characteristics of elite rugby league
25
 Importance of Horizontally Loaded Movements to Performance
players. J Strength Cond Res 28: 2372–
2375, 2014.
16. Dorn TW, Schache AG, and Pandy MG.
Muscular strategy shift in human running:
Dependence of running speed on hip and
ankle muscle performance. J Exp Biol 215:
1944–1956, 2012.
17. Escamilla RF. Knee biomechanics of the
dynamic squat exercise. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 33: 127–141, 2001.
18. Garhammer J. A review of power output
studies of Olympic and powerlifting:
Methodology, performance prediction, and
evaluation tests. J Strength Cond Res 7:
76–89, 1993.
19. Hackett D, Davies T, Soomro N, and
Halaki M. Olympic weightlifting training
improves vertical jump height in
sportspeople: A systematic review with
meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 50:
865–872, 2016.
20. Hoffman JR, Cooper J, Wendell M, and
Kang J. Comparison of Olympic vs.
traditional power lifting training programs in
football players. J Strength Cond Res 18:
129–135, 2004.
21. Holmberg PM. Weightlifting to improve
volleyball performance. Strength Cond J
35: 79–88, 2013.
22. Hori N, Newton RU, Andrews WA,
Kawamori N, McGuigan MR, and Nosaka
K. Does performance of hang power clean
differentiate performance of jumping,
sprinting, and changing of direction?
J Strength Cond Res 22: 412–418,
2008.
23. Jacobson BH, Conchola EG, Glass RG,
and Thompson BJ. Longitudinal
morphological and performance profiles for
American, NCAA Division I football players.
J Strength Cond Res 27: 2347–2354,
2013.
24. Jullien H, Bisch C, Largouët N, Manouvrier C,
Carling CJ, and Amiard V. Does a short
period of lower limb strength training improve
performance in field-based tests of running
and agility in young professional soccer
players? J Strength Conditioning Res 22:
404–411, 2008.
25. Kawamori N, Nosaka K, and Newton RU.
Relationships between ground reaction
impulse and sprint acceleration
performance in team sport athletes.
J Strength Cond Res 27: 568–573,
2013.
26. Keiner M, Sander A, Wirth K, and
Schmidtbleicher D. Long-term strength
training effects on change-of-direction
sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res
28: 223–231, 2014.
26 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 1 | FEBRUARY 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
View publication stats
27. Kyröläinen H, Avela J, and Komi PV.
Changes in muscle activity with increasing
running speed. J Sports Sci 23: 1101–
1109, 2005.
28. Laffaye G, Wagner PP, and Tombleson TI.
Countermovement jump height: Gender
and sport-specific differences in the force-
time variables. J Strength Cond Res 28:
1096–1105, 2014.
29. Lake JP and Lauder MA. Kettlebell swing
training improves maximal and explosive
strength. J Strength Cond Res 26: 2228–
2233, 2012.
30. Lieberman DE, Raichlen DA, Pontzer H,
Bramble DM, and Cutright-Smith E. The
human gluteus maximus and its role in
running. J Exp Biol 2009: 2143–2155,
2006.
31. Lockie RG, Murphy AJ, Schultz AB, Knight
TJ, and de Jonge XAJ. The effects of
different speed training protocols on sprint
acceleration kinematics and muscle strength
and power in field sport athletes. J Strength
Cond Res 26: 1539–1550, 2012.
32. López-Segovia M, Marques M, van den
Tillaar R, and González-Badillo J.
Relationships between vertical jump and
full squat power outputs with sprint times in
U21 soccer players. J Hum Kinetics 30:
135–144, 2011.
33. Manocchia P, Spierer DK, Lufkin AK,
Minichiello J, and Castro J. Transference of
kettlebell training to strength, power, and
endurance. J Strength Cond Res 27: 477–
484, 2013.
34. McBride JM, Triplett-McBride T, Davie A,
and Newton RU. A comparison of strength
and power characteristics between power
lifters, Olympic lifters, and sprinters.
J Strength Cond Res 13: 58–66, 1999.
35. McBride JM, Blow D, Kirby TJ, Haines TL,
Dayne AM, and Triplett NT. Relationship
between maximal squat strength and five,
ten, and forty yard sprint times. J Strength
Cond Res 23: 1633–1636, 2009.
36. McGill SM and Marshall LW. Kettlebell swing,
snatch, and bottoms-up carry: Back and hip
muscle activation, motion, and low back loads.
J Strength Cond Res 26: 16–27, 2012.
37. Morin JB, Edouard P, and Samozino P.
Technical ability of force application as
a determinant factor of sprint performance.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 43: 1680–1688, 2011.
38. Morin JB, Slawinski J, Dorel S, Couturier A,
Samozino P, Brughelli M, and Rabita G.
Acceleration capability in elite sprinters
and ground impulse: Push more, brake
less? J Biomech 48: 3149–3154, 2015.
39. Otto WH III, Coburn JW, Brown LE, and
Spiering BA. Effects of weightlifting vs.
kettlebell training on vertical jump, strength,
and body composition. J Strength Cond
Res 26: 1199–1202, 2012.
40. Peterson MD, Alvar BA, and Rhea MR. The
contribution of maximal force production to
explosive movement among young
collegiate athletes. J Strength Cond Res
20: 867–873, 2006.
41. Randell AD, Cronin JB, Keogh JW, and Gill
ND. Transference of strength and power
adaptation to sports performance—
horizontal and vertical force production.
Strength Cond J 32: 100–106, 2010.
42. Robbins D. A Comparison of Muscular
Activation During the Back Squat and
Deadlift to the Countermovement Jump.
Sacred Heart University Thesis Project.
Spring, 2011.
43. Rumpf MC, Cronin JB, Bed MA, and
Schneider C. Effect of different training
method on sprint times in recreational and
athletic males. J Aust Strength Cond 22:
62–73, 2014.
44. Seitz LB, Reyes A, Tran TT, de Villarreal ES,
and Haff GG. Increases in lower-body
strength transfer positively to sprint
performance: A systematic review with
meta-analysis. Sports Med 44: 1693–
1702, 2014.
45. Shimokochi Y, Ide D, Kokubu M, and
Nakaoji T. Relationships among
performance of lateral cutting maneuver
from lateral sliding and hip extension and
abduction motions, ground reaction force,
and body center of mass height. J Strength
Cond Res 27: 1851–1860, 2013.
46. Swinton PA, Lloyd R, Keogh JW, Agouris I,
and Stewart AD. Regression models of
sprint, vertical jump, and change of
direction performance. J Strength Cond
Res 28: 1839–1848, 2014.
47. Thompson BJ, Stock MS, Shields JE, Luera
MJ, Munayer IK, Mota JA, and Olinghouse
KD. Barbell deadlift training increases the
rate of torque development and vertical
jump performance in novices. J Strength
Cond Res 29: 1–10, 2015.
48. Wisløff U, Castagna C, Helgerud J,
Jones R, and Hoff J. Strong correlation of
maximal squat strength with sprint
performance and vertical jump height in
elite soccer players. Br J Sports Med 38:
285–288, 2004.
49. Young WB, James R, and Montgomery I. Is
muscle power related to running speed
with changes of direction? J Sports Med
Phys Fitness 42: 282–288, 2002.
50. Young WB. Transfer of strength and power
training to sports performance. Int J Sports
Physiol Perform 1: 74, 2006.