New Insights Into the
Development of Maximal
Sprint Speed in Male
Youth
Robert W. Meyers, PhD,1 Jon L. Oliver, PhD,1,2 Michael G. Hughes, PhD,1 Rhodri S. Lloyd, PhD,1,2
and John B. Cronin, PhD2,3
1
Youth Physical Development Unit, Cardiff School of Sport, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, United Kingdom;
2
Sports Performance Research Institute, New Zealand (SPRINZ), AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand; and
3
School of Exercise, Biomedical and Health Science, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia
ABSTRACT
SPEED IS A KEY ASPECT OF
YOUTH PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMS AND COMMONLY AS-
SESSED DURING TALENT IDENTI-
FICATION TESTING PROTOCOLS,
YET, LITTLE IS UNDERSTOOD
ABOUT THE FACTORS THAT
UNDERPIN THE NATURAL DEVEL-
OPMENT OF MAXIMAL SPEED
THROUGHOUT CHILDHOOD AND
ADOLESCENCE. THIS ARTICLE
REVIEWS THE ANTHROPOMETRIC,
KINEMATIC, KINETIC, AND ASYM-
METRY VARIABLES THAT CON-
TRIBUTE TO SPRINT
PERFORMANCE, WHILE EXAMIN-
ING THE IMPACT THAT GROWTH
AND MATURATION MAY HAVE ON
ALL FACETS OF MAXIMAL SPRINT
PERFORMANCE IN BOYS. CLEAR
GUIDANCE IS PROVIDED ON THE
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS FOR
THE STRENGTH AND CONDITION-
ING COACH THAT SHOULD HELP
IN DESIGN OF EFFECTIVE SPEED
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS FOR
MALE YOUTH.
Address correspondence to Robert W.
Meyers, rwmeyers@cardiffmet.ac.uk.
2 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
INTRODUCTION
printing is considered a fundamen-
S tal movement that underpins
successful sports participation
(27,36,46). Sprint speed is also recog-
nized as a key component of youth phys-
ical development programs (26) and is
a common performance assessment in
strength and conditioning programs
and talent identification batteries (36).
The development of speed in boys
throughout childhood and adolescence
has previously been considered (40);
however, the authors noted that little
was understood about the factors that
underpin natural developments in maxi-
mal sprint performance in youth. Given
recent developments in the pediatric lit-
erature pertaining to the development
of maximal sprint performance
(22,32–34,45,51,52), this review aims
to examine key variables that facilitate
the development of maximal sprint
speed in boys throughout childhood
and adolescence.
DEVELOPMENT OF MAXIMAL
SPRINT SPEED IN BOYS
In boys, maximal sprint speed is known
to develop in a nonlinear fashion
throughout childhood and adolescence
(28), with the suggestion of a preadoles-
cent spurt (5–9 years old) and adoles-
cent spurt (12–14 years old) in
Copyright Ó National Strength and Conditioning Association
performance for boys (58). Although
these spurts in sprint performance are
based on chronological age, a matura-
tional effect for the development of
sprint speed has also been proposed
(33,52). Peak height velocity (PHV) is
often used as an indication of maturity
and is defined as the maximum rate of
growth in stature during the adolescent
spurt (28). Peak improvements in sprint
speed have been reported to occur
between 8 and 18 months before the
period of PHV (58,63). Conversely, it
has been reported that peak changes
in sprint speed may occur in time with
the period of PHV (43,56); however,
decrements in speed may be noted in
the 12 months before PHV (43), thus
reinforcing the nonlinear nature of speed
development. Recent cross-sectional
data have suggested that maximal sprint
speed does not change between groups
of boys who were between 1 and 3 years
pre-PHV, but significant increases in
speed are observed between circa- and
post-PHV groups (33).
Researchers have suggested that when
monitored over a 2-year period, boys
who advance from 13 to 15 years old
KEY WORDS:
asymmetry; kinematic; kinetic
maturation; stiffness; velocity
 (;circa-PHV) improve sprint perfor-
mance up to twice as much as those
advancing from 15 to 17 years old
(;post-PHV) (11), whereas boys expe-
riencing the period of PHV produce
significantly greater increases in maxi-
mal sprint speed (10.4 versus 5.6%)
compared with boys remaining
pre-PHV (45). Collectively, these ob-
servations confirm the presence of
a maturational effect on the develop-
ment of speed (32,33,52); however, to
facilitate appropriate training prescrip-
tion for the development of maximal
sprint speed in youth, it is important
for practitioners to understand the
kinematic and kinetic underpinnings
of these observations and the manner
in which natural growth and develop-
ment may influence the development
of these characteristics.
ANTHROPOMETRY AND MAXIMAL
SPRINT PERFORMANCE
Throughout childhood and adoles-
cence, boys experience nonlinear
growth patterns for almost all anthro-
pometric characteristics (28). The
period of PHV is characterized by
rapid increases in stature; however, it
is important to note that the greatest
increases in leg length are observed in
the early phases of the adolescent
growth spurt, with more rapid in-
creases in trunk length and overall
standing height observed in the latter
portions of the growth spurt (28). Very
few studies have investigated the role
of anthropometric variables on sprint
performance in youth. In a large sam-
ple of boys aged 11–15 years (n 5 355),
negative relationships between body
mass and maximal speed as well as step
length have been reported; while
increased body mass was related to
elongated ground contact time (33).
Furthermore, when examined in matu-
rity groups, mass exerted a negative
influence on speed, step length, step
frequency, contact time, and flight time
in prepubertal boys, as well as a nega-
tive influence on speed and step length
in postpubertal boys (32). It is impor-
tant to note that standing height ex-
erted a positive influence on speed
and step length in prepubertal boys,
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
whereas leg length exerted a positive
influence on step length in postpuber-
tal boys (32). Furthermore, very strong
relationships have been reported
between leg length and contact length
(distance traveled by the center of mass
during ground contact) (22), which
may highlight one of the key mecha-
nisms for improved step length with
increasing leg length.
APPLICATIONS FOR THE
STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING
COACH
Collectively, these results suggest that
practitioners should devote their atten-
tion to offsetting the negative influen-
ces of mass seen as a consequence of
natural growth and maturation.
Although increases in muscle mass
should be an expected positive conse-
quence of maturation, increases in fat
mass would have a negative influence
on force production. Resistance train-
ing may be the most effective means
by which to overcome the negative
influence of mass by enhancing force-
production capabilities while also
eliciting favorable changes in body
composition to maximize relative max-
imal force (7). Meylan et al (37) re-
ported that vertical strength and
power helped to explain differences
in sprint time in boys of advancing
maturation, with strength and power
explaining the majority of differences
between boys who were pre- and
mid-PHV. In line with youth physical
development models, these observa-
tions may serve to highlight the impor-
tance of early introduction into
resistance training for boys wishing to
enhance their maximal speed (26). It is
important to note that the somatic var-
iables discussed here were only able to
explain a small proportion of the total
variance in the kinematic characteris-
tics of maximal speed (11–57%) (32),
leaving a large proportion of unex-
plained variance to be accounted for
by other factors. In boys of advancing
maturation, the majority of variance in
sprint performance may be accounted
for by the combination of anthropo-
metric variables, strength, and power
(37), further reinforcing the importance
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
of these characteristics in youth sprint
performance. Recent longitudinal data
indicate that changes in anthropomet-
ric variables over a 21-month period
were not related to, nor acted as signif-
icant predictors of, changes in maximal
sprint speed over the same period (45),
which may further highlight the
importance of nonanthropometric var-
iables on maximal sprint performance
in youth.
For practitioners working with youth
athletes, it is imperative that changes
in these variables as a consequence of
natural growth and maturation are reg-
ularly monitored and are factored in
when designing training for youth ath-
letes. It is suggested that changes in
anthropometric variables (standing
height, sitting height, leg length, and
mass) are monitored regularly
(approximately every 3 months) (19)
for each individual youth athlete so
that coaches can detect periods of
rapid growth and maturation and
be mindful of the consequences of
these for maximal sprint speed and
other aspects of physical performance.
KINEMATICS OF MAXIMAL SPRINT
PERFORMANCE
Fundamentally, speed can be deter-
mined by the product of step length
and step frequency, with the theoreti-
cal aim to concurrently enhance both
characteristics to enhance sprint per-
formance. Conversely, a negative inter-
action between step length and step
frequency has been proposed in adults
(12), and it has been further suggested
that elite adult sprinters may be reliant
on one of a combination of these char-
acteristics to elicit their best 100-m
sprint performance (54). Clearly, the
interactions between step length and
step frequency are not as well defined
as the equation for speed may suggest,
especially in pediatric populations. Fur-
thermore, additional factors such as
growth and maturation throughout
childhood and adolescence serve only
to increase the complexity of the devel-
opment of sprint speed in youth.
Step length has been reported to
increase throughout childhood and
3
 The Development of Maximal Sprint Speed
adolescence (33,55), with the sugges-
tion that these changes may be propor-
tional to changes in leg length (55). It
has been proposed that increases in
contact time and concomitant decre-
ments in step frequency may occur in
the prepubertal years, resulting in
unchanged maximal sprint speed dur-
ing this period (33). Conversely, the
majority of youth literature actually
suggests that step frequency seems to
remain unchanged throughout child-
hood (55) and between boys of
advancing maturity (32,45,52). Fur-
thermore, it has been consistently re-
ported that no significant differences in
flight time have been observed with
advancing maturation (32,33,52).
These observations serve to highlight
the importance of focusing on the
period of ground contact to elicit im-
provements in step frequency that do
not occur naturally as a result of
growth and maturation.
It is important to note that the study
by Rumpf et al (52) used a nonmotor-
ized treadmill. It is known that the
inherent resistance in a nonmotorized
treadmill reduces the maximal speed
obtained compared with overground
sprinting (16,38). Consequently, the
kinetic and kinematic parameters of
sprint performance may also differ
between a nonmotorized treadmill
and overground sprinting. For instance,
a comparison of studies suggests that
maximal speed, step length, and step
frequency are ;27–60% lower and
contact time is ;48–80% longer in
boys sprinting on a nonmotorized
treadmill versus overground conditions
(32,33,52). On this basis, practitioners
should be mindful of interpreting data
from nonmotorized treadmills in
youth, as they may not truly reflect the
kinematics and kinetics associated with
maximal sprint performance.
Currently there is a paucity of longitu-
dinal data pertaining to the kinematic
changes in sprint performance in
youth. Recent data collected over
a 21-month period have shown small
decrements in step frequency (22.4%)
and small increases in contact time
(2.3%) during the period before PHV;
4 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
however, for boys moving from pre-
PHV to post-PHV, small increases in
step frequency (2.7%) and decreases in
contact time (23.6%) were observed
(45). Furthermore, consistent increases
in step length were seen in boys who
remained pre-PHV and boys moving
from pre-PHV to post-PHV (7.8 and
8.0%, respectively) (45). Importantly,
changes in step frequency and contact
time were below the threshold of mea-
surement error for these variables
(CV 5 4.3 and 4.9%, respectively)
(34). These data highlight that the reli-
ability of the optical measurement sys-
tem used in this study is not sufficient
to attribute the longitudinal changes in
step frequency and contact time to
actual performance changes over and
above the error of the data collection
process. Conversely, the reliability re-
ported for step length (CV 5 3.9%)
(34) is considerably lower than the
observed longitudinal change in perfor-
mance, and therefore practitioners can
be more confident that real changes in
performance are being observed over
and above the system error. On this
basis, step frequency and contact time
in male youth may be viewed as rela-
tively consistent before and around the
period of PHV, whereas consistent in-
creases in step length may be observed
for boys who have experienced the
period of PHV.
Whole-group analyses of boys aged
between 11 and 16 years and separate
pre- and post-PHV groups have re-
vealed stronger relationships between
speed and step length, compared with
step frequency (33,34). Furthermore,
multiple regression analyses have sug-
gested that boys who are pre-PHV may
be more reliant on step frequency
(;58% total explained variance of
maximal speed) to elicit maximal
sprint speed, whereas boys who are
post-PHV may be more step-length
reliant (;54% total explained variance
of maximal speed) (32), highlighting
the differential impact of maturation
on sprint performance. The shift in
reliance from step frequency toward
step length may also in part be ex-
plained by the increases in muscle
mass (39,56) and resultant strength
(31,47), and power (1,24) during the
period of PHV.
APPLICATIONS FOR THE
STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING
COACH
Practitioners should be aware of the
expected increases in step length and
limited changes, or potentially slight
decrements, in step frequency as
a result of advancing age and matura-
tion. Recent evidence has suggested
that plyometric training may be the
most effective approach to elicit im-
provements in sprint performance in
prepubertal boys (21,53). Practitioners
should refer to previously published
guidelines related to the prescription
of plyometric training in youth popu-
lations to ensure the safe and effective
implementation of this training modal-
ity (2,23). The use of plyometric train-
ing in prepubertal boys would seem to
target positive adaptations in musculo-
tendinous stiffness and neurological
factors such as neural firing rates, pre-
activation, and the stretch reflex, which
are known to be naturally developing
at this time (9,15,17,25,41). Further-
more, the step frequency reliance seen
during the prepubertal period may also
be accounted for by the natural devel-
opments in neural characteristics and
sensitivity to training of a high neural
stimulus. It has also been observed that
postpubertal boys may be more step-
length reliant, and therefore it could be
suggested that combined strength and
plyometric training may be the most
effective training approach to enhance
sprint performance in postpubertal
boys (21,53). It would seem that this
approach effectively harnesses the con-
tinued enhancement of neural charac-
teristics (42), while also targeting
enhancements in force generating
capability alongside the natural devel-
opments in muscle cross-sectional area
(39,56) and pennation angle (3) that are
also observed throughout adolescence.
Furthermore, the significant increases
in testosterone in the PHV period
(58) create an enhanced anabolic envi-
ronment that may be the foundation of
the observed increases in strength
 (31,47) and power (1,24) at this time.
The approach to training physiological
qualities that are known to be develop-
ing through natural growth and matu-
ration has been termed “synergistic
adaptations” (7) and should be a key
consideration when designing youth
physical development programs.
KINETICS OF MAXIMAL SPRINT
PERFORMANCE
Research on the kinetic determinants
of maximal sprint performance in
youth is somewhat sparse; however,
data from nonmotorized treadmills
suggest that maximal force and power
may be important predictors of sprint
performance in prepubertal, midpuber-
tal, and postpubertal boys (37,52), with
the ability to both produce (concen-
tric) and absorb (eccentric) horizontal
power viewed as key determinants
(48). Furthermore, in a small sample
(n 5 11) of postpubertal boys (;16
years), vertical stiffness during bilateral
hopping was strongly related to maxi-
mal overground sprint speed, and hor-
izontal power on a nonmotorized
sprint treadmill (4). Recent cross-
sectional (22) and longitudinal data
(45) obtained during overground
sprinting have also suggested that rel-
ative vertical stiffness, relative maximal
force, and relative leg stiffness are
important determinants of maximal
sprint speed in youth, collectively
accounting for between 79 and 98%
of the total explained variance.
Based on the adult literature, it is per-
haps not surprising to find that the
application of force relative to body
mass (relative force production) (61)
is an important determinant of sprint
performance in youth; however, it is
interesting to note that in both cross-
sectional and longitudinal analyses of
boys, relative force production may
not naturally increase, and may even
decline, between and within groups
of advancing maturation (22,45). Fur-
thermore, relative maximal force has
a very strong relationship with step
length and flight length (distance trav-
eled by the center of mass from toe-off
to touchdown), further highlighting
the importance of developing relative
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
force-production capabilities in youth
(22). Of note, absolute maximal force
during sprinting increases with advanc-
ing maturation (22,48,52), and therefore
it seems that concomitant increases in
mass also observed with advancing
growth and maturation (28) may pre-
clude increases in relative force produc-
ing capabilities. Interestingly, research
on a nonmotorized treadmill has sug-
gested that horizontal force and power
may be the best predictors of maximal
sprint velocity in pre- and post-PHV
boys (r2 5 0.98–0.99), whereas vertical
force is more important for boys who
are mid-PHV to overcome increases in
mass (52).
Vertical power has been shown to have
a large impact on sprint performance
in boys, especially those classified as
pre- or mid-PHV (37). On a nonmotor-
ized treadmill, large increases in hori-
zontal power have been reported
between boys of advancing maturation,
while relative horizontal power may
increase in pre- and mid-PHV boys
yet decline in the postpubertal period
(52). Furthermore, eccentric and con-
centric power development have been
reported as the strongest predictors of
sprint speed in male youth (48,52).
Power absorption (eccentric power)
and power production (concentric
power) are indicative of storage and
utilization of elastic energy and there-
fore indicators of the strength shorten-
ing cycle (SSC) function. Importantly,
greater power production during
shorter eccentric and concentric peri-
ods is observed with advancing matu-
ration (48), highlighting the improved
SSC function with advancing age and
maturation (25,28).
A small number of studies have also
investigated the role of vertical stiff-
ness in youth sprint performance
(4,10,22,45,48,55). Vertical stiffness
may be of particular relevance to
sprint performance, as it reflects the
ability to tolerate and overcome grav-
itational forces. Greater vertical stiff-
ness is reflective of reduced vertical
displacement of the center of mass,
which in turn would allow for shorter
ground contact times and increased
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
step frequency. In youth populations,
it is especially important to ensure
that anthropometric variations are ac-
counted for by normalizing stiffness
to both leg length and body weight
(30) to produce a relative measure.
Maturity is suggested to have an influ-
ence on relative vertical stiffness on
a nonmotorized treadmill, with in-
creases (;17–30%) observed between
boys of advancing maturation (48).
Conversely, cross-sectional data from
vertical hopping and overground sprint-
ing suggest that relative vertical stiffness
does not change between 11 and 16
years old (22,24), although longitudinal
data suggest that there may be some
small increases in relative vertical stiff-
ness around the growth spurt (45). Dur-
ing overground sprint performance,
increases in step frequency and de-
creases in contact time have been related
to higher levels of relative vertical stiff-
ness in boys (22). These observations
may help to explain the role that relative
vertical stiffness may have during maxi-
mal sprinting and further highlights the
potential importance of developing rel-
ative vertical stiffness characteristics for
sprint performance in youth.
Leg stiffness is different to vertical stiff-
ness, as it accounts for the magnitude
of leg compression during ground con-
tact rather than center of mass dis-
placement. Although these variables
are identical in vertical motion such
as jumping, they differ during horizon-
tal motion such as sprinting (29). Max-
imal leg compression and relative leg
stiffness have been shown to be con-
tributors to multiple regression models
for enhanced sprint performance in
cross-sectional (22) and longitudinal
studies (45) of boys. The mechanisms
driving the contribution of these varia-
bles seem to be associated with the
concept of contact length (distance
traveled by the center of mass during
the period of ground contact) (60). An
almost perfect negative relationship
has been reported between maximal
leg compression and contact length,
whereas very large positive relation-
ships exist between leg length and con-
tact length (22). These observations
5
 The Development of Maximal Sprint Speed
highlight that those boys with higher
levels of leg compression and longer
leg lengths may also elicit greater con-
tact lengths that would consequently
benefit overall step length. Although
the argument for longer limbs enhanc-
ing step length may seem intuitive,
increasing leg compression (decreasing
leg stiffness) at the same time as
enhancing vertical leg stiffness, as dis-
cussed earlier, does not seem plausible.
Interestingly, an explanation for this
may be offered by examining the limb
angle at touch down and the resultant
leg sweep during ground contact. It has
been suggested that leg stiffness de-
creases with a more horizontal orien-
tation of the leg at touchdown (greater
limb angle from the vertical) (30). It is
therefore theoretically possible to
maintain levels of vertical stiffness,
while increasing leg compression with
more horizontal lower limb angle at
touchdown to elicit enhanced contact
length and step length.
It is important to point out that relative
vertical and leg stiffness are different
qualities to relative muscle–tendon
stiffness measured around the joint. In
isolated contractions muscle–tendon
stiffness increases with age (9,17,59),
but no study has directly measured
relative musculotendinous stiffness in
youths while sprinting. If the large in-
creases in relative muscle–tendon stiff-
ness that are observed with advancing
age contribute to speed development,
this might be through facilitating in-
creases in step length rather than step
frequency, as the latter does not increase
with age while the former does. It is
important to note that no study has
measured all these variables concur-
rently in a youth population to confirm
these assertions or have previous studies
in this field accounted for maturation in
their analyses, and therefore further
research is required to establish the value
of these contentions.
APPLICATIONS FOR THE
STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING
COACH
Relative maximal force is a determinant
of maximal speed, but practitioners
should not rely on growth and
6 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
maturation improving this quality into
the second decade of life. Instead, the
use of resistance training is strongly
recommended. Research has shown
that improvements in force production
are associated with enhanced sprint
performance in youth (5,37), especially
when combined resistance training
methodologies are used (7,13,18,50,53).
Furthermore, regression modeling has
suggested that 10% improvements in
force production in boys would result
in 1.6–4.2% increase in sprint perfor-
mance (22,37), highlighting the positive
impact that may be achieved through
modest improvements in strength in
youth athletes. Interestingly, a recent
6-week training study using resisted sled
towing elicited no improvement in max-
imal sprint performance in the pre-PHV
boys, while the combined mid- and
post-PHVgroup demonstrated enhanced
sprint velocity, step length, step fre-
quency, leg and vertical stiffness, horizon-
tal and vertical force, and power (50).
While the sled resistance in each group
was relative to body mass (2.5–10%), pre-
vious research has suggested that the
same relative load can reduce the sprint
speed of pre-PHV boys by as much as
50% compared with post-PHV (49).
These data not only highlight the bene-
fits of resisted sled towing for midpuber-
tal and postpubertal boys but also
highlight the importance of determining
resisted loads appropriate to different
stages of maturation.
Power development is also an impor-
tant determinant of maximal sprint
speed in youth (37), and although nat-
ural developments in power expression
and SSC function may be seen with
advancing maturation, these character-
istics should still be developed during
training. Combined horizontal and ver-
tical plyometrics have been shown to
elicit the greatest enhancement in
sprint performance in 11-year-old soc-
cer players (;pre-PHV) over a 6-week
training period (44) and therefore may
be deemed a suitable stimulus to
enhance power development during
sprint performance in boys. Further-
more, regression modeling has sug-
gested a 10% improvement in power
during jumping may elicit a 2% improve-
ment in sprint performance in youth
(37), again highlighting the nature of
the positive impact that strength and
conditioning coaches can have on sprint
performance in youth.
The importance of optimizing vertical
displacement and development of rel-
ative maximal force to elicit enhance-
ments in relative vertical stiffness has
been outlined. Improvements in rela-
tive vertical stiffness have been shown
in 12- and 15-year-old boys (;pre-
and post-PHV) after just 4 weeks of
plyometric training (20), and therefore
this may be deemed an appropriate
strategy for developing maximal sprint
speed in youth. Furthermore, the
increase in relative vertical stiffness re-
ported in this training study (;8%)
(20) would result in ;1.3% increase
in maximal sprint speed based on
regression modeling (22), further rein-
forcing the positive impact of this
approach to training youth.
Although enhanced vertical stiffness is
associated with enhanced speed, this
may not be the case for leg stiffness,
which represents a separate quality.
Recommendations related to leg stiff-
ness and leg compression are difficult,
as it seems that decreases in both var-
iables are observed with natural
growth and maturation, which in turn
have been linked to enhanced sprint
performance via increases in contact
length. It is plausible that technical
training may be able to influence leg
compression and leg stiffness, although
this claim remains speculative and fur-
ther research is required before practical
recommendations can be generated.
ASYMMETRY AND MAXIMAL
SPRINT PERFORMANCE
The literature examining the concept
of asymmetry in youth is somewhat
sparse, and only 2 studies have exam-
ined asymmetry in boys during sprint
performance. Rumpf et al (51) exam-
ined kinetic asymmetry during sprint-
ing on a nonmotorized treadmill with
results indicating an average of 17%
asymmetry for force, power, and work
in a noninjured youth population, with
 significant difference between matura- data presented in the present review; PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
tion groups only evident for work. It is however, it is important to note that Strength and conditioning practitioners
important to note that limb dominance further research is required to formalize working with youth athletes wishing to
was not assessed in this study (51) and the links between asymmetry and the enhance their maximal sprint perfor-
asymmetry calculations were based on concept of adolescent awkwardness, as mance should be mindful of the growth
the ratio of asymmetry between legs. this issue has not been fully explored. and development that occurs with
This observation may be important Monitoring of asymmetry was previ- advancing age and maturation, and the
given the assertion that during locomo- ously the preserve of biomechanics lab- predictors of sprint performance in
tion, one leg may act as a “propulsive” oratories with expensive force plate or youth that may highlight important
leg (greater positive work), whereas the optical measurement systems; however, training foci. From the available evi-
other may act as a “stick” leg (greater a new generation of app-based software dence, the Table provides an overview
stiffness) (6), resulting in the masking is facilitating coaches to collect this of the changes in key sprint performance
or inflation of individual asymmetry information in the field. Although issues variables with advancing maturation.
due to limb dominance during group still exist surrounding the validity and This information is critical to help prac-
comparisons. More recently, asymme- reliability of some systems (8), the titioners disentangle where gains in
try of kinematic and kinetic variables advent of new smartphone-based tech- speed are as a result of effective pro-
has been assessed during overground nologies, such as Runmatic and My gramming of training or due to the con-
running in a large cohort of noninjured Sprint, certainly represents a positive siderable influence of growth and
boys (n 5 344) (35). The results of this move to enhance coaching knowledge maturation. Long-term systematic train-
study reported the magnitude of asym- in the training environment and facilitate ing in a youth soccer academy resulted
metry across all variables ranged from easier and more regular monitoring of in greater increases in speed compared
2.3 to 12.6%, and that, predominantly, sprint performance. with control (;9 versus 4%) (62) over
the magnitude of asymmetry was not
different during age and maturity
group comparisons (35). Furthermore, Table
the same study revealed that there Changes in characteristics of maximal sprint performance with advancing
maturation
were no strong relationships between
the magnitude of asymmetry in any Pre-PHV Circa-PHV Post-PHV
kinematic or kinetic variable and max-
Speed z or [ [[ [
imal sprint performance (35).
Step length [ [ [
APPLICATIONS FOR THE Step frequency z z z or [
STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING
COACH Ground contact time z z z or Y
Existing data might suggest that the
Flight time z z z
concept of asymmetry is of no concern
for those working in youth populations. Contact length [ [ [
However, if asymmetry is monitored
Flight length [ [ z or [
throughout childhood and adolescence,
any changes in the magnitude of asym- Step reliance Step frequency Step length Step length
metry may present “red flags” for practi- Absolute vertical force [ [[ [[
tioners to investigate further, as changes
may not be expected as part of normal Relative vertical force z or Y z or Y z or Y
growth and development (35). At pres- Horizontal force [ [ [
ent, there is little evidence to inform the
exact magnitude of change or threshold Absolute horizontal power [ [[ [
of asymmetry that may represent an Relative horizontal power [ [ Y
injury risk in youth, and therefore more
longitudinal research in this field is Absolute vertical stiffness [ [ [
required to enable practitioners to make Relative vertical stiffness z z or [ z
more informed decisions. Interestingly,
the concept of “adolescent awkward- Absolute leg stiffness z z z
ness” (24,43) that has previous been used Relative leg stiffness z z z or Y
to explain decrements in performance
around the time of the growth spurt z 5 approximately equal or no change; [ 5 trend toward increases; [[ 5 trend toward
large increases; Y 5 trend toward decreases; PHV 5 peak height velocity.
may not be supported by the asymmetry

7
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com

Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 The Development of Maximal Sprint Speed
a 3-year period, whereas similar im-
provements (;19%) were observed for
controls and academy players over a 6-
year period (56). These data reinforce
the importance of knowledge about
the impact of growth and maturation
to interpret the changes in sprint perfor-
mance in male youth.
The Figure provides an overview of the
key predictors of maximal sprint speed in
youth, with suggested training stimuli
and resultant influence on maximal sprint
performance based on the current litera-
ture. Relative force, relative vertical stiff-
ness, and vertical and horizontal power
seem to be key predictors of the deter-
minants of sprint performance in youth,
independent of advancing age and mat-
uration, and therefore should be key
training foci for all youth sprint athletes.
Importantly, strength and conditioning
practitioners should include primary
sprint training as a key method for devel-
oping sprint performance (14,57); how-
ever, there is a paucity of research in
youth that actually investigates the
impact of primary sprint training on
sprint performance in male youth (53),
despite it being the most specific form
of training for sprint performance. Fur-
thermore, although it is important to
understand that all physical parameters
may be trainable at all stages of develop-
ment (26), there may be opportunities to
develop certain physical qualities at spe-
cific times to enhance the “synergistic
adaptations” with naturally occurring
developmental processes (7). On this
basis, the training of prepubertal boys
Figure Predictors of maximal sprint performance in male youth with suggested
training stimuli and projected performance outcomes.
8 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
should focus on the development of neu- long-term youth physical development
romuscular qualities through modalities programs.
such as plyometric training and tradi-
Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding:
tional resistance training. Owing to the
The authors report no conflicts of interest
lack of circulating androgens in prepuber-
and no source of funding.
tal boys, these training methods should
facilitate enhancement in force produc-
tion and stiffness via neurally mediated Robert W.
adaptations, and if combined with a clear Meyers is a
focus on technical competency and pri- principal lecturer
mary speed training, should allow prepu- in Strength and
bertal boys to achieve a strong Conditioning and
foundation of movement efficiency for Programme
sprint performance. Director within
Although strength and conditioning Cardiff School of
practitioners should expect greater en- Sport and head of
hancements in maximal sprint speed coaching within the Youth Physical
around the period of PHV, it is espe- Development unit at Cardiff Metropoli-
cially important that physical qualities tan University.
associated with relative force produc-
tion and relative vertical stiffness are
addressed, as rapid changes in stature Jon L. Oliver is
and mass observed around and imme- a reader in
diately after the period of PHV could Applied Pediatric
negatively impact these qualities. Post- Exercise Science
pubertal boys should also focus on within Cardiff
maximizing gains in relative vertical School of Sport as
and horizontal force production and well as co-founder
power because of the developmental and head of
increases in testosterone and muscle research within
mass witnessed at this stage. It is there- the Youth Physical Development unit at
fore clear that while combined training Cardiff Metropolitan University.
methods may be recommended for all
stages of development, the effectiveness
of neural-focused training methods in Michael G.
the prepubertal period and force- Hughes is
production training methods in the a senior lecturer
postpubertal period (21) provides useful in Physiology and
guidance for practitioners developing Health within
Cardiff School of
Sport at Cardiff
Metropolitan
University.
Rhodri S. Lloyd
is a senior lec-
turer in Strength
and Conditioning
within Cardiff
School of Sport as
well as the co-
founder and
director of the Youth Physical
Development unit at Cardiff
Metropolitan University.

John B. Cronin
is a professor of
Strength and
Conditioning at
Auckland Uni-
versity of Tech-
nology, holds an
Adjunct Profes-
sorial Position
at Edith Cowan University and is
co-director of the Sports Performance
Research Institute New Zealand.
REFERENCES
1. Armstrong N, Welsman JR, Williams CA,
and Kirby BJ. Longitudinal changes in
young people’s short-term power output.
Med Sci Sport Exerc 32: 1140–1145,
2000.
2. Bedoya A, Miltenberger M, and Lopez R.
Plyometric training effects on athletic
performance in youth soccer athletes: A
systematic review. J Strength Cond Res
29: 2351–2360, 2015.
3. Binzoni T, Bianchi S, Hanquinet S, Kaelin A,
Sayegh Y, Dumont M, and Jéquier S.
Human gastrocnemius medialis pennation
angle as a function of age: From newborn
to the elderly. J Physiol Anthropol Appl
Hum Sci 20: 293–298, 2001.
4. Chelly SM and Denis C. Leg power and
hopping stiffness: Relationship with sprint
running performance. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 33: 326–333, 2001.
5. Christou M, Smilios I, Sotiropoulos K,
Volaklis K, Pilianidis T, and Tokmakidis SP.
Effects of resistance training on the
physical capacities of adolescent soccer
players. J Strength Cond Res 20: 783–
791, 2006.
6. Dalleau G, Belli A, Bourdin M, and Lacour
JR. The spring-mass model and the energy
cost of treadmill running. Eur J Appl Physiol
Occup Physiol 77: 257–263, 1998.
7. Faigenbaum AD, Lloyd RS, MacDonald J,
and Myer GD. Citius, altius, fortius:
Beneficial effects of resistance training for
young athletes. Br J Sports Med 50: 3–7,
2016.
8. Gindre C, Lussiana T, Hebert-Losier K, and
Morin JB. Reliability and validity of the
Myotest for measuring running stride
kinematics. J Sports Sci 34: 664–670,
2016.
9. Grosset JF, Mora I, Lambertz D, and Pérot
C. Changes in stretch reflexes and muscle
stiffness with age in prepubescent children.
J Appl Physiol 102: 2352–2360, 2007.
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
10. Heise GD and Bachman G. Leg spring
model properties of children. In:
Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of
the American Society of Biomechanics,
Illinois. University of Illinois at Chicago,
2000. http://www.asbweb.org/
conferences/2000/pdf/034.pdf. Accessed
December 7, 2015.
11. Hirose N and Seki T. Two-year changes in
anthropometric and motor ability values as
talent identification indexes in youth soccer
players. J Sci Med Sport 19: 1–5, 2015.
12. Hunter JP, Marshall RN, and McNair PJ.
Interaction of step length and step rate
during sprint running. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 36: 261–271, 2004.
13. Kotzamanidis C, Chatzopoulos D, Michailidis
C, Papaiakovou G, and Patikas D. The effect
of a combined high-intensity strength and
speed training program on the running and
jumping ability of soccer players. J Strength
Cond Res 19: 369–375, 2005.
14. Kotzamanidis C. The effect of sprint
training on running performance and
vertical jumping in pre-adolescent boys.
J Hum Mov Stud 44: 225–240, 2003.
15. Kubo K, Kanehisa H, Kawakami Y, and
Fukanaga T. Growth changes in the elastic
properties of human tendon structures. Int
J Sports Med 22: 138–143, 2001.
16. Lakomy H. The use of a non-motorised
treadmill for analysing sprint performance.
Ergonomics 30: 627–637, 1987.
17. Lambertz D, Mora I, Grosset JF, and Perot
C. Evaluation of musculotendinous
stiffness in prepubertal children and adults,
taking into account muscle activity. J Appl
Physiol 95: 64–72, 2003.
18. Lesinski M, Prieske O, and Granacher U.
Effects and dose–response relationships of
resistance training on physical performance
in youth athletes: A systematic review and
meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 1–17, 2016.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/
26851290. Accessed July 24, 2015.
19. Lloyd R, Oliver J, Faigenbaum A, Myer G,
and De Ste Croix M. Chronological age vs.
biological maturation: Implications for
exercise programming in youth. J Strength
Cond Res 28: 1454–1464, 2014.
20. Lloyd R, Oliver J, Hughes MG, and Williams
CA. The effects of 4-weeks of plyometric
training on reactive strength index and leg
stiffness in male youths. J Strength Cond
Res 26: 2812–2819, 2012.
21. Lloyd R, Radnor J, De Ste Croix M, Cronin
J, and Oliver J. Changes in sprint and jump
performances after traditional, plyometric,
and combined resistance training in male
youth pre- and post-peak height velocity.
9
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
J Strength Cond Res 30: 1239–1247,
2016.
22. Lloyd RS, Meyers RW, Hughes MG,
Cronin JB, and Oliver JL. The relationship
between vertical and horizontal stiffness
and maximal running speed in 11–15 year
old boys. J Strength Cond Res 30: S99,
2016.
23. Lloyd RS, Meyers RW, and Oliver JL. The
natural development and trainability of
plyometric ability during childhood.
Strength Cond J 33: 23–32, 2011.
24. Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, and
Williams CA. The influence of
chronological age on periods of
accelerated adaptation of stretch-
shortening cycle performance in pre and
postpubescent boys. J Strength Cond Res
25: 1889–1897, 2011.
25. Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, and
Williams CA. Age-related differences in the
neural regulation of stretch-shortening cycle
activities in male youths during maximal and
sub-maximal hopping. J Electromyogr
Kinesiol 22: 37–43, 2012.
26. Lloyd RS and Oliver JL. The youth physical
development model: A new approach to
long-term athletic development. Strength
Cond J 34: 61–72, 2012.
27. Lubans DR, Morgan PJ, Cliff DP, Barnett
LM, and Okely AD. Fundamental movement
skills in children and adolescents: Review
of associated health benefits. Sport Med
40: 1019–1035, 2010.
28. Malina RM, Bouchard C, and Bar-Or O.
Growth, Maturation, and Physical Activity
(2nd ed.). Champaign, Illinois: Human
Kinetics, 2004.
29. McMahon JJ, Comfort P, and Pearson S.
Lower limb stiffness: Effect on
performance and training considerations.
Strength Cond J 34: 94–101, 2012.
30. McMahon TA and Cheng GC. The
mechanics of running: How does stiffness
couple with speed? J Biomech 23: 65–78,
1990.
31. Mero A, Kauhanen H, Peltola E, Vuorimaa
T, and Komi PV. Physiological performance
capacity in different prepubescent athletic
groups. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 30:
57–66, 1990.
32. Meyers R, Oliver J, Hughes M, Lloyd R, and
Cronin J. Influence of age, maturity, and
body size on the spatiotemporal
determinants of maximal sprint speed in boys.
J Strength Cond Res 2016. http://journals.
lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/publishahead/
The_influence_of_age,_maturity_and_body_
size_on.96630.aspx. Accessed November
13, 2016.
 The Development of Maximal Sprint Speed
33. Meyers RW, Oliver J, Hughes M, Cronin J,
and Lloyd RS. Maximal sprint speed in boys
of increasing maturity. Pediatr Exerc Sci
27: 85–94, 2015.
34. Meyers RW, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, Lloyd
RS, and Cronin JB. Reliability of the
spatiotemporal determinants of maximal
sprint speed in adolescent boys over single
and multiple steps. Pediatr Exerc Sci 27:
419–426, 2015.
35. Meyers RW, Oliver JL, Lloyd RS, Hughes
MG, and Cronin JB. Asymmetry during
maximal sprint performance in 11-16 year old
boys. Pediatr Exerc Sci 2016. http://journals.
humankinetics.com/pes-in-press/pes-in-
press/asymmetry-during-maximal-sprint-
performance-in-11-16-year-old-boys. In
press in 2016. Accessed March 29, 2016.
36. Meylan C, Cronin J, Oliver J, and Hughes
M. Talent identification in soccer: The role
of maturity status on physical, physiological
and technical characteristics. Int J Sport
Sci Coach 5: 571–592, 2010.
37. Meylan CMP, Cronin J, Oliver JL, Hopkins
WG, and Pinder S. Contribution of vertical
strength and power in sprint performance
in young male athletes. Int J Sports Med
35: 749–754, 2014.
38. Morin JB and Sève P. Sprint running
performance: Comparison between
treadmill and field conditions. Eur J Appl
Physiol 111: 1695–1703, 2011.
39. O’Brien TD, Reeves ND, Baltzopoulos V,
Jones DA, and Maganaris CN. Muscle-
tendon structure and dimensions in adults
and children. J Anat 216: 631–642, 2010.
40. Oliver JL, Lloyd RS, and Rumpf MC.
Developing speed throughout childhood
and adolescence: The role of growth,
maturation and training. Strength Cond J
35: 42–48, 2013.
41. Ozmun JC, Mikesky AE, and Surburg PR.
Neuromuscular adaptations following
prepubescent strength training. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 26: 510–514, 1994.
42. Paus T, Zijdenbos A, Worsley K, Collins
DL, Blumenthal J, Giedd JN, Rapoport JL,
and Evans AC. Structural maturation of
neural pathways in children and
adolescents: In vivo study. Science 283:
1908–1911, 1999.
43. Philippaerts RM, Vaeyens R, Janssens M,
Van Renterghem B, Matthys D, Craen R,
Bourgois J, Vrijens J, Beunen G, and Malina
10 VOLUME 39 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2017
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
RM. The relationship between peak height
velocity and physical performance in youth
soccer players. J Sports Sci 24: 221–230,
2006.
44. Ramırez-Campillo R, Gallardo F,
Henriquez-Olguın C, Meylan C, Martınez C,
Alvarez C, Caniuqueo A, Cadore E, and
Izquierdo M. Effect of vertical, horizontal,
and combined plyometric training on
explosive, balance, and endurance
performance of young soccer players.
J Strength Cond Res 29: 1784–1795,
2015.
45. Read P, Meyers RW, Lloyd RS, Hughes
MG, Cronin JB, and Oliver JL. The impact
of peak height velocity on changes in sprint
kinetics and kinematics in boys. In: National
Strength and Conditioning Association
(NSCA) 39th National Conference. New
Orleans, LA, July 6th–9th, 2016.
46. Reilly T, Bangsbo J, and Franks A.
Anthropometric and physiological
predispositions for elite soccer. J Sports
Sci 18: 669–683, 2000.
47. Round JM, Jones DA, Honour JW, and
Nevill AM. Hormonal factors in the
development of differences in strength
between boys and girls during
adolescence: A longitudinal study. Ann
Hum Biol 26: 49–62, 1999.
48. Rumpf M, Cronin J, Oliver J, and Hughes M.
Vertical and leg stiffness and stretch-
shortening cycle changes across
maturation during maximal sprint running.
Hum Mov Sci 32: 668–676, 2013.
49. Rumpf MC, Cronin JB, Mohamad IN,
Mohamad S, Oliver J, and Hughes M.
Acute effects of sled towing on sprint time
in male youth of different maturity status.
Pediatr Exerc Sci 26: 71–75, 2014.
50. Rumpf MC, Cronin JB, Mohamad IN,
Mohamad S, Oliver JJL, and Hughes MG.
The effect of resisted sprint training on
maximum sprint kinetics and kinematics in
youth. Eur J Sport Sci 15: 374–381, 2015.
51. Rumpf MC, Cronin JB, Mohamad IN,
Mohamad S, Oliver JL, and Hughes MG.
Kinetic asymmetries during running in male
youth. Phys Ther Sport 15: 53–57, 2014.
52. Rumpf MC, Cronin JB, Oliver JL, and
Hughes MG. Kinematics and kinetics of
maximum running speed in youth across
maturity. Pediatr Exerc Sci 27: 277–284,
2015.
53. Rumpf MC, Cronin JB, Pinder SD, Oliver J,
and Hughes M. Effect of different training
methods on running sprint times in male
youth. Pediatr Exerc Sci 24: 170–186,
2012.
54. Salo A, Bezodis I, Batterham A, and Kerwin
D. Elite sprinting: Are athletes individually
step-frequency or step-length reliant? Med
Sci Sports Exerc 1: 1055–1062, 2011.
55. Schepens B, Willems P, and Cavagna G.
The mechanics of running in children.
J Physiol 509: 927–940, 1998.
56. Vanttinen T, Blomqvist M, Nyman K, and
Hakkinen K. Changes in body composition,
hormonal status, and physical fitness in 11-
, 13-, and 15-year-old Finnish regional
youth soccer players during a two-year
follow-up. J Strength Cond Res 25: 3342–
3351, 2011.
57. Venturelli M, Bishop D, and Pettene L.
Sprint training in preadolescent soccer
players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 3:
558–562, 2008.
58. Viru A, Loko J, Harro M, Volver A, Laaneots
L, and Viru M. Critical periods in the
development of performance capacity
during childhood and adolescence. Eur J
Phys Educ 4: 75–119, 1999.
59. Waugh CM, Blazevich AJ, Fath F, and Korff
T. Age-related changes in mechanical
properties of the Achilles tendon. J Anat
220: 144–155, 2012.
60. Weyand PG, Sandell RF, Prime DNL, and
Bundle MW. The biological limits to
running speed are imposed from the
ground up. J Appl Physiol 108: 950–961,
2010.
61. Weyand PG, Sternlight DB, Bellizzi MJ, and
Wright S. Faster top running speeds are
achieved with greater ground forces not
more rapid leg movements. J Appl Physiol
89: 1991–1999, 2000.
62. Wrigley RD, Drust B, Stratton G,
Atkinson G, and Gregson W. Long-term
soccer-specific training enhances the
rate of physical development of academy
soccer players independent of maturation
status. Int J Sports Med 35: 1090–1094,
2014.
63. Yague PH and De La Fuente JM. Changes
in height and motor performance relative to
peak height velocity: A mixed-longitudinal
study of Spanish boys and girls. Am J Hum
Biol 10: 647–660, 1998.