Performance Modeling: A

System-Based Approach
to Exercise Selection
Paul J. Read, MSc, CSCS*D,1 Chris Bishop, MSc, CSCS,2 Jon Brazier, MSc,2
and Anthony N. Turner, MSc, CSCS*D2
1
School of Sport, Health and Applied Science, St Mary’s University, London, United Kingdom; and 2London Sports
Downloaded from https://journals.lww.com/nsca-scj by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 01/27/2021

Institute, Middlesex University, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT
IN THE PROCESS OF DESIGNING
PROGRAMS FOR ATHLETES,
OFTEN STRENGTH AND CONDI-
TIONING COACHES DO NOT
DEVELOP AN APPROPRIATE SYS-
TEM WHICH IS INTEGRATED WITH
THE ACHIEVEMENT OF SPECIFIED
PERFORMANCE GOALS. THE SYS-
TEM OF PERFORMANCE MODEL-
ING PROMOTES THE DESIGN OF
TRAINING PROGRAMS WHICH
USE A CLEAR SYSTEM OF ANALY-
SIS, TESTING, AND EXERCISE
PRESCRIPTION, WHICH IN-
CREASES TRANSFER OF TRAINING
AND ENHANCES SPORTS PER-
FORMANCE. THIS ARTICLE OUT-
LINES THE CONCEPT OF
PERFORMANCE MODELING USING
A SPORT EXAMPLE. FURTHER
CONSIDERATIONS TO PROMOTE
INDIVIDUALIZATION OF TRAINING
PRESCRIPTION USING A PRO-
GRESSION/REGRESSION
SEQUENCE ARE ALSO SUG-
GESTED.
INTRODUCTION
he process of program design
application but in the context of
strength and conditioning (S&C), some
relevant descriptions include (1);
a clearly defined set of principles and
procedures according to which a task is
achieved, (2) an organized scheme or
method, or (3) the process of devising
detailed methods, procedures, and rou-
tines which are developed to perform
a specific activity, perform a duty, or
solve a problem.
From its emergence in organismic
biology, “systems thinking,” or the pro-
cess of applying consciously organized
thought using system ideas has been
developed and adopted in a number
of different environments (4). Focusing
on a series of processes used to meet
a predetermined goal or objective, this
involves a layered structure. The
achievement of the system’s goal re-
quires a purposeful arrangement com-
prising interrelated and interdependent
elements which continually influence
one another (4). It should be noted that
coaching expertise and athletic devel-
opment require a humanistic multifac-
eted approach which is beyond the
scope of this review. However, within
this article, the authors propose that
systems thinking can be applied to
S&C in the form of “performance mod-
performance. The purpose of this arti-
cle is to outline the concept of perfor-
mance modeling and provide an
example of its application; here, the
authors use the sport of sprint hurdling.
DEVISING A PERFORMANCE
MODEL FOR S&C USING A
SYSTEM-BASED APPROACH
To develop a targeted program for an
athlete that progresses them toward
a specific goal or performance target,
the authors propose a system-based
approach comprising 4 sequential pro-
cess steps which have been described
below. A schematic of this process is
also outlined in Figure 1.
 Step 1: Determination of the sports
performance goal that is reflective of
the athlete’s current level of
performance
 Step 2: Identification of the key
physiological and biomechanical
requirements for the sport and
physical characteristics of elite per-
formance through a needs analysis
to identify the determinants of
step 1
 Step 3: Design and implementation
of a suitable test battery to assess the
athlete in the different components
identified in step 2
 Step 4: The selection of a progressive

T and exercise selection can be

enhanced by developing an
appropriate system that is integrated
eling.” This concept promotes the
design of training programs which
use a clear system of analysis, testing,
sequence of exercises related to each

with the achievement of specific
performance goals. The definition of
a “system” will vary based on its
KEY WORDS:
and exercise prescription. Specula-
performance modeling; systems; program
tively, transfer of training is enhanced
design
with a greater impact on sports

90 VOLUME 38 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2016 Copyright Ó National Strength and Conditioning Association

Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Figure 1. A 4-step sequential process toward performance targeting.
of the assessments undertaken in
step 3 from which S&C coaches
are required to select the appropriate
level for each individual athlete; this
forms the basis of the program.
Each category of exercises in step 4
are designed to improve the individ-
ual qualities identified from the needs
analysis (step 2), and those subse-
quently tested in step 3. By complet-
ing each step as described above, and
provided appropriate coaching, tech-
nical competence, and suitable load-
ing parameters (rest/reps/set/loads/
tempo, etc.) are used, athletes should
enhance the targeted physical quali-
ties. That is, by developing the (sport-
relevant) physical capabilities of the
athlete, greater levels of sports perfor-
mance will be achieved. This moves
the athlete closer to their predeter-
mined sports goal (identified in step
1). Further details of each stage of this
process are outlined below, exam-
pling its use for a sprint hurdles ath-
lete. However, the model presented
here is intentionally generic and
should be further built up around
the individual needs of the athlete
which may require the formation of
differing sports performance goals.
The performance model can also be
adapted and applied to any sport or
activity, thus increasing its versatility
for S&C coaches.
STEP 1: GOAL SETTING
The first step in the system-based
approach is to determine the athletes’
sport performance goal. The nature of
this goal should be realistic and is
dependent on the current level of
the individual athlete in question. Pro-
gressive goals will also be established
after the completion of a needs anal-
ysis (step 2), and subsequent athlete
testing (step 3) to further enhance
the effectiveness of the model in
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
achieving its purpose. The example
describes a sprint hurdler who is aim-
ing to qualify for an Olympic team
where the world record is 12.87 sec-
onds (correct before the London 2012
Olympics). However, a logical start
point is to use the Team “A standard”
qualifying time for the 110-m event,
which for the 2012 games was 13.4
seconds for team Great Britain ath-
letes. This provides an objective and
quantifiable measure of performance,
and all subsequent goals, fitness tests,
and program choices should be in line
with the sole purpose of progress
toward this specific target. In addi-
tion, to achieve the endpoint of the
system’s goal (the “A Standard” qual-
ifying time), it is advisable to integrate
both short and medium term goals.
These should include sporting out-
comes (i.e., specific race times/event
qualifications) and relevant physical
performance targets identified during
athlete testing (step 3). Examples
include Reactive Strength Index or
Squat 1 repetition maximum (1RM)
scores. This will allow the S&C coach
to monitor progress and may also
provide a motivational tool for the
athlete.
A further point to consider for S&C
coaches in the development of a system
model is the important role of the
coach and athlete in the formation of
the overall performance plan. It is likely
that discussions regarding the perfor-
mance outcome will be (sports) coach
led and facilitated by the performance
director (or equivalent). However, this
will depend on the support team avail-
able to the athlete. The model will
ideally encompass the technical, phys-
ical, nutritional, and psychological
components of a multifaceted high-
performance team for which systems
can also be developed. Adopting such
an interdisciplinary approach will
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
ultimately be more successful, but clear
communication channels should be
developed to ensure all members of
the support team are informed during
each stage of the process with regular
performance reports. Although it is
beyond the scope of this review to dis-
cuss the management of this process in
depth, the interested reader is directed
to the work of Neumann et al. (11) for
further information.
STEP 2: CONDUCTING A NEEDS
ANALYSIS
The second stage in the process of
designing a performance model is to
complete a thorough needs analysis
of the sport. This should act as a pre-
cursor to the design and implementa-
tion of any strength and conditioning
program, where it is necessary to
undertake a preliminary assessment of
the specific demands and unique char-
acteristics of the sport being prepared
for. To do this, it is recommended that
a comprehensive analysis of the sport
is completed and a review of the avail-
able literature pertaining to:
 The biomechanical characteristics of
the movements involved
 The physiological demands
 The normative data to establish
physical performance standards
 The reported injury epidemiology
In our sprint hurdles example, an
awareness of mechanical factors is an
important observation. Sprint hurdle
starts differ to traditional sprinting
events because of the added demand
of negotiating the first hurdle after
13.72 m. Subsequently, this highlights
that time available in which to accel-
erate is reduced and thus, the require-
ment to produce significant concentric
force in a rapid manner (rate of force
development) is paramount. Further-
more, the ability to demonstrate high
levels of leg extension strength (to pro-
mote triple extension force and align-
ment behind the body’s center of
mass), lower limb stiffness (to ensure
the maintenance of a positive tibia
position, and shorter ground contact
times), and rotational trunk control
(to optimize force transfer) are of high
importance. In this regard, sports skills
91
 Performance Modeling
can be further broken down and ana-
lyzed using a deterministic model to
establish the underpinning mechanical
and physical characteristics. An exam-
ple of this has been provided in
Figure 2.
In terms of physiological considera-
tions, anaerobic production of ATP
from phosphocreatine has been shown
to dominate in the high hurdles, with
anaerobic metabolism exceeding 90%
(22). This impacts the design of session
length and drill duration and intensity.
Also regarding injury epidemiology,
the most common injuries, include shin
splint, ankle injuries, and patellar ten-
donitis (24). Each of the above factors
needs to be considered when designing
and implementing appropriate testing
and screening protocols to assess the
athlete’s physical and physiological
capabilities.
STEP 3: DESIGNING A TEST
BATTERY TO ASSESS THE
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF
ELITE PERFORMANCE
The next step is to design an appropri-
ate testing battery from which the ath-
lete’s physical and physiological
characteristics can be assessed and
compared with those of elite perform-
ers (through the use of normative data)
and their peers (through group assess-
ment). This enables S&C coaches to
Figure 2. Acceleration drive phase physical determinants. GCT 5 ground contact time; RFD 5 rate of force development; SSC 5
stretch-shortening cycle.
92 VOLUME 38 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2016
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
identify the current physical capabil-
ities of their athletes and also provides
a monitoring tool from which the
effectiveness of subsequent training in-
terventions can be analyzed. A visual
representation of this concept has been
provided in Figure 3. Further testing
should then be readministered system-
atically throughout the planned train-
ing phases of the athlete’s season to
assess progress and make subsequent
program alterations.
In the design of an effective test bat-
tery, the physical characteristics of
elite performers must be considered,
and the key physiological, biome-
chanical, and injury information is
derived from a comprehensive needs
analysis. This presents a challenge to
the S&C coach because an abun-
dance of assessments are available
to select for each of the specified
physical qualities. To determine
which tests should be used, it is pru-
dent to review the available literature
and critically analyze the validity and
reliability of each available method.
For the interested reader, some rele-
vant examples and recommendations
for testing include (2,15,16,19). An
example of how research evidence
can be used to aid in this process
has been provided below for the
sprint hurdles athlete.
ASSESSMENT OF LOWER-BODY
POWER USING THE BODYWEIGHT
COUNTERMOVEMENT JUMP AND
NONCOUNTERMOVEMENT JUMP
SQUAT
A key aspect of the sprint hurdles is
the start and acceleration phase due
to limited distance available (13.72 m
to the first hurdle). Evidence exists of
strong correlations between counter-
movement jump (CMJ) and sprint per-
formance (r 5 0.88 and r 5 0.86) (12),
velocity off the blocks (14), and 10-
meter sprint time from a start block
(13). Thus, the CMJ can be considered
a valid assessment of lower-body
power pertinent for sprint hurdlers.
Also, athletes should be able to jump
higher in the CMJ versus the squat
jump or non-CMJ as has been previ-
ously established (26). If a difference in
jump height is not evident, it provides
the S&C coach with a clear “window of
opportunity” to enhance the stretch-
shortening cycle (SSC) and rate of
force development abilities of the
athlete.
ASSESSMENT OF LIMB
SYMMETRY USING THE SINGLE-
LEG COUNTERMOVEMENT JUMP
AND OR SINGLE-LEG MAXIMAL
HOP FOR DISTANCE
The use of single-leg jumping tasks to
determine power ratios and imbalan-
ces between the 2 legs may also be
 Figure 3. Performance model flow diagram.

important for sprint athletes. Of note,
Bracic et al. (3) identified elite sprinters
who demonstrated lower bilateral def-
icits in CMJ and produced higher peak
forces (r 5 0.63). In addition, a higher
total impulse of force on the blocks was
shown. An imbalance between limbs
has also been reported as a predictor
of injury (7).
ASSESSMENT OF FAST
STRETCH-SHORTENING CYCLE
PERFORMANCE USING A DROP
JUMP TO DETERMINE REACTIVE
STRENGTH INDEX
The short contact time in the landing
phase after hurdle clearance is a key
determinant of successful hurdling
(6). This ensures an efficient transition
to running between the hurdles.
Ground contact times (GCT) after
hurdle clearance have been reported
at 0.08 seconds (6); the ability to effec-
tively switch from an eccentric to con-
centric contraction is an essential
requirement, suggesting the need to
train and test such fast SSC (GCT
,250 milliseconds) qualities.
STEP 4: EXERCISE SELECTION TO
IMPACT TEST PERFORMANCE
The final step required to build the
performance model requires the
selection of appropriate exercises
which are associated with each test.
In doing this, transfer of training is
achieved, which should positively
impact performance of the individual
qualities tested. Thus, designing a pro-
gram to target improvement in the
identified qualities for elite perfor-
mance (steps 2 and 3) will aid in the
progression of the athlete toward
their specified performance goal (step
1 of the model). In our example,
a rationale for the inclusion of the
squat exercise (to increase maximal
strength) can be established on the
basis that the ability to run at maxi-
mal speed requires high levels of
force production (1). Specifically, it

Figure 4. Sprint hurdles performance model diagram. CMJ 5 countermovement jump; MB 5 medicine ball; RSI 5 reactive strength
index; SLBJ 5 single-leg broad jump; S/L 5 squat jump; SSc 5 strength-shortening cycle; W/L 5 weightlifting.

93
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com

Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Performance Modeling

has been indicated that force applied

AEL 5 augmented eccentric loading; BB 5 barbell; BW 5 body weight; DB 5 dumbbell; RDL 5 romanian deadlift; RFESS 5 rear foot elevated split squat; RNT 5 reactive neuromuscular
to the ground is the most important

Ring pull-ups Sternum chin ups

RFESS jumps Split squat switch
Progression/

S/L hang snatch

determinant of running speed result-

variation 4

S/L drop jumps

Squat w/bands
ing in a greater displacement of the
athlete’s body and an increase in

jumps
stride length (25). This highlights
the importance of maximum strength
as demonstrated by the strong rela-
Progression/

tionships between 1RM squat and

variation 3

Split snatch
w/chains

10-m sprint times (27). Therefore, it

AEL drop
jumps
could be argued that including squat-
Squat

ting based movements into the ath-

lete’s program will lead to increased
acceleration and maximal speed per-
formance. This change in a specified
Drop jump box . Box . box varied

3 position snatch
Progression/
variation 2

RFESS overhead

physical quality will then progress the

Jump squat

athlete toward their performance goal

loading
heights

of achieving the “A standard” qualify-

Pull-up

ing time. The process is then repeated

for each of the identified physical
qualities in the performance model,
Exercise progression/regression system

and the combination of the selected

Progression/
variation 1

exercises form the basis of the athletes

Deficit RFESS
Speed squat

Snatch from
Neutral grip

S&C program. An example of the per-

blocks

formance model for the sprint hurdle

box

athlete aiming to achieve a time of

13.4 seconds at the Team GB Olym-
Table 1

pic Trials and qualify for the Olympic

exercise

Band assisted Chin ups

snatch
Target

team can be seen in Figure 4.

squat

jump
BB split squat RFESS

Hang
Drop
Back

FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Regression 1

USING A PROGRESSION/
Snatch pulls
Front squat

landings

REGRESSION MODEL OF
Altitude

EXERCISE SELECTION
A caveat to the system-based
approach is that not all athletes will
Regression 2

be able to perform each of the spec-

Low hurdles

balance
Overhead

ified exercises for a number of rea-

Eccentric
squat

squat
DB split

Snatch
chin

sons such as; differing movement

skill abilities, training ages, and spe-
cific limitations (e.g., mobility/stabil-
band resistance

ity). Therefore, it is essential to select

Regression 3

Split squat RNT

an appropriate start point for each

Lat pull down

RDL to power
Goblet squat

individual athlete and progress

position

accordingly because they demon-

Ankling

strate the requisite technical compe-

tence. Some examples of how to
training; S/L 5 single leg.

apply this system to a range of com-

Box jump/jump and

Cable X-pull downs

monly prescribed exercises can be

seen in Table 1.
Overhead squat
BW band squat

BW split squat
Regression 4

The first exercise in each category

would generally be considered the
stick

most basic; however, this may not

always be the case, and further regres-
sions and rationales for alternative

94 VOLUME 38 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2016

Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Target exercise Movement dysfunction
Deadlift from floor Poor ankle mobility
Hang clean Wrist mobility
Back squat Patellofemoral pain
KB 5 kettlebell; MB 5 medicine ball.
exercises can be applied. For example
in Table 1, the third regression for the
rear foot elevated split squat suggests
the use of a band resisted Reactive
Neuromuscular Technique (RNT) split
squat during which the S&C coach
would position a band above the ath-
lete’s knee and actively pull the knee
inward during the movement, a tech-
nique suggested by Voight and Cook
(21). The basis for this approach ensues
that methods to facilitate the control of
abnormal joint motion include kines-
thetic and proprioceptive information
to the central nervous system, in which
joint repositioning exercises reflexively
stimulate the peripheral mechanore-
ceptors (21). Furthermore, RNT exer-
cises are used to develop preparatory
coactivation of agonists, antagonists,
and synergists restoring the force cou-
ples necessary to balance joint force.
Both feedforward and feedback stabil-
ity mechanisms are required to pro-
mote dynamic coactivation, and thus,
facilitation of these pathways involves
actively positioning the joint in a posi-
tion of compromise (i.e., example pull-
ing the knee in through band
resistance). This will assist in develop-
ing the athlete’s reactive stabilization
capabilities. Its inclusion here before
loading the movement pattern is to
promote optimal knee alignment
(avoidance of high-risk positions, spe-
cifically knee valgus collapse) and
effective motor control through enhan-
ces in dynamic stability.
The final exercise is not always the
most advanced but provides a variation
which can be implemented once the
athlete has mastered the fundamental
exercises that precedes it in each
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Table 2
Variation examples
Suggested variations
Rack pull Trap bar high handles
KB swing/MB overhead toss Box jump/jump squats
Box squat Low bar back squat
category. For example, the second
drop jump progression/variation as
outlined in Table 1 suggests using var-
ied height boxes as opposed to a single
fixed height. This is based on the prem-
ise of applying variability to a selected
skill to aid the motor learning process.
Specifically, this occurs through the
generation of task performance imbal-
ances which subsequently lead to
spontaneous adaptions and discovery
of movement patterning through
exploration of the perceptual motor
landscape, or a constraint-led approach
(8). Because movement is character-
ized by inherent variability, it is logical
to deduce that providing additional
variability within practice tasks will
facilitate motor learning and retention
of the specific skills in question as sup-
ported by previous investigations
(17,18,20).
Therefore, using a progressive
sequence will ensure safe and effec-
tive performance of each exercise, al-
lowing S&C coaches to individualize
programs to the level of the athlete.
During group and team training ses-
sions, individualized exercise pre-
scription can be applied through the
selection of the appropriate progres-
sion/regression for each athlete based
on their movement competency and
training age. An example of this could
be applied to the chin up, in which
athletes who are able to competently
perform this exercise would under-
take the target exercise or a suitable
progression when performing their
vertical pulling work. Athletes who
do not demonstrate the requisite
technical competence or strength in
this exercise can instead use one of
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
Sumo deadlift
Hang or block pulls
Front squat
the suggested regressions. In this
way, program design can be further
planned and divided into phases,
where for beginner athletes; regres-
sion 4 forms their phase 1 exercise
selection. From this starting point,
each phase would implement the next
level of progression. Such application
of planned variation encourages con-
tinual development of the athlete, and
reduces training monotony.
APPLYING EXERCISE VARIATIONS
An adjunct to the progression/regres-
sion model is the concept of providing
appropriate variations to athletes who
may experience difficulty or pain with
a particular exercise. For example in
the performance model, the develop-
ment of hip dominant strength may
be required and the desired exercise
is a conventional deadlift. However,
the athlete in question may not have
the requisite ankle mobility to achieve
an appropriate neutral spine position.
Thus, presented with such a challenge,
the S&C coach has 2 options; (a)
regress the exercise using the concept
as outlined in Tables 1and 2, or (b),
modify the lift using a variation such
as a rack pull (characterized by a higher
bar set position) or a sumo deadlift
(adopting a wider stance and a more
vertical tibia) which demonstrates less
of an ankle mobility requirement. This
enables the athlete to be loaded in a safe
position, providing an effective training
stimulus for strength development con-
comitantly; increases in ankle mobility
can be attained through the inclusion
of targeted interventions elsewhere in
the program.
95
 Performance Modeling
A further example can be applied using
an athlete who experiences patellofe-
moral pain during a deep back squat.
Although this may be due to poor
technique, muscle imbalances, inap-
propriate training/loading parameters,
or other factors, it has been reported
that peak patellofemoral compressive
forces are experienced at or near max-
imum knee flexion (5,9). In the pres-
ence of patellofemoral disorders,
squatting at high flexion angles may
be contraindicated (9). Thus, variations
such as low bar, box, or front squats
may be a suitable alternative. A low
bar back squat places the bar below
the level of the acromion promoting
a more forward inclination of the torso
and a vertical tibia which subsequently
produces a reduction in knee extensor
torque (23). Concomitantly, hip exten-
sor torque is increased reducing patel-
lofemoral compression. Front squats
may also result in lower maximal com-
pressive forces at the knee joint with-
out compromising muscle activity (10).
SUMMARY
An inability to develop appropriate
systems from which to plan S&C pro-
grams for athletes will likely result in
suboptimal results. The system of “Per-
formance Modeling” presents S&C
coaches with a generic model from
which to assess the physical and phys-
iological capabilities of their athletes
and select targeted exercises to
improve. This provides greater transfer
of training and may subsequently move
the athlete closer to the achievement of
their sport performance goals. An
example for a sprint hurdles athlete,
aiming to qualify for the London
2012 Olympics, has been provided in
this article; however, performance
modeling can realistically be applied
to any sport or activity. Progressions,
regressions, and variations should also
be offered to athletes to individualize
exercise selection based on their cur-
rent technical competence and physi-
cal ability.
Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding:
The authors report no conflicts of interest
and no source of funding.
96 VOLUME 38 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2016
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
influence of bilateral deficit on the
Paul J. Read is countermovement jump performance in
a strength and elite sprinters. Kinesiol 42: 73–81, 2010.
conditioning 4. Checkland P. Systems thinking. In: Re-
coach and senior thinking Management Information
lecturer in Systems. Curries W and Galliers B, eds.
strength and Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999.
conditioning at pp. 45–50.
the St Mary’s 5. Clarkson HM and Gilewich GB.
University. Musculoskeletal Assessment: Joint Range
of Motion and Manual Muscle Strength.
Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins,
1999:374.
Chris Bishop is
6. Coh M. Biomechanical analysis of Colin
a strength and
Jackson’s hurdle clearance technique. New
conditioning
Stud Athletics 1: 37–45, 2003.
coach and lec-
7. Crosier JL and Crelaard JM. Hamstring
turer in strength
muscle tears with recurrent complaints: An
and conditioning
isokinetic profile. Isokinetic Ex Sci 8: 175–
at Middlesex
180, 2000.
University.
8. Davids K, Button C, and Bennett S.
Dynamics of Skill Acquisition: A
Constraints-led Approach. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics, 2008. pp. 114–118.
Jon Brazier is
the BSc Personal
9. Donnelly DV, Berg WP, and Fiske DM. The
effect of the direction of gaze on the
Training with kinematics of the squat exercise. J Strength
Strength & Con- Cond Res 20: 145–150, 2000.
ditioning pro- 10. Gullett JC, Tillman MD, Gutierrez GM, and
gram leader at Chow JW. A biomechanical comparison of
City and Isling- back and front squats in healthy trained
ton College. individuals. J Strength Cond Res 23: 284–
292, 2009.
11. Neumann V, Gutenbrunner C, Fialka-
Anthony N. Moser V, Christodoulou N, Varela E,
Turner is the head Giustini A, and Delarque A.
of athletic devel- Interdisciplinary team working in physical
and rehabilitation medicine. J Rehabil
opment for Brit-
Med 42: 4–8, 2010.
ish Fencing and
the program 12. Mann R and Hermann J. Kinematic analysis
of olympic sprint performance. Men’s
director of the
200m. Int J Sport Biomech 1: 151–162,
MSc in strength 1985.
and conditioning
13. Mero A, Luhtanen P, and Komi P. A
at Middlesex
biomechanical study of the sprint start.
University. Scand J Sports Sci 5: 20–28, 1983.
14. Mero A and Komi PV. Force, EMG, and
REFERENCES elasticity-velocity relationships at
1. Baker D and Nance S. The relation submaximal, maximal and supra-maximal
between running speed and measures of running speeds in sprinters. Eur J Appl
strength and power in professional rugby Phys 55: 553–561, 1986.
league players. J Strength Cond Res 13: 15. Read P and Lloyd R. Strength and
230–235, 1999. conditioning considerations for golf.
2. Bishop C, Cree J, Read P, Chavda S, Strength Cond J 36: 24–33, 2014.
Edwards M, and Turner A. Strength and 16. Read P, Hughes J, Stewart P, Chavda S,
conditioning for sprint swimming. Strength Bishop C, Edwards M, and Turner A. A
Cond J 35: 1–6, 2013. needs analysis and field-based testing
3. Bracic M, Supej M, Peharec S, Bacici P, battery for basketball. Strength Cond J 36:
and Coh M. An investigation of the 13–20, 2014.
 17. Schönherr T and Schölhorn W. Differential
learning in basketball. In: European
Workshop on Movement Science,
Mechanics, and Physiology. Schölhorn W,
Bohn C, Jäger JM, Schaper H, and
Alichmann M, eds. Müster, Alemania: de
mayo (book of abstracts), 2003. pp. 22–24.
18. Shahrzad N, Bahram A, and Shafizadeh M.
The effect of variability of practice and age
on retention and transfer of the over arm
throwing accuracy in children. Proceedings
of the 21st Pan-Asian congress of sports
and physical education, theory and practice
of competitive sports, Nanchang (China),
23–25 de abril (book of abstracts), 2010.
19. Turner AN and Stewart PF. Strength and
conditioning for soccer players. Strength
Cond J 36: 1–13, 2014.
Copyright ª National Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
20. Rossum Van, J. Schmidt’s schema theory:
The empirical base of the variability of
practice hypothesis: A critical analysis.
Hum Mvmt Sci 9: 387–435, 1990.
21. Voight ML and Cook G. Clinical application
of closed kinetic chain exercise. J Sport
Rehab 5: 25–44, 1996.
22. Ward-Smith AJ. A mathematical theory of
running based on the first law of
thermodynamics, and its application to the
performance of world class athletes.
J Biomech 18: 337–349, 1985.
23. Watkins J. Structure and Function of the
Musculoskeletal System. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics Publishers, 1999.
24. Watson MD and DiMartino PP. Incidence
of injuries in high school track and field
athletes and its relation to performance
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
ability. AM J Sports Med 15: 251–254,
1987.
25. 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 Phys 89:
1991–1999, 2000.
26. Wilson JM and Flanagen EP. The role of
elastic energy in activities with high force
and power requirements. A brief review.
J Strength Cond Res 22: 1705–1715,
2008.
27. Wisloff U, Castagna C, Helgured 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.
97