‘Making the Most’ of Your
Fitness Testing: Research Overview & Practical
Applications in Youth RL
part of the Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure.
Fitness Testing
Why Fitness Test?
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Provide Feedback
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Provide Feedback
Educate Coaches / Athletes
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Provide Feedback
Educate Coaches / Athletes
Monitor Readiness
The Challenge
‘Effectively use fitness testing data
to inform the prescription of training
and inform players and coaches of
their needs’
Pyne et al., (2013)
Why Fitness Test?
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Educate Coaches / Athletes
‘Effectively
use fitness
testing data
to inform the
prescription
of training
and inform
players and
coaches of
their needs’
Why Fitness Test?
Establish Norms
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Educate Coaches / Athletes
‘Effectively
use fitness
testing data
to inform the
prescription
of training
and inform
players and
coaches of
their needs’
Establishing Norms (Till et al., 2013)
• 257 player assessments over
6 year period
• Under 16s to 20s Players –
Backs and Forwards
• Anthropometry - Height,
Body Mass, Sum of 4 Skinfolds
• Physical – 10m & 20m sprint,
Vertical Jump, Yo-Yo Level 1, 1-
RM / Relative Squat, Bench
Press & Prone Row
Key Findings• Comparative data for UK academy RL players between 16 and
20 years by backs and forwards
• Height, Body Mass, Vertical Jump and Strength improve with
Chronological Age
• Sum of four skinfolds, Speed and Estimated VO2max do not
appear to change across age categories
• Forwards – Taller and Heavier with greater 1-RMs
• Backs – Leaner, Quicker, more Powerful with Greater Relative
Strength
Implications
• Consider combinations of anthropometric and fitness
characteristics (e.g., momentum)
Backs U14s (1)n=38
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 295 ± 60.1*
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 406 ± 100.7*
Peak Power (W) 2295 ± 673*
Forwards U14s (1)n=28
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 365 ± 26
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 516 ± 45
Peak Power (W) 3952 ± 365
Implications
• Consider combinations of anthropometric and fitness
characteristics (e.g., momentum)
Backs U14s (1)n=38
U16s (2)n=62
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 295 ± 60.1* 384 ± 55*
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 406 ± 100.7* 530 ±74*
Peak Power (W) 2295 ± 673* 3970 ± 539*
Forwards U14s (1)n=28
U16s (2)n=78
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 365 ± 26 437 ± 50
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 516 ± 45 607 ± 74
Peak Power (W) 3952 ± 365 4268 ± 494
Implications
• Consider combinations of anthropometric and fitness
characteristics (e.g., momentum)
Backs U14s (1)n=38
U16s (2)n=62
U18s (3)n=31
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 295 ± 60.1* 384 ± 55* 448 ± 42*
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 406 ± 100.7* 530 ±74* 619 ± 56*
Peak Power (W) 2295 ± 673* 3970 ± 539* 4700 ± 509*
Forwards U14s (1)n=28
U16s (2)n=78
U18s (3)n=42
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 365 ± 26 437 ± 50 496 ± 43
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 516 ± 45 607 ± 74 694 ± 75
Peak Power (W) 3952 ± 365 4268 ± 494 5075 ± 478
Implications
• Consider combinations of anthropometric and fitness
characteristics (e.g., momentum)
Backs U14s (1)n=38
U16s (2)n=62
U18s (3)n=31
U20s (4)n=18
Post-hoc
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 295 ± 60.1* 384 ± 55* 448 ± 42* 476 ± 45 1<2<3,4,
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 406 ± 100.7* 530 ±74* 619 ± 56* 680 ± 56.82 1<2<3,4
Peak Power (W) 2295 ± 673* 3970 ± 539* 4700 ± 509* 5094 ± 461 1<2<3,4
Forwards U14s (1)n=28
U16s (2)n=78
U18s (3)n=42
U20s (4)n=29
Post-hoc
10m Mom (kg.s-1) 365 ± 26 437 ± 50 496 ± 43 521 ± 54 1<2<3,4
20m Mom (kg.s-1) 516 ± 45 607 ± 74 694 ± 75 711 ± 88 1<2<3,4
Peak Power (W) 3952 ± 365 4268 ± 494 5075 ± 478 5262 ± 526 1<2<3,4
Implications
• Consider combinations of anthropometric and fitness
characteristics (e.g., momentum)
• Relative strength increased with age
• First study to present pulling strength characteristics –
Limited understanding
• Greater pushing to pulling ratio - 104.1 ± 14.4% (under
16s) and 116.6 ± 10.6% (under 19s). Suggested <100%
so programmes should focus on pulling strength.
Practical Implications
‘It is recommended that such data should be used by
strength and conditioning coaches and player
development staff for player identification, assessing
individual player’s strengths and weaknesses, and
monitoring player development.’ (Till et al., 2013)
2 Questions
Why Fitness Test?
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Educate Coaches / Athletes
1. Do coaches use research findings? (or their own data sets)
Why Fitness Test?
Talent ID
Assess Strengths & Weak-nesses
Monitor Progress
Prescribe Training
Provide Feedback
Educate Coaches / Athletes
2. How do coaches use their fitness testing data?
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
JSCR (2013)
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2Player 2 – Q2, Avg Maturer,
Hooker
Player 3 – Q1, Early Maturer,
Prop
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
Under 13s
Till et al., (2013)
Player 1 – Q4, Late Maturer, Outside-Back
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
Under 13sUnder 14s
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3-2-1012
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3-2-1012
Under 13sUnder 14s
Player 1 – Q4, Late Maturer, Outside Back
Player 2 – Q2, Avg Maturer,
Hooker
Player 3 – Q1, Early Maturer,
Prop
Till et al., (2013)
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3-2-1012
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3-2-1012
Years from PHVHeight
Sitting Height
Body Mass
Skinfolds
VJ
MBT10m
20m
30m
60m
Agility 505
VO2max
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
Under 13s
Under 14s
Under 15s
Under 13sUnder 14s
Under 15s
Player 1 – Q4, Late Maturer, Outside Back
Player 2 – Q2, Avg Maturer,
Hooker
Player 3 – Q1, Early Maturer,
Prop
Till et al., (2013)
30m = -0.56s 30m = -0.39s
30m = -0.01s
DescriptorsStrength & Conditioning Standards
Poor Excellent
1 2 3 4 5
Body Fat (mm) - 4 site >60 50 40 30 <20
5m Speed (s) >1.30 1.20 1.10 1.00 <0.90
10m Speed (s) >2.05 1.95 1.85 1.75 <1.65
20m Speed (s) >3.45 3.30 3.15 3.00 <2.85
Zig Zag Agility >12.0 11.25 10.50 9.75 <9.0
Vertical Jump (cm) <30 40 50 60 >70
Med Ball Chest Throw (m) <5.0 6.5 8.0 9.5 >11.0
Yo-Yo Level 1 (stage) <12 20 28 36 >44
Gym Competency (out of 13) 1 4 7 10 13
1RM Squat (%BW) 1.0 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.0
1RM Power Clean (%BW) <0.75 0.9 1.05 1.2 >1.35
1RM Bench Press (%BW) <0.75 0.9 1.05 1.2 >1.35
1RM Prone Row (%BW) <0.75 0.9 1.05 1.2 >1.35
Player Reporting
Scoring System
• Aim - Develop a club wide scoring system of physical
development
– Simplify feedback to players and coaches
– Take into account overall physical development
– Monitor progressions with age
• Using standards (1-5) calculate an average score for Speed,
Strength, Power, Agility, Aerobic / Anaerobic Capacity
• Multiply by LEAN body mass
‘Bull Rating’Power = 3.6Strength = 3.2Speed = 3.9Agility = 3.0Aerobic Capacity = 2.4Total = 3.22Lean Mass = 65.5kg
Bull Rating = 211
Avg Rating Bull ScorePlayer 1 3.73 233Player 2 3.37 216Player 3 3.13 211Player 4 3.4 208Player 5 3.08 202Player 6 2.93 198Player 7 2.83 188Player 8 2.93 181Player 9 3.23 179Player 10 3.03 179Player 11 3.08 175Player 12 2.93 174Player 13 2.72 173
Scoring System
Monitoring Progress??
• Although we can compare data with established
norms – This is mostly cross sectional
• What are the expected improvements following a…
– Programme
– Long term
• Establish longitudinal (and change) data
Seasonal Improvements (Till et al., in review)
U14s U16s U18s U20s (1) (2) (3) (4) Post-hoc
Body Mass (kg) 7.4 ± 4.3 (0.8 – 15.3)
5.2 ± 5.0 (-7.9 – 18.5)
2.5 ± 4.7 (-7.5 – 17.5)
1.2 ± 3.3 (-3.8 – 8.8)
1, 2 > 3, 4
∑ 4 Skinfolds (mm) -7.8 ± 11.6 (-24.2 – 13.7)
-4.1 ± 15.1 (-32.0 – 43.4)
-8.2 ± 15.4 (-43.6 – 51.0)
-11.8 ± 12.5(-36.3 – 8.0)
Estimated VO2max -0.4 ± 10.5(-18.7 – 18.2)
0.9 ± 7.2(-32.4 – 15.5)
4.9 ± 6.9(-15.0 – 17.9)
9.2 ± 7.6(0.0 – 17.8)
1 < 3, 4; 2 < 4
10m Sprint (s) 1.3 ± 3.9 (-5.1 – 10.2)
0.5 ± 3.7 (-10.3 – 9.3)
-1.6 ± 2.5 (-4.7 – 3.8)
-1.9 ± 1.2 (-3.5 – -0.5)
1 < 3, 4
20m Sprint (s) -0.1 ± 3.5(-7.5 – 9.2)
-0.1 ± 2.7 (-6.2 – 5.5)
-1.3 ± 2.8 (-4.1 – 5.1)
-1.8 ± 2.3 (-4.4 – 0.9)
Vertical Jump (cm) 7.9 ± 12.7 (-14.3 – 32.0)
9.2 ± 10.7 (-12.5 – 46.0)
1.6 ± 7.4(-11.6 – 21.2)
0.5 ± 7.5(-13.5 – 10.5)
2 > 3, 4
1-RM Squat (kg) 15.8 ± 13.8 (-18.8 – 40.0)
6.5 ± 10.7 (-10.0 – 20.0)
3 > 4
1-RM Bench Press (kg)
16.9 ± 8.3(5.9 - 33.3)
4.1 ± 6.8 (-9.1 – 14.3)
3 > 4
1-RM Prone Row 11.9 ± 8.7 (-10.0 – 27.6)
10.2 ± 6.4 (-5.1 – 19.4)
Table 1. Pre to Post Season changes in anthropometric and physical characteristics
Key Findings• Comparative data for % change in performance from pre to
post Season
• Younger players (U14s and 16s) experienced greater seasonal improvements in body mass and vertical jump performance
• Older players (U18s and 20s) demonstrated greater seasonal improvements in speed and estimated VO2max.
• All players significantly reduced sum of 4 skinfolds across a season
• Under 18s also demonstrated greater improvements in strength than Under 20s players.
Implications• Large individual variation = Individual
Monitoring• Absolute changes in speed and aerobic
performance may not occur so coaches – monitor momentum, etc.
• Findings suggest 3 pre-season and 2 in season strength sessions a week elicit strength gains in academy aged rugby league players – is this optimum?
• The relationships between seasonal changes in characteristics demonstrated that prone row strength was significantly correlated to all variables, excluding sum of skinfolds.
1-RM Prone Row
Body Mass 0.206**
∑4 Skin Fold 0.053
Est VO2max 0.326***
10m Sprint 0.312***
20m Sprint 0.217**
Vertical Jump 0.326***
1-RM Squat 0.509***
1-RM Bench Press
0.500***
Future Directions
• Greater understanding of the expected changes
of short and long term programmes –
Longitudinal Monitoring
• Fitness Testing vs Daily Monitoring?
• Compare players fitness testing scores with well
being measures
Thank You!!Email: [email protected]
Tel: 07411 227745
part of the Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure.
How can you ‘Make the Most’ of
Your Fitness Testing?
Top Related