Testing your athletes: Part II – What

In the realm of strength and conditioning, the utilization of various performance tests is a common practice. Nevertheless, the paramount question that demands our attention before embarking on any testing endeavor is: What is the primary purpose of conducting such assessments?

As a practitioner frequently engaged in dialogues revolving around sports science with both peers and the athletes under my guidance, the intricacies of this matter have become increasingly evident. This serves as the primary motivation for me to delve into this topic. Despite the initial appearance of simplicity in addressing this question, one soon realizes the prevalence of uncertainties embedded within the practical implementation.

Engaging in discussions with colleagues dispersed across the globe, particularly those who specialize in working with elite athletes, has afforded me invaluable insights. Our conversations have ventured beyond the mere act of testing, delving into the underlying theoretical framework that substantiates our testing protocols. This includes a meticulous consideration of which domains of athletic performance warrant assessment and which specific tests are most appropriate for such evaluations.

The amalgamation of my professional practice in the field and the rigorous journey toward obtaining a Ph.D. has notably enhanced my comprehension of this complex issue. It has enabled me to adopt an evidence-based approach to tackle these uncertainties systematically.

Before embarking on an in-depth exploration of the specific tests at our disposal, it is imperative that we acquaint ourselves with the concept of "Psychometric Properties of Tests." Although the term may ring a familiar bell for some coaches, including myself during the nascent stages of my career, it often elicited quizzical expressions.

In more accessible terms, psychometric properties pertain to the quality of a given test. It revolves around the fundamental question of how dependable and accurate a test is in measuring the targeted attributes. Within this realm, two pivotal components emerge: reliability, which encompasses both intra and inter-day reliability as well as inter-rater reliability, and validity, encompassing criterion validity, concurrent validity, predictive validity, and more.

In forthcoming articles, I will dedicate further attention to the nuances of these properties, unraveling their significance in the context of sports science and the precise evaluation of athletic performance.

So, let’s go back to assessing athletic performance. It is a multifaceted endeavor, encompassing a diverse array of tests, each meticulously designed to fulfill a specific purpose. One such invaluable assessment focuses on the measurement of lower limb muscle power through jumping assessments. In this short overview, I will present some types of tests and elucidate their distinct objectives. In future articles I will delve into their utilization for performance monitoring, training optimization, fatigue detection, and the facilitation of a safe return to play post-injury.

Here is an example of tests used to measure different aspects of athletic performance:

Strength Tests: These assessments serve as crucibles for measuring an athlete's maximal strength. Notable examples include the one-repetition maximum (1RM) test, applied to exercises like squats or bench presses. Another commonly used test is maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MViC), which pertains to the maximal exerted force under isometric muscle conditions, where the muscle exerts force without changing its length.

Power Tests: Power, characterized by the ability to generate force rapidly, finds embodiment in assessments such as the vertical jump or standing broad jump. These tests, integral to measuring lower limb muscle power and explosive strength, assume paramount importance in assessing an athlete's capacity to execute explosive movements, a pivotal facet in numerous sports disciplines. Another scientific term for power found in the literature is the Rate of Force Development (RFD), typically utilized during MViC testing in time frames of 100, 150, and 200ms of muscle contraction offset.

Speed Tests: Velocity assessments, exemplified by the 40-yard dash in football or the 100-meter sprint in track and field, scrutinize an athlete's capability to traverse a specified distance with utmost celerity. These tests are of particular consequence in sports wherein sprinting speed emerges as a defining attribute. It is also common to assess split times, such as running speed over 5m, 10m, 20m, and 30m. This additional information may provide more insight into the reaction time and acceleration capabilities of our athletes.

Endurance Tests: The evaluation of endurance entails appraising an athlete's ability to sustain effort over a longer period of time without reducing efficiency. Like all other tests, one can utilize laboratory and field-based tests where the prediction of aerobic capacities (VO₂ max, the maximum rate of oxygen consumption attainable during physical exertion) might be measured by direct or indirect methods. Based on athletes’ preferences and the specificity of the sport, VO₂ max can be measured using different ergometers such as running (treadmill), cycling, rowing, skiing, or swimming, among others. More ecological tests include field-based tests such as the beep test, intermittent fitness test 30-15, yo-yo test, and the Cooper or 2-mile run test.

Agility Tests: Agility examinations scrutinize an athlete's adeptness in executing fast and efficient changes of direction during running. The Illinois Agility Test and the T-Test exemplify these evaluations. Agility is a pivotal attribute in sports characterized by rapid shifts in direction.

In summation, comprehensively measuring athletic performance necessitates the judicious amalgamation of strength, power, speed, endurance, and agility tests, selected in alignment with the unique demands of the sport and specific objectives. It is worth knowing that a different metrics from a single test may offer profound insights into the realm of that specific motor ability (such as lower limb muscle power assessed by countermovement jump, for instance). Thus, facilitating ongoing performance monitoring, training optimization, fatigue detection, and the secure reintegration of athletes into competitive play following injury. This topic will be covered in future articles.