Original paperNegative effect of static stretching restored when combined with a sport specific warm-up component
Introduction
The purpose of the pre-competition warm-up is to prepare athletes for the demands of the competition. A well-designed warm-up can assist the athlete in mentally focusing on the upcoming task and to bring about various physiological changes to optimise performance.1 A pre-game warm-up for team sports typically includes a period of sub maximal running, static stretching of the major muscle groups and sport specific movements incorporating various range of motion (ROM) exercises with skill-based drills executed at, or just below game intensity.2
Low to moderate intensity aerobic activity is an important element of the warm-up as it increases muscle temperature, which is directly responsible for a number of mechanisms important for short term performance, including range of movement about the joints, increased rate of nerve impulses, and an altered force–velocity relationship.3 In contrast, the static stretching component, which is routinely practiced in team sports, has little scientific basis to support a beneficial effect on sports performance. In fact, substantial evidence exists that static stretching may acutely inhibit performance in strength and power activities, with previous research reporting negative effects on maximal isometric force,4, 5 one repetition maximum strength6 and explosive performance as measured by a countermovement vertical jump,7, 8 drop-jumps7, 8, 9 and 20 m sprint performance.10, 11 Acute bouts of stretching have also been shown to impair balance, reaction time and movement time.12 The lack of evidence in favour of static stretching during a warm-up has led some authors to recommend the exclusion of this component from the warm-up for strength and power activities.13, 14
Awareness of the substantial evidence suggesting acute impairment of strength and power following static stretching has led to some coaches combining and/or replacing static stretching with dynamic warm-up routines. McMillian et al.15 found that a dynamic stretching routine produced higher (2.8%, ES 0.24) scores for a five-step jump than when static stretching was utilised. Similarly, dynamic stretching produced faster (2.8%, ES 0.51) 20 m sprint performance10 and greater (11.56%, ES 2.23) leg extension power16 than static stretching. Such evidence suggests that dynamic warm-up routines have a greater beneficial effect on powerful-based performances than static stretching routines. However, an important component of the warm-up sequence that has generally been overlooked in the literature to date is the sport specific warm-up activities that are commonly included in many team sport warm-up routines. Only Young and Behm7 have investigated the effect of specific rehearsal of the test activity subsequent to a bout of static stretching. They examined the influence of practice jumps in combination with a 4 min submaximal run and static stretching and reported better performance for a variety of jump variables when the subjects were given opportunity to perform practice jumps. The authors suggested that rehearsal of the skill to be performed may have had an effect of “opening up” the specific neural pathways, facilitating motor unit activation, and therefore assisting to improve explosive performance.7 In addition to these findings, Young and Behm7 also reported that a run + stretch condition produced very similar mean results to their control condition, leading them to believe that perhaps the run + stretch condition might be made up of a positive influence (run) and a negative influence (stretch), which counteracted each other to produce results similar to the control condition. While their study design did not include an additional warm-up condition to examine the effect of a warm-up consisting of only two positive influences, for example the run + skill rehearsal, they hypothesised such a warm-up routine may be the most beneficial combination of activities.
Therefore, the purpose of the current research was to replicate current warm-up practice in netball to evaluate differences in speed and leg extensor power after static stretching and dynamic warm-up routines. A further objective was to determine if differences in performance remained after a period of moderate to high intensity skill rehearsal. That is, we were interested in investigating if the hypothesised negative effect of stretching would remain after a sport specific warm-up sequence.
Section snippets
Methods
Thirteen players from the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS) Netball program (mean ± standard deviations (S.D.) age, height, and mass of 19.6 ± 0.8 years, 184.8 ± 6.3 cm and 75.2 ± 10.3 kg, respectively) participated in this study. All players received a clear explanation of the study, including the risks and benefits of participation. Testing was in accordance with and approved by institutional ethics, and written consent for testing was obtained in the player's scholarship holder's agreement.
Although
Results
Descriptive statistics for the performance variables in each warm-up condition are presented in Table 2. As hypothesised, the static stretching condition resulted in significantly worse performance than the dynamic warm-up in vertical jump height (−4.2%, 0.40 ES) and 20 m sprint time (1.4%, 0.34 ES) (Fig. 2, Fig. 3). The VJ and sprint performance in the static stretching condition were improved after the SKILL component was performed (5.3% and 0.9%, respectively). No significant differences were
Discussion
While many researchers have shown that static stretching can inhibit strength and power performance, they have tended to use stretching protocols that do not replicate current practice in preparation for dynamic sports performance, generally using stretching protocols with extensive time under tension per muscle group, or using static stretching in isolation. The purpose of this study was to determine the performance effect of static stretching that is undertaken as a component of a typical
Conclusions
Although the need for a warm-up before high intensity performance is rarely questioned, the precise protocol leading to optimum performance is not well established.2 The most important findings from this study were that a dynamic warm-up routine is superior to static stretching when preparing for powerful performance; however, these differences can be eliminated if followed by a moderate to high intensity sport specific skill warm-up.
Practical implications
- •
If static stretching is included in place of, or in addition to a dynamic warm-up routine, it should be followed by a period of moderate to high intensity sport specific activity that includes some form of skill rehearsal.
- •
A dynamic warm-up routine is superior to static stretching when preparing for powerful performance.
References (21)
- et al.
Warm-up or stretch as preparation for sprint performance?
J Sci Med Sport
(2007) A functional approach to warm-up and flexibility
Strength Cond J
(2006)- et al.
Should static stretching be used during a warm-up for strength and power activities?
Strength Cond J
(2002) Warm up. II. Performance changes following active warm-up and how to structure the warm-up
Sports Med
(2003)- et al.
Reduced strength after passive stretch of the human plantar flexors
J Appl Physiol
(2000) - et al.
An acute bout of static stretching: effects on force and jumping performance
Med Sci Sports Exerc
(2004) - et al.
Acute muscle stretching inhibits maximal strength performance
Res Q Exerc Sport
(1998) - et al.
Effects of running, static stretching and practice jumps on explosive force production and jumping performance
J Sports Med Phys Fit
(2003) - et al.
Flexibility is not related to stretch-induced deficits in force or power
J Sports Sci Med
(2006) - et al.
Effects of static stretching volume and intensity on plantar flexor explosive force production and range of motion
J Sports Med Phys Fit
(2006)