The purpose of this article is to propose a training model for the aging firefighter to improve the athletic qualities of aerobic fitness and muscular strength so that they may remain healthier longer into their careers.

This article analyzes heavy barbell lifting, load management, injury risk, and practical evidence-based programming recommendations. Visit NSCA online to read more about weightlifting and injury prevention

The purpose of this article is to discuss the various types of low-impact activities and their associated cardiovascular and musculoskeletal benefits.

Abstract submissions are open yearly from November to March (exact dates change annually). See the Abstract Submission and Presentation Guidelines for more information (below). Research abstract presentations are an opportunity to present current research findings to researchers and strength and conditioning professionals at the NSCA National Conference.

For many athletes, being agile is the end goal of physical performance training. It represents their capacity to change velocity and direction in response to the actions of their opponent and the opportunities and constraints of their environment. The aim of this article was to describe the pitch-based development of agility, focusing on 60–1808 turns. This ensures all turns have the demand of deceleration, turning, and reacceleration, requiring both outside leg turns (608) and inside leg turns (1808). To enable the effective coaching of these, coaches must understand movement mechanics and thus the fundamental principles that underpin good technique. Within agility training, a detailed appreciation of how the center of mass and base of support interact to affect the direction of force is fundamental to this. This understanding and the ensuing technical models ensure athletes have the best chance of executing the task optimally and ensure coaches can effectively instruct athletes and adapt drills accordingly.

One resistance training variable that may be altered to achieve desired outcomes is the range of motion used in training. Generally, the strength and conditioning field has accepted that using a greater range of motion in strength training exercises results in more substantial muscle hypertrophy outcomes. However, this theory has proved to be inconsistently supported in the literature, and to date, no sufficient explanation exists to explain this phenomenon. This review article seeks to outline a novel approach for potentially describing the disparities seen in range of motion research with respect to hypertrophy outcomes by applying the unique length-tension curve of each muscle being examined. As will be discussed in the review, virtually all the results from range of motion studies in various muscles have corresponded to each muscle’s length-tension curve; muscles that are active on the descending limb of the curve appear to garner greater hypertrophy from using larger ranges of motion. Conversely, muscles that are not active on the descending limb exhibit similar adaptations despite alterations in range of motion. A novel hypothesis for applying this information to resistance training programs will be presented and discussed.

Deloading is widespread, but its application is often inconsistent and undervalued. That gap caught Lee Bell’s attention after discovering there was no consensus definition. Bell is a Senior Lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University who focuses on the deloading, overtraining, and overreaching spectrum. He explains how overtraining and overreaching are sometimes used synonymously. That confusion is compounded further by associations with overtraining syndrome (OTS). Instead, Bell frames overreaching as a “window of opportunity” when used intentionally. For example, a planned overreach can be functional or non-functional based on recovery. Bell also examines opportunities and tradeoffs in modern periodization models. He contrasts flexible and fluid approaches with more traditional, rigid programming; each approach has implications for athlete trust and recovery. Looking ahead, Bell envisions a collaborative approach to sport science driven by coaching needs. He reflects on recent coaching survey data and the key themes that emerged for the future. Hear his perspective on next steps in velocity-based training, individualized periodization, and variability. Reach out to Lee via Instagram: @lee3ell and LinkedIn: @lee-bell| Find Eric on Instagram: @ericmcmahoncscs and LinkedIn: @ericmcmahoncscs → Read the SCJ article co-authored by Lee Bell referenced in this episode: A Practical Approach to Deloading: Recommendations and Considerations for Strength and Physique Sports.

The use of exercise interventions to maximize athletes’ performance is a common practice in competitions. This systematic review aimed to compile research that explored the effectiveness of priming strategies to maximize physical performance in track and field. The literature search was conducted from PubMed and Scopus. One hundred eighty-two studies were assessed against the inclusion criteria: (a) minimum 1-year participation/competition experience; (b) randomized controlled trials with pre-post intervention outcomes; and (c) studies involving exercise interventions applied #6 hours before outcome measures were collected. Fifteen studies satisfied the criteria and were categorized according to the exercise interventions used (i.e., resistance training, plyometric/ ballistic training, resisted sprints, and modified warm-ups). Heavy-loaded resistance training (i.e., .85% 1 repetition maximum) and resisted sprints increased subsequent sprint performance. Plyometrics/ballistic training also positively impacted subsequent jumping (i.e., long jump) and throwing performance (i.e., shot put). Modified warm-ups (i.e., high-intensity sprints and heavier throwing implements) also improved subsequent running and throwing performance. Overall, exercise interventions performed at high intensity and low volume augment subsequent physical performance as close to 4 minutes before the event. However, a sufficient recovery interval must be considered for a positive performance response.

Long-Term Athletic Development (LTAD) models have provided a youth sport framework for more than 2 decades, aimed at improving skill progression, training outcomes, and athlete preparation. Although influential, traditional LTAD approaches are limited by their sport-centric orientation, linear design, and focus on elite performance, leaving them less relevant for most youth and adults who do not pursue competitive sport. In response, we propose reframing LTAD as Long-Term Activity Development (LTActD), an accessible and flexible model designed to promote lifelong engagement in physical activity, including recreation, exercise, and sport. LTActD emphasizes 5 dynamic phases—Explore, Develop, Apply, Sustain, and Thrive—that accommodate diverse pathways, periods of inactivity, and opportunities to re-enter active living at any age. Represented as a curvy road, the new model underscores that participation in physical activity is rarely linear, more like a winding journey shaped by health, motivation, environment, and social context. LTActD bridges sport science and public health, positioning physical activity as a lifelong resource for health, independence, and fulfillment. LTActD offers a practical framework to empower individuals of all ages and abilities to discover meaningful ways to move, re-engage, and embrace active living throughout the life course.

The primary aim of this study was to systematically compare the effectiveness of blood flow restriction training (BFR) versus traditional resistance training (TRT) to improve muscle size in healthy adults. Secondary outcomes were improvements in muscle strength and endurance. We performed a systematic searchwithmeta-analysis. Using predetermined criteria, 541 unique articles were identified through databases and bibliographies. After screening titles, abstracts, and full texts, 20 articles were included in the review. All 20 articles evaluated muscle hypertrophy, 19 evaluated strength, and 1 evaluated endurance in response to BFR and TRT. Data from 10 articles were included in the meta-analysis. In the qualitative analysis, TRT and BFR increased muscle size without differences between conditions for at least 1 hypertrophy outcome in 13 studies, and TRT or BFR differentially improved hypertrophy in 5 studies. TRT and BFR increased strength without differences between conditions for at least 1 outcome in 15 studies, and TRT or BFR differentially improved strength in 9 studies. Results from the meta-analysis indicate no differences in muscle size (ES 5 0.045, 95% CI [20.278 to 0.367]) or strength (ES520.149, 95% CI [20.439 to 0.141]) improvements with BFR versus TRT. Practitioners can implement BFR training to increase muscle size and strength as appropriate, especially for training periods of 8 weeks or longer.