Static Stretching in Physical Education and Athletics: Misconceptions and Research
Tad Jinguji, MS, PES

As a consultant to various schools, districts and athletic teams, I have encountered a variety of misconception within the focus of exercise and movement.  One of the most debated topics is the use of static stretching in physical education and sport.  Many physical educators and coaches continue to use static stretching as part of their daily warm up (pre activity), others have removed it from their warm up and placed it at the end of their classes as part of their cool down (post activity), and others have removed the use of static stretching altogether or have never used it. 

• static stretching should be a part of the warm up

• static stretching should not be included in your warm up

• static stretching should be included, but only after the student or athlete is warmed up

• to prevent/reduce injury occurrence (research has not determined this to be true)

• to increase performance (research has shown that pre activity static stretching can actually decrease the potential for muscles to produce maximal force - for a period of 30-60 minutes)

• to prepare the body for dynamic activity (static stretching promotes muscular relaxation and therefore does not adequately prepare the neural system for dynamic activity)

I have had various conversations in the past 5 years or so with several Physical Educators, Exercise Physiologists and Strength/Conditioning Specialists about the "true" definition of Muscular Strength in relationship to Muscular Endurance (or Muscular Endurance in relationship to Muscular Strength).  The conversations are usually extensive and exhaustive due to the fact that defining Muscular Strength/Endurance in relation to each other is an extremely difficult task.
 
Muscular Strength - the ability of a muscle to exert maximum force against resistance; 1 RM (Repetition Maximum).
 
Muscular Endurance - the ability of a muscle to exert sub-maximal force repeatedly over a period of time.
 
We all are familiar with the traditional definitions of Muscular Strength/ Endurance, but how do we answer the question: "is anything beyond the one repetition max (1 RM) threshold working Muscular Endurance?".  Let's take a look at a 2, 3, or 4 sub-maximal repetition lift.  Can one honestly say that an individual is not gaining Muscular Strength when you perform this? Or that you are gaining only Muscular Endurance because it is beyond the scope of the 1RM.  I agree that a 1 RM test measures the individual's ability to exert maximal force against resistance; but does this lead us to believe that a sub-maximal 2, 3 or 4 repetition lift against resistance is a test of Muscular Endurance?  I would have to disagree wholeheartedly with this statement and what it suggests.  What it's suggesting is that there is an "absolute" answer when it comes to defining both Muscular Strength and Muscular Endurance and although scientific research can help us, there is an awful large "grey area" within the definition.
 
 Muscular strength is the ability to generate force with a muscle or group of muscles; whereas, muscular endurance is the ability to perform repeated contractions with a muscle or group of muscles. The difference between muscular strength and muscular endurance can be better understood by reviewing how each is assessed. Muscular strength is assessed by determining the maximal amount of force that an individual can apply against resistance-one time (1 RM), such as with a bench press or possibly a push up. Muscular endurance is assessed by determining how many times that an individual can apply sub-maximal force upon a weight (or body weight), such as bench-pressing x pounds twenty five times, or the total number of sit-ups, or push-ups one can perform.

Above all, it is important not to be confused by the assessments of muscular strength and of muscular endurance.  The 1 RM lift is an assessment of Muscular Strength; however, Muscular Strength is developed by working with resistance that is correlated to 80% or more of the individual's 1RM.   Muscular Endurance is assessed by using 70% or less of an individual's 1 RM and determining how many repetitions can be performed. 

If physical educators want to be able to properly define the relationship between muscular strength and muscular endurance, they must look at the two in a way that defines their association with each other, not their differences.  The most beneficial way that I have found to accomplish this is to use a Strength Training Continuum which states: If a workload is less than 70% of an individual's 1RM, then muscular endurance is the primary outcome of the activity (however, muscular strength is still being developed at a lower level); if a workload is greater than 80% of an individual's 1RM, then muscular strength is the primary outcome of the activity (however, muscular endurance is still being developed at a lower level); if the workload is between 70-80% of an individual's 1 RM, then muscular strength and muscular endurance are being developed somewhat equally.  The use of the Pathway to the Development of Muscular Strength and Endurance provides the students with a visual and subjective measurement to increase their comprehension of the concepts of muscular strength and muscular endurance as used in physical education.

From here, a physical educator must begin to expand on the topic of strength training by applying the terms: overload, specificity and variation along with reviewing the FITT principle, only then can a student fully comprehend how strength training can effect their bodies and how to utilize strength training in their short and long term health/fitness goals.