The pursuit of functional, real-world power—the kind of strength that helps you move furniture, sprint for a bus, hoist a child onto your shoulders, or tackle a demanding physical job with ease—is a primary driver for many people to engage in structured physical training. In the modern fitness landscape, two methodologies often stand in stark opposition to one another, each claiming supremacy in forging a capable, resilient human body: traditional strength training and CrossFit. On one side, you have the iron game’s stalwarts: the powerlifters, the Olympic weightlifters, and the dedicated gym-goers whose primary focus is moving increasingly heavy loads through specific, mastered patterns. Their domain is one of calculated progression, rest periods, and singular focus. On the other side, you have the high-intensity, constantly varied world of CrossFit, which blends weightlifting, gymnastics, and metabolic conditioning into grueling workouts-of-the-day (WODs) designed to test every fiber of one’s being. The debate between these two camps is often heated, fueled by tribalism and vastly different philosophies. But which approach truly builds a more transferable, usable form of strength for the unpredictable challenges of daily life? The answer is not a simple binary choice. Real-world power is a multifaceted quality, and the most effective path to building it requires a deep understanding of the principles, advantages, and limitations inherent in both strength training and CrossFit. This examination will move beyond the hype and the rhetoric to dissect the physiological and neurological adaptations produced by each modality, ultimately arguing that the optimal strategy for developing genuine, applicable power lies not in choosing one exclusively, but in intelligently synthesizing the best elements of both.
Real-world power is distinct from gym strength. It is the ability to produce force quickly, efficiently, and often under fatigue or in awkward positions. It involves not just muscles, but a highly tuned nervous system, superior cardiovascular capacity, mobility, stability, and mental grit. It’s the difference between slowly lifting a heavy box in a perfect deadlift stance and explosively heaving a wriggling, 40-pound suitcase into a crowded overhead bin on a moving train after sprinting through an airport. Traditional strength training excels at building the raw force-production engine—the maximal strength potential. CrossFit, by its nature, excels at teaching the body to express that strength across broad time and modal domains, under duress. The question of which builds “real-world power” is therefore a question of specificity versus generality, of depth versus breadth. This analysis will break down each system’s approach to building strength, power, endurance, durability, and neurological efficiency. We will explore how pure strength training builds an immense ceiling of potential power, and how CrossFit’s methodology teaches the body to access and apply a percentage of that power across a wider range of scenarios. The final verdict will not declare a single winner but will provide a framework for individuals to construct a training philosophy that maximizes their functional capabilities, making them not just strong in the gym, but powerfully capable in the world.
1. Defining the Contenders: Philosophy and Methodology
To understand the outcomes of any training system, one must first understand its core principles and prescribed practices. Strength training and CrossFit are built upon fundamentally different philosophical foundations, which dictate everything from exercise selection to the structure of a typical session. These differences are not merely cosmetic; they represent divergent answers to the question: “What is the purpose of physical training?”
Traditional strength training is a broad term that encompasses disciplines like powerlifting (focused on the one-rep max in the squat, bench press, and deadlift), Olympic weightlifting (focused on the snatch and clean & jerk), and general strength and conditioning. Its philosophy is rooted in the principle of specificity, also known as the SAID principle (Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands). The goal is to get better at a specific, defined task by practicing that task or its close variations with a high degree of focus and technical precision. A strength training session is characterized by a structured, progressive plan. It typically begins with a specific warm-up aimed at preparing the movement patterns for the day. The main session is built around one to three primary “lifts.” For a powerlifter, this might be 5 sets of 3 repetitions on the back squat at 85% of their one-rep max. For an Olympic lifter, it could be multiple sets of 2 reps of the power clean. The focus is solely on executing these lifts with perfect technique and maximal intent. Assistance work follows, which targets muscle groups or movement patterns that support the main lifts (e.g., pull-ups, rows, lunges). Rest periods are long, often 3-5 minutes between heavy sets, to ensure full recovery of the ATP-CP energy system and the nervous system, allowing for the highest quality of effort on each subsequent set. The entire model is built on linear or periodized progression—systematically increasing weight, volume, or intensity over weeks and months to force continuous adaptation. The metric of success is unambiguous: more weight on the bar.
CrossFit, by contrast, defines itself as “constantly varied, high-intensity, functional movement.” Its philosophy is rooted in the pursuit of general physical preparedness (GPP). The goal is not to excel in any one sport or lift but to develop a broad and general fitness that prepares an individual for any physical challenge, known or unknown. This is achieved through extreme variance. A participant rarely does the same workout twice in a short period. The programming is designed to be random, preventing specialization and forcing adaptation across all energy systems and movement modalities. A typical CrossFit class is highly structured socially but varied physically. It begins with a dynamic group warm-up, followed by a “skill” or “strength” segment where a specific lift or gymnastic skill is practiced, often for 10-15 minutes. The heart of the class is the WOD (Workout of the Day), a high-intensity circuit typically lasting between 5 and 20 minutes. The WOD is where the philosophy comes to life: it might combine deadlifts, box jumps, and pull-ups performed for as many rounds as possible (AMRAP) in 12 minutes. The intensity is meant to be maximal, with participants encouraged to push their limits in a competitive, often group-driven environment. Rest is minimal, often only taken when absolutely necessary, prioritizing the maintenance of a high heart rate and metabolic stress. Metrics of success are diverse: time to complete a task, total rounds completed, or total weight lifted in a complex workout. Success is measured by work capacity—the ability to perform large amounts of work in multiple domains in the shortest possible time.
These philosophical differences create two distinct athletic profiles. Strength training produces a specialist with a very high peak in a narrow range of activities. CrossFit aims to produce a generalist with a high average across a very wide range of activities. The former builds a deep but narrow reservoir of strength; the latter builds a shallower but immensely broad reservoir of mixed physical skills. The applicability of each to “real-world power” depends entirely on how one defines the “real world.” Is it a series of predictable, heavy tasks? Or is it a chaotic, unpredictable series of events requiring a blend of strength, stamina, and agility?
2. The Case for Strength Training: Forging the Raw Engine
Proponents of traditional strength training argue that real-world power is first and foremost a product of maximal strength. You cannot express power you do not possess. The primary and most compelling argument for strength training as the foundation for real-world power is its unparalleled efficiency in increasing the body’s maximal force-producing capacity. This is a neurological and structural adaptation that serves as the bedrock for all other expressions of strength.
The process of dedicated strength training, particularly with compound, multi-joint movements like the squat, deadlift, press, and Olympic lifts, teaches the nervous system to become incredibly efficient at recruiting motor units. A motor unit consists of a motor neuron and the muscle fibers it innervates. The body’s ability to exert force is dependent on both the number of motor units recruited (recruitment) and the rate at which they are fired (rate coding). Heavy lifting (above 85% of one-rep max) demands the recruitment of high-threshold motor units, which contain the largest and most powerful type II muscle fibers. Through consistent practice, the nervous system loses its innate inhibitory mechanisms and becomes adept at calling upon these powerful fibers synchronously and forcefully. This is why a seasoned lifter can lift more weight than a novice who may have similar muscle mass; their nervous system is simply better at using the hardware available. This neurological efficiency is the essence of “raw power.” It translates directly to the real world: the ability to generate a huge amount of force to push a broken-down car, to deadlift a heavy safe, or to forcefully pull oneself up onto a ledge. This adaptation is best developed through the low-rep, high-intensity, long-rest model of traditional strength training, which allows for maximal neural drive on every single repetition.
Furthermore, this style of training builds the structural foundation for power: muscle and bone density. The mechanical tension placed on muscles and the compressive forces placed on the skeletal system during heavy lifting are the primary drivers of hypertrophy and increased bone mineral density. A larger muscle has a greater potential for force production, and a denser skeleton is more resilient to impact and stress. The real-world benefit is a body that is not only more powerful but also more durable and resistant to injury from falls or accidents. The focused nature of strength training also allows for meticulous technique practice. Mastering the biomechanics of a hip hinge (deadlift) or a deep squat under load teaches the body to move with efficiency and safety. This movement literacy is invaluable. Knowing how to brace your core, maintain a neutral spine, and engage your lats under load is a protective skill that applies to every heavy task encountered in daily life, from lifting a couch to grabbing a bag of concrete. It prevents the back injuries that so commonly occur when untrained individuals attempt feats of strength using poor mechanics.
However, the limitation of pure strength training for real-world application is its context. The strength it builds is largely expressed in ideal conditions: a controlled environment, with a predictable load (a barbell with balanced weight), a stable surface (a flat platform), and without fatigue. The real world is messy. Objects are awkwardly shaped, surfaces are unstable, and you are often required to be strong after you’ve already been active. This is where the critique of strength training lies: it builds an immense engine but does little to practice using that engine in the chaotic “race” of everyday life.
3. The Case for CrossFit: Training for Applied Chaos
CrossFit’s central thesis is that fitness—and by extension, real-world power—is not about how much you can lift in a vacuum, but about your ability to perform athletic tasks across a wide range of scenarios, even when fatigued. Its proponents argue that the real world is not a powerlifting meet; it is a series of metabolic-conditioning workouts where strength must be applied under pressure, in combination with other skills, and at speed. CrossFit’s primary contribution to real-world power is its relentless focus on building work capacity and teaching the body to express strength in a fatigued state.
The most significant adaptation from CrossFit training is the drastic improvement in metabolic conditioning. CrossFit WODs brutally train all three of the body’s energy systems: the phosphagen system (for short, explosive bursts), the glycolytic system (for high-intensity efforts lasting several minutes), and the oxidative system (for longer endurance efforts). This is achieved by coupling weightlifting movements with gymnastic elements and monostructural cardio (like rowing, running, or biking) in time-based or task-based circuits. The physiological result is a body that is incredibly efficient at managing energy production, clearing metabolic waste like lactate, and sustaining high power output for prolonged periods. This is the definition of work capacity. The real-world translation is profound. It’s the difference between being able to deadlift 400 pounds once, and being able to repeatedly lift 150-pound objects for ten minutes straight during a move. It’s the power to help a friend push a car up a hill without being completely gassed after 20 seconds. It’s the stamina to play with your kids for hours at the park while still having the burst of strength to catch them when they fall. CrossFit trains the cardiovascular system to support the muscular system, ensuring that your strength is not just a single-shot weapon but a renewable resource.
Furthermore, the “constantly varied” and often “odd-object” nature of CrossFit (using kettlebells, sandbags, sleds, ropes) provides a broader movement vocabulary and teaches adaptive strength. While a barbell is a perfectly balanced tool, a sandbag is shifting and unstable. Lifting it requires the engagement of stabilizer muscles and proprioception in a way a barbell does not. This has direct carryover to the real world, where objects are rarely perfectly balanced with convenient grips. Carrying a heavy, awkward piece of furniture down a flight of stairs engages the same core stability, grip strength, and full-body coordination as a heavy sandbag carry in a WOD. The high-intensity, competitive environment also builds immense mental toughness. The ability to push through extreme discomfort, to keep moving when every fiber of your being is screaming to stop, is a mental skill that translates to any difficult real-world scenario, physical or otherwise. CrossFit builds a deep reservoir of grit.
The limitations of CrossFit, however, are the inverse of strength training’s. In its pursuit of breadth and intensity, the potential for developing maximal strength can be capped. It is exceedingly difficult to truly maximize your one-rep max deadlift when you are regularly asked to perform high-rep deadlifts in a fatigued state during a WOD. The technique required for optimal strength expression can break down under fatigue, and the nervous system is often too taxed from frequent high-intensity metcons to recover adequately for dedicated maximal strength work. There is also a higher inherent risk of injury when complex, technical lifts are performed under fatigue, especially by novice athletes who may prioritize finishing time over movement quality. Therefore, while CrossFit is superb at teaching you to apply a moderate level of strength across a wide range of scenarios, it may not be the most efficient method for building the absolute highest levels of that strength in the first place.
4. The Synthesis: Blending Strength and Conditioning for Ultimate Real-World Power
The debate between strength training and CrossFit is often presented as a zero-sum game, but this is a false dichotomy. The most effective training philosophy for building comprehensive, real-world power is not an either/or choice but a strategic synthesis of both methodologies. The goal should be to build a massive engine through dedicated strength training and then learn to use that engine efficiently across a wide range of terrains through high-intensity conditioning and varied movements. This synergistic approach acknowledges that real-world power is a spectrum, requiring both a high peak (maximal strength) and a broad base (work capacity).
The optimal framework for most individuals seeking real-world power is to prioritize strength as the foundation. This means structuring training cycles, or at least individual weeks, where the primary focus is on getting stronger in the key compound lifts: the squat, deadlift, press, and some form of clean or snatch. These sessions should be treated with the respect they demand: performed first in a workout when the nervous system is fresh, with a focus on perfect technique and progressive overload. The intensity (weight on the bar) and volume (sets and reps) should be periodized to allow for consistent progress and adequate recovery. This dedicated strength work builds the absolute force-producing potential—the size of the strength “tank.”
Once this foundation is being laid, conditioning can be intelligently layered on top to build the “fuel lines” and “cooling systems” that allow that tank to be used effectively. This is where the principles of CrossFit become invaluable, but they should be applied judiciously. Instead of random, daily high-intensity metcons that constantly beat up the nervous system, conditioning can be programmed to complement strength gains. For example, on days after a heavy lower-body strength session, a longer, lower-intensity conditioning piece like a row or bike could be used to aid recovery without causing further neural fatigue. On other days, shorter, high-intensity metcons that don’t heavily impact the same movement patterns as the next strength session can be used to build work capacity. The key is to avoid consistently pairing heavy strength days with highly fatiguing metcons that use the same lifts, as this is a recipe for stagnation and overtraining.
This synthesized approach also allows for the incorporation of CrossFit’s most valuable asset: variety and odd-object training. After building a base of strength with a barbell, incorporating sessions with kettlebells, sandbags, sled pushes, and farmer’s walks teaches the body to apply that strength in unpredictable ways, building the stability and durability that pure barbell training can sometimes neglect. This creates a more robust and adaptable athlete. The final product is an individual who possesses the raw strength to handle extremely heavy objects, the metabolic conditioning to handle prolonged physical tasks, and the movement versatility to handle awkward, unpredictable challenges. They have the deep strength reserve of a powerlifter and the work capacity of a CrossFit athlete. This is the true embodiment of real-world power: not just being strong, but being powerfully capable in any situation.
5. The Neurological Demands: Skill vs. Grit
The neurological adaptations required and fostered by each discipline are fundamentally different, shaping not just the body but the very way the brain and nervous system approach physical tasks. Strength training prioritizes the development of highly refined, specific neural pathways, while CrossFit emphasizes neural toughness and the ability to switch between motor patterns under duress. Both are valuable for real-world application, but they serve different purposes.
Traditional strength training is, in many ways, a skill sport. The goal of a powerlifter or Olympic weightlifter is to execute a movement pattern with maximal efficiency and minimal error. This requires the nervous system to develop incredibly precise motor patterns. Through thousands of repetitions with submaximal and maximal loads, the neural pathways responsible for the squat, bench press, or clean become superhighways. The brain learns to recruit exactly the right muscles, in the right sequence, with the right timing to move the load most effectively. This process, often called “greasing the groove,” reduces energy leaks and co-contraction of antagonist muscles, allowing for the expression of true maximal force. This neurological efficiency is a form of power conservation; by moving well, you waste less energy and can direct more force into the object you are moving. In the real world, this translates to economy of movement. Lifting a heavy object becomes less taxing because the body automatically assumes the most biomechanically efficient position, protecting the joints and maximizing strength output.
CrossFit, conversely, trains the nervous system for chaos and resilience. The constantly varied nature of the programming prevents the nervous system from becoming too specialized in any one pattern. Instead, it must remain adaptable, learning to quickly recruit motor units for a deadlift, then immediately switch to the coordination demands of a muscle-up, and then to the rhythmic pattern of a rowing machine—all while flooded with metabolites and under significant cardiovascular stress. This develops a different kind of neural fitness: the ability to perform skilled movements while fatigued. The real world rarely allows for perfect rest and recovery before a demanding task. You might need to lift a heavy object after already having been physically active. CrossFit conditions the nervous system to maintain a higher level of coordination and output under these conditions, a phenomenon known as “fatigue resistance.” However, the trade-off is that the technical precision for any single lift may not reach the peak level of a strength specialist. The nervous system is being trained for breadth and toughness, not for depth and perfection. The grit and mental fortitude forged in a brutal WOD—the ability to tell your body to keep moving when every signal is screaming to stop—is a powerful neurological adaptation that has immense carryover to persevering through any difficult real-world scenario.
6. Durability and Injury Risk: The Long-Term Perspective
A critical, often overlooked aspect of “real-world power” is sustainability. It is not just about how powerful you are today, but whether your training methodology allows you to remain powerful and injury-free for decades to come. The approaches of strength training and CrossFit present different risk profiles and philosophies regarding longevity and durability, making this a crucial differentiator for long-term athletes.
Properly executed, traditional strength training is arguably one of the most potent tools for building a durable, resilient body. The progressive overload of heavy loads stimulates not only muscle growth but also increased bone density, thicker connective tissues (tendons and ligaments), and stronger joints. Mastering technically sound movement patterns under load ingrains motor habits that protect the spine and joints during everyday activities. A person who has drilled the hip hinge pattern with a deadlift is far less likely to injure their back picking up a box. The controlled environment, long rest periods, and focus on technique minimize acute injury risk during training sessions themselves. The primary risk in strength training comes from ego—attempting weights that far exceed one’s current technical capability—or from poor programming that leads to overuse injuries. However, when approached with patience and intelligence, strength training is an investment in long-term structural integrity, building a body that is resistant to the wear and tear of life.
CrossFit’s injury risk profile is more complex and is often the source of its greatest criticism. The high-intensity, high-volume, and high-skill nature of many WODs creates a perfect storm for potential injury. The most significant risk is the performance of technically complex, high-skill movements (e.g., Olympic lifts, kipping pull-ups) under extreme fatigue. As form breaks down due to exhaustion, the risk of acute injury (e.g., torn rotator cuffs, disc herniations) spikes dramatically. Furthermore, the competitive atmosphere, both against the clock and against others in the class, can push athletes beyond their technical limits, prioritizing speed over safety. The philosophy of “constantly varied” training can also be a double-edged sword. While it prevents overuse injuries from repetitive patterns, it can also prevent the mastery of movement patterns that comes from thousands of repetitions, potentially leaving athletes perpetually in a state of “almost proficient” in dangerous lifts. That said, a well-run CrossFit affiliate with obsessive coaches who prioritize scaling and technique can mitigate these risks significantly. The durability CrossFit builds is often metabolic and mental—the ability to withstand and recover from immense systemic fatigue. However, the long-term structural durability is more dependent on intelligent programming and coaching than the modality itself.
7. The Community and Psychological Factor: Motivation and Identity
The environment in which one trains is not a minor detail; it is a powerful determinant of long-term adherence, enjoyment, and ultimately, success. Strength training and CrossFit cultivate vastly different social and psychological environments, which can significantly influence an individual’s relationship with fitness and their own identity as an athlete.
Traditional strength training is, by and large, a solitary pursuit. While training partners exist and can be invaluable, the journey is fundamentally internal. The focus is on the individual’s interaction with the barbell, the numbers in the training log, and the personal battle against one’s previous self. This environment fosters self-reliance, intense focus, and a deep sense of personal accomplishment. The victory is a quiet, personal one: adding five pounds to a lift that no one else in the gym notices or understands. This can be incredibly empowering for self-motivated individuals who thrive on internal validation. However, this solitude can also be a barrier. It requires a high degree of intrinsic motivation. Without the external push of a group or a coach, it is easy to skip sessions, sandbag workouts, or plateau due to a lack of external accountability. The identity formed is often one of a “lifter”—someone whose primary fitness goal is measured in kilos on the bar.
CrossFit is explicitly built around community. The class-based structure, the shared suffering of the WOD, and the collective cheering at the end of a workout create a powerful tribal bond. This social component is arguably one of CrossFit’s greatest strengths. It provides immense accountability; people show up because their friends are expecting them. It provides motivation; it’s harder to quit in the middle of a workout when others are pushing alongside you. The encouragement from coaches and peers can often help individuals break through barriers they would not have突破 on their own. This environment builds an identity not just around being “fit,” but around being part of a team, a “CrossFitter.” This sense of belonging is a powerful force for adherence. The potential downside is the risk of external validation becoming too dominant, where an athlete’s self-worth becomes tied to their performance on the whiteboard relative to others, potentially leading to unhealthy comparisons or the aforementioned risk-taking that leads to injury.
8. Practical Application: Designing a Personal Program for Real-World Power
The theoretical debate is meaningless without practical application. For an individual seeking to maximize their real-world power, the most effective approach is to consciously design a training regimen that synthesizes the principles of both disciplines, tailored to their specific goals, lifestyle, and recovery capacity. This is not about doing random strength days and random metcons; it is about intelligent, periodized programming.
The foundational principle is to prioritize strength. For the majority of people, dedicating 2-3 sessions per week to pure strength work will yield the greatest returns. These sessions should be focused on the big compound movements: Squat, Hinge (Deadlift), Horizontal Push (Bench Press), Vertical Push (Overhead Press), and Vertical Pull (Pull-ups). The goal is linear progression: adding weight or reps to the bar over time. These sessions should be performed first in the day, when you are fresh, and should not be followed immediately by a high-intensity metcon that targets the same movement patterns.
Next, layer in conditioning intelligently. Use 2-3 other days per week for metabolic work. The key is to align the type of conditioning with your strength goals. For example:
- On a day after heavy lower body lifting, perform longer, lower-intensity “cardio” like a 30-minute row or bike to aid recovery without adding neural fatigue.
- On an upper body day or a full rest day, you can incorporate a shorter, high-intensity metcon that focuses on bodyweight movements or light weights to build work capacity without impairing recovery for your heavy lifts.
- Crucially, avoid making every metcon a high-skill, high-fatigue grind fest. Variance should include monostructural cardio and simple, cyclical movements.
Finally, incorporate variance and odd-object training. Once a month, or in dedicated “off-seasons” from linear progression, replace a traditional strength session with a workout focused on real-world application. This could be a strongman-style session with sandbag carries, sled pushes, and log lifts. This builds the stability and conditioning to apply your gym-built strength to unpredictable objects, closing the carryover gap.
This blended approach ensures you are building the maximum strength potential in the gym while also teaching your body to access and use that strength under the varied and often fatiguing conditions of real life. It respects the need for focused neural recovery to get stronger while also providing the metabolic and mental stimulus to be capable across broad time and modal domains. This is the true path to building real-world power: becoming a hybrid athlete who is both strong and conditioned, precise and adaptable, a specialist and a generalist.
Conclusion
The quest to determine whether strength training or CrossFit builds superior real-world power is ultimately a misguided one. Both systems offer crucial, yet incomplete, pieces of the puzzle. Traditional strength training is the undisputed champion for building the raw, neurological and structural foundation of strength—the maximal force-producing potential that is the prerequisite for all power. Its methodical, focused approach builds a high ceiling of strength and impeccable movement mechanics for predictable tasks. CrossFit, conversely, excels at teaching the application of strength under real-world conditions: under fatigue, at speed, in combination with other movements, and with varied, awkward objects. Its philosophy of constant variation and high-intensity conditioning builds an unparalleled work capacity and mental toughness, forging an individual who can sustain power output over time.
Therefore, the most effective training philosophy is not to choose a side in a tribal war, but to become a pragmatic opportunist, taking the most effective tools from each system. The optimal path to genuine, real-world power is a periodized, intelligent blend of both. It involves dedicating focused blocks of time to building maximal strength in the key foundational lifts, ensuring the “engine” is as large as possible. Subsequently, it incorporates the principles of metabolic conditioning, variety, and intensity from CrossFit to build the systems that allow that engine to run efficiently, effectively, and reliably in the chaotic and unpredictable race of life. By respecting the strengths and mitigating the weaknesses of each approach, you can build a body that is not only capable of an impressive one-rep max but is also prepared for any physical challenge, known or unknown, that the real world throws your way. True power is not just about the weight on the bar; it is about the capability in the person.
SOURCES
Bellar, D., Hatchett, A., Judge, L. W., Breaux, M. E., & Marcus, L. (2015). The relationship of aerobic capacity, anaerobic peak power and experience to performance in CrossFit exercise. Biology of Sport, 32(4), 315–320.
Feito, Y., Heinrich, K. M., Butcher, S. J., & Poston, W. S. C. (2018). High-Intensity Functional Training (HIFT): Definition and Research Implications for Improved Fitness. Sports, 6(3), 76.
Garhammer, J. (1993). A review of power output studies of Olympic and powerlifting: Methodology, performance prediction, and evaluation tests. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 7(2), 76–89.
Klimentová, J., Vajda, M., & Komadel, L. (2021). The effect of CrossFit training on aerobic capacity and body composition in both beginners and advanced participants. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 21(3), 1464–1470.
Suchomel, T. J., Nimphius, S., & Stone, M. H. (2016). The Importance of Muscular Strength in Athletic Performance. Sports Medicine, 46(10), 1419–1449.
Weiss, L. W., Fry, A. C., & Relyea, G. E. (2002). Explosive strength deficit as a predictor of vertical jumping performance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 16(1), 83–88.
HISTORY
Current Version
SEP, 13, 2025
Written By
BARIRA MEHMOOD