Cited by 127Physical Activity and HealthSports Performance and TrainingCardiovascular and exercise physiology

The Case for Retiring Flexibility as a Major Component of Physical Fitness

Nuzzo, James L.·2020·Sports Medicine

Abstract

Flexibility refers to the intrinsic properties of body tissues that determine maximal joint range of motion without causing injury. For many years, flexibility has been classified by the American College of Sports Medicine as a major component of physical fitness. The notion flexibility is important for fitness has also led to the idea static stretching should be prescribed to improve flexibility. The current paper proposes flexibility be retired as a major component of physical fitness, and consequently, stretching be de-emphasized as a standard component of exercise prescriptions for most populations. First, I show flexibility has little predictive or concurrent validity with health and performance outcomes (e.g., mortality, falls, occupational performance) in apparently healthy individuals, particularly when viewed in light of the other major components of fitness (i.e., body composition, cardiovascular endurance, muscle endurance, muscle strength). Second, I explain that if flexibility requires improvement, this does not necessitate a prescription of stretching in most populations. Flexibility can be maintained or improved by exercise modalities that cause more robust health benefits than stretching (e.g., resistance training). Retirement of flexibility as a major component of physical fitness will simplify fitness batteries; save time and resources dedicated to flexibility instruction, measurement, and evaluation; and prevent erroneous conclusions about fitness status when interpreting flexibility scores. De-emphasis of stretching in exercise prescriptions will ensure stretching does not negatively impact other exercise and does not take away from time that could be allocated to training activities that have more robust health and performance benefits.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40279-019-01248-w

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The current meta-analysis concurs with Nuzzo and Afonso et al. that resistance training and stretch training do not differ significantly for improving range of motion.

    “The current meta-analysis generally concurs with the findings of Nuzzo [5] and Afonso et al. [12] based on an expanded analysis of 55 studies.”
  • Neither prior commentaries nor the prior meta-analysis evaluated the specific type of resistance training (free weights vs machine vs Pilates vs calisthenics) effects on range of motion.

    “However, neither the commentaries nor the meta-analysis evaluated the specific type of RT (i.e., free weights vs machine RT, vs Pilates, vs calisthenics) effects on ROM.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 320 · Cited by 127

Authors
Nuzzo, J. L.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Nuzzo, James L.
Venue
Sports Medicine
Published
2019-12-16
Volume
50
Issue
5
Pages
853-870
ISSN
  • 0112-1642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1179-2035
OpenAlex
W2994708356
Cited by
127
References
320
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1
FWCI
9.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sports Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
flexibility, fitness components, static stretching, exercise prescription, range of motion, resistance training, predictive validity, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscle strength, falls, mortality, physical fitness assessment
MeSH terms
Body Composition, Humans, Physical Endurance, Physical Fitness, Sports Medicine, Exercise, Range of Motion, Articular, Muscle Strength

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review