Transfer of Training (Part 4, Why Strength Is Not Always The Answer, Athlete Examples, Training Age and Concluding Thoughts)
- Hugo Morgan
- Mar 24
- 10 min read
Updated: Mar 24
If the first three parts of this series taught us anything, it’s that transfer of training is a highly individual and context-dependent process. In this final installment, we’ll explore how an athlete’s training age influences transfer potential and why methods that work for beginners often lose their effectiveness in elite populations. Drawing from case studies of Jannik Sinner, Mondo Duplantis, and Greg Rutherford—as well as insights from leading coaches.
One key factor in this individualisation is the task-specific nature of strength development. This concept is supported by Baker and colleagues (1994) who investigated whether muscle function is general or specific to the task. They assessed the correlation between dynamic strength (1RM back squat) and isometric leg extension strength, and despite an initial correlation, it was not statistically significant. Furthermore, they examined speed-strength measures through a vertical jump and the time taken to reach 400N of force on an isometric leg extension. Their research found that although the intervention did improve vertical jump height, no improvements were made in the isometric force-time variables or in the specified aspects of force production, suggesting that other mechanisms must be at play. This supports the view that strength adaptations are specific to the nature of the task (SAID principle), reinforcing the need for training approaches that align with the coordination demands of the sporting context.
Additionally, Bobbert and Van Soest (1994) explored how muscle strength training may impact vertical jump performance. They concluded that improvements in strength within isolated muscles (intramuscular coordination) do not transfer very well to improvements or higher jump heights in the skill. Consequently, Bobbert and Van Soest place a large amount of emphasis on the fundamental role of intermuscular coordination, where the newly acquired increases in force production must be neurologically linked to the target task for optimal transfer.
Moreover, Van Hooren and colleagues’ (2017) study examined whether strength or resistance training alone contributes to increases in rate of force development in sporting tasks like unloaded jumping and sprinting. Their study concluded that again, strength training alone does not transfer very well to improved rates of force development in dynamic sporting tasks, especially amongst more well-trained elite populations which will be discussed very shortly. Van Hooren and colleagues suggest that training must attempt to match force-velocity characteristics, movement patterns and neural demands of the sporting tasks whilst considering the training age. They believe a mixed method or blended approach ensures more optimal levels of transfer of training for individuals (Brearley and Bishop, 2019).
Sinner, Mondo and Rutherford
This blended approach is evident when you look at how many elite athletes structure their training. Even by watching a few videos of athletes training, you can gain valuable insights into how they prepare. Take tennis player Jannik Sinner, for example—much of his training closely mirrors the movement patterns and demands of his sport. In several clips, you’ll see him mimicking lateral movements similar to those in matches, using a resistance band around his waist while throwing medicine balls. In other videos, he performs his serving motion with a ShoulderSphere attached to his wrist (https://www.shouldersphere.com), targeting shoulder robustness through the specific patterns used during his serve. It’s clear from his training that his physical preparation coaches place a strong emphasis on coordination. He often holds a racket while doing sled acceleration work—further reinforcing movement specificity and the idea of closing the gap between the weight room and the tennis court. That said, I think we can all agree that his tennis over the last two years has been phenomenal. His movement, accuracy, and the power he is able to generate puts him in a league of his own.
Swedish pole vaulter Mondo Duplantis once described his training in an interview by saying, “I train like how a sprinter would train, with a little more gymnastics and pole vault-specific exercises mixed in.” Notably, he made no mention of heavy resistance training in his program—a detail that might surprise some, given the high ground reaction forces sprinters must tolerate through their lower limbs. However, as Frans Bosch has pointed out, the only way to truly replicate those kinds of forces is through the act of sprinting itself. No weight room exercise, especially for well-trained athletes, can match that level of specificity. Taking Mondo’s words at face value, we can infer that his training is deliberately focused on the exact components required by his sport. This underscores the importance of including coordination elements in training programmes rather than relying solely on general strength work.
Finally, a recent lecture by Dr. Nicholas Jones on maximal velocity sprinting offered some fascinating insights into Greg Rutherford’s long jump training at ALTIS. As expected, his training placed a strong emphasis on the kinematics and coordination elements of sprinting and jumping, with relatively little focus on developing general physical capacities. That’s not to say Greg avoided the weight room altogether—far from it. In fact, there are impressive videos of him performing 6-inch step-ups with 230kg on his back, seemingly with ease. But what stood out most to me was the low training volume in the weight room. So, perhaps such an exercise was being utilised for more neural drive benefits (improving motor unit recruitment, faster contraction, more powerful muscle contractions) than anything else.
Unsurprisingly, all three of these athletes have truly excelled in their respective fields—each reaching the pinnacle of their sport either currently or at some point in their careers. A common thread running through their training programmes is the consistent inclusion of specific coordination elements. Even when an exercise appears far removed from the actual sport skill, it’s often paired with movements that closely mimic movement patterns seen in their sports. This approach helps continually remind the brain and neuromuscular system why a certain physical capacity is being developed—if it’s needed at all. Of course, it’s important to take publicly available training footage with a pinch of salt, as what we see online is likely just a small snapshot of their full programmes. Still, these glimpses offer valuable insight into how the very best in the world are enhancing the transfer of training effect—and ultimately, how they’re preparing their bodies for the unique demands of elite sport.
The Impact of Training Age: The Elite vs Beginner - Sprinting Case Study
In their fascinating 2019 paper Transfer of training: how specific should we be?, Brearley and Bishop outlined a key point: “A consistent message in the literature is that transfer is achieved much more readily in sub-elite athletes or those with lower training histories.” This is crucial! Much of the current scientific literature available supporting that improvements in general strength capacities impact sports skills and performance—such as improved COD abilities from increased lower body strength—are conducted upon individuals with relatively low training ages.
Seitz and colleagues (2014), in a revolutionary meta-analysis (study combining results of multiple other studies) of 171 studies, found that improvements in lower body strength improved sprint performance by 3.11%. But when digging deeper into the individuals or samples within the studies, there is a catch: the elite, more well-trained sprinters in the study showed a 2.34% reduction in their sprinting performance. We can therefore deduce that due to the overall average of the meta-analysis suggesting a 3.11% improvement, this number was primarily down to the younger, less well-trained sprinters, where we see improvements in general physical capacities having a greater transference effect.
This stark contrast highlights what Brearley and Bishop emphasised: as training age increases, the effectiveness and potency of general physical preparation decreases. Stronger, more experienced individuals do not respond in the same way as younger, less trained individuals. In fact, according to Seitz and colleagues’ study, continually attempting to develop those physical capacities of a highly trained neuromuscular system may not only offer diminishing returns but may decrease their sprinting performance too.
As well-known strength coach Alex Natera explained, for less experienced athletes, general strength training does transfer well to sprinting. But once an athlete becomes well trained, “it becomes very tricky.” Simply put, "Once the capacity is above a certain level, it doesn’t have direct transfer....It is so far removed from the technical aspects of the event [skill] itself.” Alex introduces the idea of “link training," or exercises that are used to allow the body and neuromuscular system to understand and recognise where to utilise the newly developed physical capacity. This idea can be compared to Verkhoshansky’s special strength exercises, which are used to “improve the athlete's competition performance by enhancing specific strength requirements of their discipline.” As well as Bondarchuk’s exercise categorisation model, where he exclaimed that “excluding SDEs [Special Developmental Exercises] in the final phase led to a loss in physical abilities during competition.” This can be achieved by adding in special strength or even skill-based exercises into complexes, as the closer the movements are, the easier it is for the brain to connect the dots (Joel Smith & Christian Thibaudeau). The likes of Alex Natera, Steffan Jones, and Sean Furey have adapted these special strength exercises into their respective skills of sprinting, cricket fast bowling, and the javelin throw. More specifically, Steffan Jones refers to his bank of exercises that look to change aspects of the skill over physical capacities as his "skill stability paradigm."
In sum, general strength training can offer significant performance benefits within sprinting for those of a younger training age. As athletes become more proficient, more experienced, and well-trained in sprinting, benefits from developing physical capacities begin to plateau and even reverse. This shift again further highlights the need for a more nuanced approach: one that relates physical capacities to the skill in the well-trained populations. Utilising Verkhoshanky’s “special strength” exercises within Bondarchuk’s model of Progression or Natera’s “link” exercises can aid in allowing transfer of training to take place.
Concluding Thoughts
At its core, the pursuit of transfer of training is about one question: Is what we are doing away from our sport making us better at the sport itself?
As we’ve explored, transfer of training is far from a linear process—it’s deeply multifaceted and often misunderstood. In some cases, it may even do more harm than good. Personally, I’ve fallen into the trap of believing that every progression in the weight room would automatically carry over into better sporting performance. But I’m living proof that this couldn’t be further from the truth. For years, I chased strength development, assuming it would raise my athletic ceiling. Looking back, I wonder: when my training did transfer, was it simply just because I was relatively inexperienced in the weight room? With hindsight, probably yes.
As Stuart McMillan (ALTIS) wisely notes: “From a programming perspective it is understanding where the athlete is, what they require, what they’ve got, where they are in the rate of diminishing returns on each of those capacities…Understanding the spectrum of capacities and abilities that humans have to do a task in an almost infinite number of ways…It depends on who you are and what you’re good at and why you’re good at it. There’s not one way.” This really encapsulates the individualistic approach needed to ensure individuals are doing what is right for them, rather than what worked for someone else. We are all different!
We highlighted that sprinting, a closed-skill sport - naturally lends itself to clearer transfer of physical capacities due to the repetitive nature of the task. But in more dynamic, open-skill sports like football, cricket, rugby or field hockey, transfer becomes far less predictable. These sports are layered with complexity and constantly changing constraints. Physical qualities are important, yes—but they’re only one part of what makes an athlete successful in these environments.
The rise of increasingly specialised coaching roles has created depth in certain areas, but may also contribute to fragmentation in the athlete development process. On this topic, Verkhoshansky (2009) raises a valid point stating that: “Very few single coaches are equipped to handle strategic skills, movement skills, physical conditioning, psychological preparation, biomechanical analysis, fitness assessment and rehabilitation routines.” This is especially true in field sports, where transfer is more elusive. Still, I would argue that—even if coaches don’t master every domain—they must develop enough understanding across disciplines to optimise transfer and athlete development.
While some athletes respond well to general strength work; others thrive on coordination-heavy, sport-specific approaches—or a blend of both. The Mixed Methods Approach (Brearley & Bishop, 2019) may provide the flexibility needed to match the athlete with the right stimulus. McMillan reminds us that we need to appreciate what individuals are limited by so we can focus on developing the right qualities and capacities enabling them to be more successful within their sport or sporting skills. At the end of the day, “many sporting tasks require specific force application, movement sequencing and coordination.” (Steffan Jones) So, if we stray too far from the skill itself - and focus only on general physical development (intramuscular coordination) - we risk training in ways that transfer less and may even blunt performance.
To enhance transfer of training, we must move beyond the pursuit of bigger lifts equalling better performance. We must learn to respect the complexity of movement skills within sport, and the variability of human movement. It is not always about doing more, lifting heavier; it’s about what matters for a given athlete, at the right time. So I am by no means saying do not develop maximal strength, but I am simply questioning if increasing your bench press from 130kg to 135kg is really going to make a difference to your throwing velocity? Maybe. But probably not.
In the end, all of our training is hypothesis testing. And if we feel our training isn’t transferring over to our abilities to perform the sporting skills better, then what are we doing it for?
References / Sources:
Baker, D., Wilson, G., & Carlyon, B. (1994). Generality versus specificity: a comparison of dynamic and isometric measures of strength and speed-strength. European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 68, 350-355.
Bobbert, M. F., & Van Soest, A. J. (1994). Effects of muscle strengthening on vertical jump height: a simulation study. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 26(8), 1012-1020.
Bondarchuk, A. P. (2007). Transfer of Training in Sports. Ultimate Athlete Concepts.
Brearley, S., & Bishop, C. (2019). Transfer of training: how specific should we be?. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 41(3), 97-109.
Christian Thibaudeau – Strength & Conditioning Coach and Author
Joel Smith - Founder of JustFlySports & Athletic Performance Coach
Mondo Duplantis Interview: https://citiusmag.com/articles/mondo-duplantis-training-before-pole-vault-world-record
Pacey Performance Podcast #44 - Alex Natera https://open.spotify.com/episode/3hN37nGeWdiZzcr85zdtH4?si=7c96efa15a5d45bc
Seitz, L. B., Reyes, A., Tran, T. T., de Villarreal, E. S., & Haff, G. G. (2014). Increases in lower-body strength transfer positively to sprint performance: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports medicine, 44, 1693-1702.
Steffan Jones - Founder of PaceLab & Fast Bowling Coach
Stu McMillan & Andrew Huberman - https://open.spotify.com/episode/2ygKhnKjr5XRwMTRB0COQw?si=f8f3e36ab02d441b
Van Hooren, B., Bosch, F., & Meijer, K. (2017). Can resistance training enhance the rapid force development in unloaded dynamic isoinertial multi-joint movements? A systematic review. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 31(8), 2324-2337.
Verkhoshansky, Y, and Siff, M.C. (2009). Supertraining. Verkhoshansky SSTM: Rome, Italy.