• Functional Training Revisited
    Functional training is typically considered avoiding machines and training multi-dimensionally, or performing balancing tricks on “functional” toys. This is not how function or functional processes were ever defined, nor is this an accurate description of training processes that are intended to enhance sports, motor, or metabolic specificity.
  • comment 
    Tell us what you think of this article in the new
    "comments" section below.
     
  • NSCA ClassicsFunctional Training Revisited

    Why You Should Read This Article    

    It seems like every couple of years a new fad hits the fitness industry. Often times these fads consist of methodologies and practices that have been around for years. These concepts, often quite valuable, are often ill-defined and bastardized. This article discusses functional training and attempts to provide a clear definition of it.

    Functional training is typically considered avoiding machines and training multidimensionally, or performing balancing tricks on “functional” toys. This is not how function or functional processes were ever defined, nor is this an accurate description of training processes that are intended to enhance sports, motor, or metabolic specificity.

    The author asks some excellent questions regarding how we dogmatically classify an exercise as functional or non-functional; causing fitness professionals to often avoid exercises that may indeed provide benefit to human performance. An example brought up in the article is whether or not Olympic lifting is “functional.” Some in the industry would argue that it is not functional and claim that their stability ball and transverse abdominis exercises are functional. Want to learn more? Check out the article!

    NSCA Strength and Conditioning Journal 
    Volume 24, Issue 5, pg 42-46
    Functional Training Revisited
    Mel C. Siff, PhD
    October 2002
     

    Read the Article (PDF) 

  • Disclaimer: The National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA) encourages the exchange of diverse opinions. The ideas, comments, and materials presented herein do not necessarily reflect the NSCA’s official position on an issue. The NSCA assumes no responsibility for any statements made by authors, whether as fact, opinion, or otherwise. 
  • Add Comment

    Text Only 2000 character limit

    0 Comments

    Page 1 of 1