What Is Skill-Related Or Athletic Fitness?

Posted on 07 Feb 2018 22:54

The fitness industry tends to conflate two broad categories of fitness. We've already defined one of these: health-related fitness. The other is skill-related or athletic fitness.

Skill-related or athletic fitness is fitness that meets further demands than what is needed in our daily and "normal" lives. This may mean strength, power agility, balance, coordination, reaction time, and speed. Of course, programs meant to increase skill-related fitness will increase general physical fitness, and so have the same health benefits, if not somewhat greater health benefits.

Not All Skill Related Adaptations are Positive Ones

The idea that greater and greater fitness means greater and greater health is an erroneous view of health-related fitness and tells us why we should not conflate this general type of fitness with advanced athletic skill. Athletic training is associated with a halo effect that is unwarranted. For one, not all adaptations related to performance and skill, especially at the extreme end, are positive ones. With ever-increasing and specific fitness comes certain maladaptations. Also, in order to achieve very great levels of specific fitness, training must be specific to an adaptation, so, at extreme levels of performance, certain virtues of general physical fitness must be de-prioritized. Health, is not the purpose of athletic pursuit.

This is not meant to create fears of a "slippery slope." It is quite possible to enjoy progressive and specific skill-related fitness pursuits, while deriving the many health benefits possible from these pursuits. Research has consistently shown that more benefits are derived from exercise of greater intensity, volume, or both. These greater benefits, however, have created a culture of more equals better, in which individuals are led to believe that they are 'wasting their time' if they are not engaging in a sustained, highly vigorous, and progressive program of exercise.

All Exercise Has Health Benefits

This is absolutely true. All exercise has health benefits. All fitness greater than an individual's baseline fitness at the start of using exercise is beneficial. Also, the benefits of exercise can be maintained even without a program of ever-increasing fitness.

Many of the marketing statements made by the fitness industry, with its focus on doing more, being dedicated or disciplined, is harmful to the public health, in that it intimidates people rather than inspires them. As well, the idea that increasing all of the aspects of skill-related fitness is necessary for maintaining health is mistaken. Of course, to reach a specific fitness goal, you must be dedicated and disciplined, and these must increase as the goals become more advanced. However, to say that without discipline there is no reward is just untrue. Exercise in any dose is healthy.

For Health, Sticking To It is the More Important Concern

The problem is not how much exercise you need to be healthy. The problem is that any benefits derived from the exercise are lost if you stop exercising! Some immediate benefits are lost more quickly than some long-term benefits. So, we need to find ways of sticking to it, but even so, even exercising regularly without a plan is much much better than not exercising at all! Consistency is better. Progression better still. But exercise is always good! Even exercise that looks like playing. Not everyone must use the same tools to find their "stick-to-it-ness."

Many experts, erroneously, in my view, separate physical activity from physical exercise, in terms of its benefits to health. In other words, they draw a line in the sand and say "physical activity is just being physically active, while physical exercise is being physically active for a purpose."

Think carefully about the vagaries of that statement. If I pursue the activities of daily life, does this make me physically active? Surely not. I am, of course, moving my body. If my job entails it, I may be moving my body quite vigorously. Yet, I might still be termed "sedentary" by the fitness industry. I am not moving for the purpose of physical fitness. Keep in mind, that a person studying kinesiology might, in turn, define physical activity as movement for a purpose in order to differentiate it from mindless involuntary movement or non-purposeful movement, such as tugging on your earlobe, or twiddling your thumbs.

While exercise is, indeed, a planned, structured, and repetitive movement activity that is intended to improve or maintain physical fitness, the same experts who draw this line do not recognize that our culture does not view being physically active as "just moving your body." If that were true, every single person in America would be said to be physically active. "Active" does indeed have the connotation of a "fit" lifestyle.

So, what is being active, if it is not exercising? Well, if you go out and play soccer twice a week, is this being physically active? Of course. Is it exercising? We are engaging in a semantic pursuit! Soccer, if it keeps you physically active, will have the same benefits, of course, as planned and structured exercise! What if you also go for regular walks or hikes, but without a "plan or a structure?" Are you exercising?

Does it matter?

The answer is that it does and it does not. The reason that planned and structured exercise can be better is that it creates a routine of physical activity. It also creates opportunities for progressive improvement of fitness in a sustained and regular program, which can result in more intense and vigorous exercise, which may be more beneficial to health (although not necessarily for every individual).

However, that does not mean that it is impossible to perform what would appear, to any reasonable individual to be vigorous and sustained exercise but without a plan or structure. In other words, while "exercise" may be better, physical activity is the actual ingredient that public health messages should be talking about. The details of that physical activity are the recipe. Start by getting them to shop for the ingredients. Any physical activity is better than none and all physical activity has health benefits, both immediate and sustained.

When it comes to the benefits from exercise, we are talking degrees of benefit, then. There is no demarcation between "no benefit" and "benefit." I could even go so far to say that the idea that fitness equals health is a bit deluded.

I like messages, such as this one by Dave Hargreaves, that say if you decide you've gotten to the point you want to be at, something you view fit and healthy, it is OK to say, "now I'm going to just keep this."

The problem is, everyone is deluged with messages about how extreme you need to be in order to be fit and healthy, and these are integrated into extreme messages about body composition or achieving a certain "look" which is considered ideal. I discussed these types of messages here in Gym Intimidation and the Ideal Female Body.

It is kind of hard to decide for any one individual what is good condition, and it is certainly not proper to tell people that a certain ideal and "athletic" body is a healthy body. I think the fitness industry would do well to separate messages about physical fitness and health, or "general fitness" and specific skills fitness. The two have become intertwined to such a degree that health messages are over-stated and confusing, leading people to think that if you don't go all the way on something, you are wasting your time.

The irony is that the further you go toward any one type of skill, the less general your fitness becomes, and if you ever hope to hone that skill to its ultimate potential, you'd have to leave behind such general conditioning, and realize that it is not longer a goal, but only a part of your potential for realizing said "elite" skill. Once you've said you want to be advanced, you have left behind "general fitness" because you cannot be "generally advanced" relatively speaking. In fact, there comes a time, when an athlete has reached a very extreme level of skill, that some of the adaptations that occur, generally speaking, could be considered maladaptations. There is certainly a greater risk to benefit involved the more advanced you get.

Keep in mind that most sensible fitness professionals, when they say "advanced" are speaking in terms of individual training status. They are saying that a certain person is advancing, or that this person has reached a stage that, based on the knowledge the trainer has about their ability and, perhaps, even potential, is advanced. The idea that there is a certain training status, such as a 1RM, that is advanced for all individuals is a concept in the strength training world that really should not matter to you as an individual.

This page created 07 Feb 2018 22:54
Last updated 20 Sep 2018 22:18

© 2019 by Eric Troy and Ground Up Strength. All Rights Reserved. Please contact for permissions.