Military Review English Edition September-October 2014 | Page 20

adaptation, as well as those that exhibit a high degree
of skill crossover from sport to sport. Modalities such
as gymnastics, Olympic and power lifting, plyometrics (exercises involving repeated stretching and
contraction), yoga, running, and rowing are examples
of these modal domains. Therefore, we recognize that
a soldier is fit insofar as he or she is able to produce
power over different durations and in different
modalities (referring to types of physical activities
that are improved by exercise). For example, under
this definition the soldier who practices weightlifting,
trail running, and kayaking, and who demonstrates
some gymnastic capability (the capability to perform
a muscle-up, vault, or handstand, for example) is
fitter and more combat-ready than a soldier who exclusively runs 50 miles per week and performs some
push-ups. From an athletic perspective, a worldclass decathlete (physically) is fitter and more combat-ready than a world-class triathlete.
What are functional movements? The term functional movement is another example of frequently used
exercise terminology lacking a common definition.
According to W. Larry Kenney, Jack Wilmore, and
David Costill, functional movements—
Incorporate combinations of joints and muscle
systems for execution. They do not isolate single muscle
groups.
Begin proximally and culminate distally, from
core (transverse abdominis, erector spinae, and associated musculature) to extremity.
Stave off decrepitude (because regular functional
movement through full range of motion is therapeutic).
Are safe and within the ability of healthy human
beings, when all points of performance are observed.
Are replicated naturally and come from everyday
human experience.10
Not teaching and learning how to perform functional movements correctly is to the detriment of a
soldier’s quality of life and ability to perform his or
her job.
Examples of functional movements include the
squat (the equivalent of standing from seated position),
dead lift (the equivalent of picking up an object from
the ground), and press (the equivalent of taking an
object from shoulder level and placing it or handing
it overhead). Sporting experience teaches that when
correct points of safety performance are observed and

•
•
•
•
•

18

trained, it is possible to move large loads quickly while
staying injury free. We do soldiers an injustice (fail to
empower them) by not teaching them correct execution of these fundamental human operations.
What is the best method for training soldiers for
the rigors of combat? Research has shown conclusively that desired physical adaptation is elicited to a higher
degree through PRT that combines modalities (e.g.,
strength and endurance training combined rather than
just strength or just endurance training).11 Moreover,
in a 2012 study, Heinrich et al. reported that an active
duty population responded more favorably to a program consisting of functional movements executed
with a high degree of intensity compared to a sample
conducting traditional training.12 Statistically significant favorable adaptation relative to the traditional
group included increased APFT push-up performance,
decreased APFT two-mile run time, increased one-repetition maximum bench press, and increased flexibility.

Recommendations
We therefore propose the following general guideline, consistent with Glassman: training that includes
a wide variety of functional movements performed at
a high degree of intensity across broad time and modal
domains is the most effective way to increase a person’s
capacity to generate power.13
Specific recommendations for improving Army
PRT protocols are—
Adopt the Functional Movement Systems
screening tools.
Empower master fitness trainers.
Keep PRT in its current format for basic combat
training.
Develop additional Army publications that concisely discuss practical application of the principles in
FM 7-22.
Revise the APFT.
Adopt the Functional Movement Systems
screening tools at the unit level. One of the primary
arguments against implementing the type of training
we advocate here is based on concerns about high rates
of musculoskeletal injuries. In general, however, many
injuries can be avoided by ensuring soldiers use pro W