Is reactive strength better?

Is reactive strength more important than limit strength?

Is limit strength very related to reactive strength?

Is utilizing the stretch reflex in strength exercises (reactive types, even bouncing) very usefull?

Are reactive strength exercises the best strength exercises?

An answer to any of these similar questions would be appreciated.

A strength coaches’ short answer:

“It depends!”

Let others chime in here!

All this has been discussed ad nauseum. Ask Dr. Search, he has good info.

Let me re-frame the question, assuming reactive strength qualities are important, do we have to rely on weightlifting exercises to develop them? Are the other major components of the program (sprinting, plyos, med ball) sufficient to develop this quality? Furthermore, given the presence of these other components, would the specific incorporation of reactive weightlifting techniques be too much for the body to handle, specifically the series elastic components?

Hi Flash,

Going by the anecdotal evidence of elite sprinters and jumpers, we know that weightlifting exercises (standard or ballistic) are NOT an essential component to develop elite, world champion or olympic champion results in the short sprints and jumps.
It seems, based on comparisons of many elite programs that the only mandatory component to achieve elite status in nearly all sports is continued “perfect” practice of the core skills themselves. E.g. regularly running at >95% maximum speed, regularly lifting with > 90% 1rm, regularly jumping maximally etc etc.

Unknown currently is the rate of progress with programs not incorporating either traditional strength/power work or weighted reactive work.

Going by research into vertical jump, comparing standards, reactive and combined approaches, common sense would hint that a combination of all methods would be method producing the fastest results; what we do not know is how fast is too fast - rate of progress is irrelevant if injuries that reduce progress occur even semi-frequently.