A longitudinal study across three Adriatic rowing clubs reveals that movement competency — not strength — is the real barrier for youth athletes.
The question we set out to answer
When young athletes drop out of sport, we often blame motivation, time, or social pressure. But what if part of the problem is simpler — and more physical? What if young rowers are leaving because training feels hard, uncomfortable, or even unsafe for their bodies?
This was one of the driving questions behind the KeYs project. And to answer it properly, we didn’t just design a prevention programme. We measured it. Three times, over thirteen months, across three rowing clubs on the Adriatic coast: RCAF (Italy), VK Piran (Slovenia), and VK Arupinum Rovinj (Croatia).
The result is a full longitudinal report on injury prevention — one of the final deliverables of the KeYs project — that tells a clear and sometimes surprising story about how young athletes move, adapt, and grow.
The testing battery: what we measured and why
Rather than isolating individual muscle groups, the testing battery was designed to evaluate integrated movement patterns — the kind that actually matter in rowing.
Five exercises formed the core of the assessment:
The pull-up tested upper body pulling strength and shoulder girdle stability — essential for effective stroke execution. The deadlift assessed posterior chain strength and hip hinge mechanics, partially mirroring the force production pattern of the rowing stroke. The Zercher squat, with its anterior load position, challenged trunk stability and the integration of upper and lower body. The Jefferson curl — perhaps the most unconventional choice — was included not just as a mobility test, but as a tool to change how athletes think about movement: specifically, to show them that controlled spinal flexion under load is safe. And finally, two coordination tests — an agility course and a quadruped obstacle course — measured movement control, decision-making, and adaptability under fatigue.
Testing took place across three time points: January 2025 (baseline), July 2025 (adaptation), and February 2026 (stabilization).
What we found: the three phases of adaptation
Phase 1 — Learning (January 2025)
The baseline results were revealing. Most limitations had nothing to do with physical capacity. Athletes simply hadn’t been exposed to these movement patterns before.
Success rates in the deadlift ranged from just 21% to 47% across clubs. The Zercher squat hovered between 33% and 35%. The Jefferson curl was the starkest case: only 12–20% of athletes could perform controlled spinal flexion under load — not because they lacked flexibility, but because they had never been asked to move that way before.
The pull-up showed more variation between clubs, pointing to differences in training culture rather than any fundamental physical limitation.
Phase 2 — Adaptation (July 2025)
Six months later, the picture had changed dramatically. The Zercher squat success rates jumped to 67–88% across all three clubs. The Jefferson curl showed some of the most striking relative improvements of the entire study. Coordination scores improved across the board, with quadruped completion times dropping significantly in all groups.
The message was clear: when young athletes are introduced to movement patterns in a structured, progressive way, they adapt quickly. The barrier was exposure, not capacity.
Phase 3 — Stabilization (February 2026)
By the final testing, deadlift and Zercher squat success rates had reached approximately 85–90% across all clubs. These movements — initially unfamiliar and technically limited — had become stable, repeatable skills.
Mobility under load continued to improve, though increasingly dependent on progressive loading rather than just movement practice. Coordination-based performance stabilized, showing that initial learning gains need consistent exposure to be maintained.
The surprising finding: it’s not about strength
One of the most important conclusions of the entire project is also one of the most counterintuitive.
Performance limitations in young rowers are not primarily about strength. They are about movement competency — the familiarity, control, and confidence to execute patterns under load.
This has real implications for how we coach. It challenges the hesitation many youth coaches have around strength training with external load. The data shows that young athletes are not only capable of developing strength safely — they are motivated to do so when the exercises are introduced in a meaningful, progressive way.
It also challenges traditional models of injury prevention, which tend to focus on low-intensity corrective exercises. The KeYs findings suggest that the ability to handle load safely is itself a protective factor — and that building it should be a standard part of any youth training programme.
What coaches and athletes said
The prevention programme was also evaluated through a structured questionnaire completed by both coaches and athletes across all three clubs.
The response was overwhelmingly positive. All participants agreed that the exercises were appropriate for rowers at different levels and aligned with the goals of injury prevention and performance enhancement. The majority reported using the exercises two to three times per week — a sign that the programme had been genuinely integrated into training, not just tested and forgotten.
Feedback also highlighted what could be improved: clearer progressions, more variability, and stronger links to rowing-specific demands. These are valuable directions for future development.
A model worth keeping
The KeYs injury prevention programme was never designed to be a one-off research exercise. It was designed to be transferable — simple enough for any club to implement, evidence-based enough to be taken seriously, and flexible enough to adapt to different contexts.
With minimal equipment and approximately 60 minutes, coaches can assess an athlete’s strength, coordination, and movement competency in a meaningful and measurable way. The minimum performance criteria established through the project give coaches a practical benchmark for monitoring development over time.
From an Erasmus+ Sport perspective, this is exactly the kind of grassroots capacity-building the programme is designed to support: evidence-informed coaching, safer participation, and long-term athlete development.
The legacy
KeYs is now complete. But the knowledge it generated doesn’t stop here.
Three clubs. Three countries. Thirteen months of testing, training, and learning together. The data is clear: young athletes are highly adaptable. Movement patterns that seemed out of reach at baseline became stable skills within a year. Injury risk factors were reduced. Training quality improved.
Most importantly, the athletes stayed. And they got stronger — not just physically, but in the way they understand and inhabit their own bodies.
That’s what keeping youth in sport really looks like.
Comments are closed