See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/236888748

Speed and Agility

Chapter · January 2013

CITATIONS READS
0 4,668

3 authors, including:

Tim Gabbett Jeremy M Sheppard

Gabbett Performance Solutions Canadian Sport Institute
305 PUBLICATIONS   11,414 CITATIONS    107 PUBLICATIONS   3,057 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Biodesp Institute View project

Influence of Anthropometric and Upper Body Strength Qualities on Surfboard Paddling Kinematics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tim Gabbett on 18 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.
Testing and Training Agility
Tim J. Gabbett and Jeremy M. Sheppard
Agility has traditionally been defined as the
ability to change direction rapidly and accurately
(Alricsson et al. 2001; Baechle 1994; Barrow and
McGee 1971). The first edition of Physiological Tests
for Elite Athletes emphasized this definition by only
including protocols for the assessment of preplanned
change of direction speed (e.g., zig-zag running).
Consequently, agility has traditionally been viewed
as a quality influenced predominantly by physical
(e.g., leg muscular strength, reactive strength, and
power) and biomechanical (e.g., running technique)
qualities, and training programs designed to improve
agility performance typically focus on enhancing
these individual qualities.
Speed of movement both in a straight line and
when changing direction is a clear determinant of per-
formance in many team sports and therefore should
be emphasized in the preparation of these athletes.
However, speed qualities such as acceleration and
acceleration with changes of direction are somewhat
distinct from each other and likely require individual
attention to maximize performance application to
the sporting context (Young et al. 2001). Furthermore,
an athlete’s speed and ability to change direction are
underpinned by a multifactorial model including
strength, technique, and other related variables that
should be addressed (Sheppard and Young 2006).
Factors Influencing Agility
Performance
Although it is recognized that preplanned move-
ments are important to team sport performance,
effective agility movements are also commonly
executed in response to a sport-specific stimulus (e.g.,
12
the offensive movements of an attacking player). It
has been established that successful team sport per-
formance depends on well-developed physical quali-
ties (e.g., linear sprinting speed, change of direction
speed) (Gabbett et al. 2009). However, higher-skilled
athletes in team sports have also consistently shown
perceptual skills that are superior to those of their
less-skilled counterparts (refer to chapter 15, Percep-
tual–Cognitive and Perceptual–Motor Contributions
to Elite Performance). Despite the wealth of evidence
demonstrating differences between experts and
novices in sport-specific anticipation and decision
making tasks (see Williams et al. 2006 for review), the
majority of agility testing protocols have used tests
of preplanned change of direction speed. A limita-
tion of tests that measure change of direction speed
is that they fail to assess the perceptual components
of agility. Figure 12.1 shows a multifactorial model
of physical and perceptual qualities influencing agil-
ity performance. Although the physical and biome-
chanical qualities are important to enhance change
of direction speed, perceptual qualities such as visual
scanning, anticipation, situational knowledge, and
pattern recognition are also critical factors discrimi-
nating the agility performances of higher- and lesser-
skilled team sport athletes (Young et al. 2002).
Contemporary Definition
of Agility
Because perceptual qualities are important for
effective agility performance, and given that agility
represents an integration of physical and perceptual
factors, agility has recently been redefined as “a rapid,
whole-body, change of direction or speed in response
199
 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.

12
Agility

Perceptual Change
and decision of direction
making speed

Knowledge Straight Leg Anthro-

Visual Pattern
Anticipation of Technique sprinting muscle pometric
scanning recognition
situations speed qualities variables

Adjustment
Foot of strides Body lean Reactive
to accelerate Strength Power
placement and and posture strength
decelerate

Figure 12.1  Theoretical model of agility components.

Adapted by permission of Edizioni Minerva Medica from: J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 2002 Sep;42(3);282-8.

to a sport-specific stimulus” (Sheppard and Young
2006, 919). This definition applies to agility tasks that
are open skilled, in that they involve both temporal
and spatial uncertainty. E5232/ASC/Fig 12.1/424921/KE/R3-alw athletes suggests that these partici-
We recently investigated the speed, change of
direction speed, and reactive agility (using a test that
relied on the ability of players to “read and react” to
a game-specific stimulus) performances of higher-
and lesser-skilled rugby league players (Gabbett
et al. 2008b). Interestingly, significant differences
between experts and novices were detected in the
perceptual qualities of higher-skilled and less-skilled
team sport athletes; however, no differences existed
between groups in physical abilities (e.g., speed and
change of direction speed) (table 12.1) (Gabbett et al.
2008b), with similar results found in netball (Farrow
et al. 2005) and Australian Rules Football (Henry
et al. 2011; Sheppard et al. 2006; Veale et al. 2010;
Young et al. 2011). Equally important, the reactive
agility test offered a reliable method of assessing the
perceptual components of agility performance (table
12.2) (Gabbett et al. 2008b; Sheppard et al. 2006).
The finding of superior anticipatory skill in the
higher-skilled
pants had a greater ability to extract relevant infor-
mation earlier in the visual display by identifying
relevant postural cues presented by the stimulus
and disregarding irrelevant sources of information
(Farrow et al. 2005). Collectively, these findings
demonstrate the practical utility of the reactive
agility test for assessing the perceptual components
of agility and also raise questions about the dis-
criminant validity of preplanned change of direction
speed tests currently used by the majority of high-
performance coaches.
Perhaps more important, among a squad of team
sport athletes, the reactive agility test was able to
distinguish four distinct classifications (table 12.3).
Specifically, players were classified as requiring (1)
decision-making and change of direction speed

200
 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.
Testing and Training Agility

Table 12.1  Speed, Change of Direction Speed, and Reactive Agility Results
for First Grade and Second Grade Rugby League Players (mean ± SD)
First grade Second grade Effect size Difference
Speed
5 m sprint, s 1.14 ± 0.06* 1.20 ± 0.11 0.68 Moderate
10 m sprint, s 1.90 ± 0.09* 2.00 ± 0.14 0.85 Large
20 m sprint, s 3.25 ± 0.16* 3.39 ± 0.21 0.75 Moderate
Change of direction speed
5-0-5 agility test, s 2.34 ± 0.20 2.39 ± 0.15 0.28 Small
Modified 5-0-5, s 2.66 ± 0.14 2.71 ± 0.17 0.32 Small
L-run, s 6.36 ± 0.53 6.49 ± 0.40 0.28 Small
Reactive agility
Movement time, s 2.48 ± 0.17* 2.60 ± 0.16 0.73 Moderate
Decision time, ms 55.3 ± 43.6 78.2 ± 40.4 0.54 Moderate
Response accuracy, % 89.3 ± 13.9 84.0 ± 17.3 0.34 Small
Effect size differences, <0.10 = trivial, 0.11-0.50 = small; 0.51-0.80 = moderate; >0.80 = large.
*Denotes significant difference (p < .05) between groups.
Adapted, by permission, from T.J. Gabbett, J.N. Kelly, and J.M. Sheppard, 2008, "Speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility of rugby
league players,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 22: 174-181.

Table 12.2  Test–Retest Reliability of Speed, Change of Direction Speed,

and Reactive Agility Tests in a Sample of Rugby League Players (mean ± SD)
Test 1 Test 2 ICC %TE
Speed
5 m sprint, s 1.20 ± 0.10 1.20 ± 0.10 0.84 3.2
10 m sprint, s 1.98 ± 0.13 1.99 ± 0.11 0.87 1.9
20 m sprint, s 3.39 ± 0.20 3.38 ± 0.20 0.96 1.3
Change of direction speed
5-0-5 agility test, s 2.39 ± 0.17 2.37 ± 0.16 0.90 1.9
Modified 5-0-5, s 2.73 ± 0.17 2.72 ± 0.17 0.92 2.5
L-run, s 5.77 ± 0.69 5.63 ± 0.38 0.95 2.8
Reactive agility
Movement time, s 2.50 ± 0.14 2.52 ± 0.18 0.92 2.1
Decision time, ms 71.5 ± 47.1 71.1 ± 46.0 0.95 7.8
Response accuracy, % 85.5 ± 16.3 85.4 ± 16.6 0.93 3.9
Data were collected on the same sample of rugby league players as in table 12.1. ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient; TE = typi-
cal error of measurement.
Adapted, by permission, from T.J. Gabbett, J.N. Kelly, and J.M. Sheppard, 2008, "Speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility of rugby
league players,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 22: 174-181.

training to further consolidate good physical and

perceptual abilities, (2) decision-making training to
improve below-average perceptual abilities, (3) speed
and change of direction speed training to improve
below-average physical attributes, or (4) a combina-
tion of decision-making and change of direction
speed training to improve below-average physical
and perceptual abilities.
Agility Testing Protocols
This section provides a sample of agility testing proto-
cols. It is not designed to provide an exhaustive list of
change of direction speed and reactive agility testing
protocols but rather provides the reader with some
of the options available to test preplanned change of
direction speed and reactive agility.

201
 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.
Gabbett and Sheppard

Table 12.3  Interpretation and Training Prescription for Four Players With
Different Results on the Reactive Agility Test
Decision Movement
Player time, ms time, s Interpretation Prescription
Fast mover– 58.75 2.31 Has speed and fast decision time, Needs to continue to develop
fast thinker which contribute to above-average change of direction speed and
anticipation skills decision-making skills.
Fast mover– 148.75 2.33 Has speed but slow decision time, Needs more decision-making
slow thinker which contributes to below-aver- training on (e.g., reactive agility
age anticipation skills training) and off (e.g., video-based
perceptual training) the field.
Slow mover– 28.75 2.85 Perceptually skilled but lacks Needs more speed and change of
fast thinker change of direction speed direction speed training to improve
physical qualities.
Slow mover– 112.50 2.86 Has poor speed and slow decision Needs more decision-making and
slow thinker time, which contribute to below- speed and change of direction
average anticipation skills speed training to improve physical
qualities and perceptual skill.
Fast movers–fast thinkers = good change of direction speed and good perceptual skill; fast movers–slow thinkers = good change
of direction speed and below-average perceptual skill; slow movers–fast thinkers = below-average change of direction speed and
good perceptual skill; slow movers–slow thinkers = below-average change of direction speed and below-average perceptual skill.
Adapted, by permission, from T.J. Gabbett, J.N. Kelly, and J.M. Sheppard, 2008, "Speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility of rugby
league players,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 22: 174-181.

Change of Direction Speed 5m

Testing Protocols
The following tests are examples of change of direc-
tion speed protocols.

L-Run
The L-run test was originally developed for rugby
union (Webb and Lander 1983) but subsequently
5m

has been used with subelite (Gabbett et al. 2008b)

and elite (Meir et al. 2001) rugby league players. In
this preplanned running test, the athlete runs 5 m,
turns 90° to the left, runs 5 m, makes a full 180° turn
around a cone, returns to the original cone, makes
another 90° turn, and returns to the start position
(figure 12.2).
5-0-5 Agility Test
For the 5-0-5 agility test, 2 timing gates are placed 5
m from a designated turning point. Athletes assume
a starting position 10 m from the timing gates (and
therefore 15 m from the turning point). Athletes are
instructed to accelerate as quickly as possible through
the timing gates, pivot on the 15 m line, and return as
quickly as possible through the timing gates (figure
12.3) (Draper and Lancaster 1985). Refer to chapter
14, Field Testing Principles and Protocols, for a more
detailed description of the 5-0-5 agility test.
Start and
finish line
X
Figure 12.2  Schematic illustration of the L-run (Webb
and Lander 1983).
Reprinted, by permission, from T.J. Gabbett, J.N. Kelly, and J.M. Shep-
pard, 2008, "Speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility of
rugby league players,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
22: 174-181.
E5232/ASC/Fig 12.2/424925/KE/R3-alw
T-Test
The T-test is a popular test of change of direction
speed (Pauole et al. 2000; Semenick 1990). The ath-
lete runs forward from point A to point B, shuffles

202
 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.
10 m
Start line
Figure 12.3  Schematic illustration of the 5-0-5 agility test (Draper and Lancaster 1985).
Reprinted, by permission, from T.J. Gabbett, J.N. Kelly, and J.M. Sheppard, 2008, "Speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility of rugby
league players,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 22: 174-181.
to the left (point C), shuffles to the right (point D),
shuffles back to point B, and runs backward to the
start position (point A) (figure 12.4). It should be
emphasized that the T-test is clearly a preplanned
E5232/ASC/Fig comparison to their less-skilled counterparts
change of direction speed test rather than a reactive
agility test.
Reactive Agility Testing Protocols
Several sport-specific reactive agility testing protocols
have been proposed for Australian football (Shep-
pard et al. 2006), rugby league (Gabbett et al. 2008b;
Serpell et al. 2010), netball (Farrow et al. 2005), and
softball (Gabbett et al. 2007). Faster decision times
5m
C B D
10 m
Start and A
finish line
X to the left or right in response to, and in the same
Figure 12.4  Schematic illustration of the T-test.
Adapted, by permission, from D. Semeick, 1990, “Tests and measurement:
The T-test,” Strength and Conditioning Journal 12(1): 36-37.
E5232/ASC/Fig 12.4/424927/KE/R3-alw
Testing and Training Agility
5m
Finish line
Turning
Light gate point
and response accuracy have been demonstrated in
response to lifelike video footage simulating sport-
specific passages of play in higher-skilled athletes
in 12.3/424926/KE/R3-alw
in competitors from a wide range of team sports.
Although the majority of these studies typically use
expensive technology that involves projection of
video images onto a large screen (Farrow et al. 2005;
Gabbett et al. 2007; Serpell et al. 2010), the reactive
agility test first described by Sheppard and colleagues
(2006) offers an inexpensive and practical method
of assessing reactive agility for a wide range of team
sports. Although this reactive agility test was initially
designed and validated for Australian football (Shep-
pard et al. 2006), it has recently gained popularity
in rugby league (Gabbett et al. 2008b), rugby union
(Sheppard et al. 2008), soccer (Sheppard, unpub-
lished observations), and basketball (Gabbett et al.
2008a), demonstrating its practical utility for assess-
ing the generic perceptual demands of a wide range
of team sports.
The reactive agility test has been described in detail
elsewhere (Sheppard et al. 2006). In brief, the athlete
begins on a marked line, as illustrated in figure 12.5.
Timing gates are placed 5 m to the left and right and
2 m forward of the start line. Therefore, the timing
gates are placed 10 m from each other.
The tester (investigator) stands opposite and facing
the athletes and is behind a set of timing lights. In
each test trial the tester initiates movement, thereby
beginning the timing. The athlete reacts to the move-
ments of the tester by moving forward and then
direction as, the left or right movement of the tester.
The timing stops when the athlete triggers the timing
beam on either side.
203
 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.
Gabbett and Sheppard
10 m
5m
Start line X high frequency (e.g., 200 Hz) so that the number of
2m
Light gate
Light gate
3m
3m
Timing lights
Figure 12.5  Schematic illustration of the reactive
E5232/ASC/Fig 12.5/424928/KE/R2-alw
agility test.
Reprinted, by permission, from T.J. Gabbett, J.N. Kelly, and J.M. Shep-
pard, 2008, "Speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility of
rugby league players,” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
22: 174-181.
The tester displays one of four possible scenarios
for the athlete to react to. The four possible scenarios
all involve steps of approximately 1/2 m and are
presented in a random order that is different for
each athlete:
• Step forward with right foot and change direc-
tion to the left.
• Step forward with the left foot and change
direction to the right.
• Step forward with the right foot, then left, and
change direction to the right.
• Step forward with the left foot, then right, and
change direction to the left.
An equal number of each scenario is presented
for each athlete. The test protocol involves random-
ized presentation of four different cues, for a total of
eight trials. These cues create varying demands on the
athletes (as in a game setting), resulting in intertrial
variability. For this reason, the recorded score used
represents the mean of all trials (8), which is an aver-
age of all trials to the left (4) and to the right (4).
The athletes sprint forward prior to any change of
direction, in reaction to the forward movement of
the tester. The athletes are instructed to recognize the
cues as soon as possible (essentially while moving
forward) and react by changing direction and sprint-
204
ing through the gates on the left or right in response.
The athletes are instructed to emphasize accuracy
(decision-making accuracy) and speed of move-
ment. A high-speed video camera interfaced with a
video recorder is usually positioned 5 m behind the
subject to record the athlete's change of movement
direction relative to the tester. Video is sampled at
frames between the tester’s and athlete's movement
initiation enables the athlete's decision-making time
to be recorded to within ±5 ms for each trial.
Typical results of the reactive agility test are pre-
sented in table 12.3. Note that published results for
the reactive agility test have been collected with dif-
ferent timing light systems, in different populations,
and with different surfaces, all of which would likely
contribute to differences in test results.
Individual Interpretation
of Tests
Although it is clear that perceptual qualities contrib-
ute to effective agility performance, no study has used
temporal or spatial occlusion techniques (which are
traditionally used in anticipation studies) to identify
the most relevant cues used by highly agile team
sport players. Consequently, although reactive agility
tests are acknowledged as important for informing
agility training programs, the relevant cues to which
athletes should attend are unclear. Identifying the
information sources that are most relevant to spe-
cific sports offers an important research pursuit for
applied sport scientists and is likely to provide great
value to coaches attempting to train the perceptual
components of agility.
Notwithstanding the current limitations associ-
ated with reactive agility tests, the inclusion of deci-
sion time and response accuracy information for the
reactive agility test using high-speed video footage
provides insight into the anticipatory strengths and
weaknesses of team sport athletes. Table 12.3 shows
the results of four rugby league players tested on the
reactive agility test. The analysis of the high-speed
video footage allows us to delineate the performance
components of the reactive agility test by elucidating
whether performance was limited by decision time
or movement speed. Indeed, if movement time alone
were used to classify reactive agility, some players
would be incorrectly classified as having superior
anticipatory skill (i.e., “fast thinkers”). Also note
that a speed–accuracy trade-off exists in the majority
of players, so that reductions in decision time (i.e.,
faster decision-making ability) result in reductions
in response accuracy (Gabbett et al. 2008b).
 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.
Training Directions Based
on Test Results
As stated previously in this chapter, the use of a tra-
ditional preplanned change of direction speed test,
in combination with a reactive agility test, allows the
coach to identify the individual factors limiting effec-
tive agility performance. For example, players with
fast movement speed but slow decision time and low
response accuracy clearly require additional percep-
tual training to improve their ability to recognize and
respond to sport-specific cues. Conversely, players
with fast decision times and high response accuracy
but poor movement speed are likely to benefit from
additional movement speed training that emphasizes
speed in changing direction. To assist with the inter-
pretation of change of direction speed and reactive
agility tests, we have developed an agility training
matrix (table 12.3). This matrix identifies players
with fast change of direction speed, well-developed
decision-making ability, or a combination or absence
of both qualities so that coaches can provide players
with specific agility training to meet their individual
requirements.
References
Alricsson, M., Harms-Ringdahl, K., et al. 2001. Reliability of
sports related functional tests with emphasis on speed and
agility in young athletes. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine
and Science in Sports 11(4):229-232.
Baechle, T.R. 1994. Essentials of Strength and Conditioning.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Barrow, H., and McGee, R. 1971. A Practical Approach to Mea-
surement in Physical Education. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.
Draper, J.A., and Lancaster, M.G. 1985. The 505 test: A test
for agility in the horizontal plane. Australian Journal for
Science and Medicine in Sport 17(1):15-18.
Farrow, D., Young, W., and Bruce, L. 2005. The development
of a test of reactive agility for netball: a new methodol-
ogy. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 8(1):52-60.
Gabbett, T., Rubinoff, M., Thorburn, L., and Farrow, D.
2007. Testing and training anticipation skills in softball
fielders. International Journal of Sport Science and Coaching
2(1):15-24.
Gabbett, T.J., Sheppard, J.M., Pritchard-Peschek, K.R.,
Leveritt, M.D., and Aldred, M.J. 2008a. Influence of
closed skill and open skill warm-ups on the performance
of speed, change of direction speed, vertical jump, and
reactive agility in team sport athletes. Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research 22(5):1413-1415.
Gabbett, T.J., Kelly, J.N., and Sheppard, J.M. 2008b. Speed,
change of direction speed, and reactive agility of rugby
league players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
22(1):174-181.
Testing and Training Agility
Gabbett, T., Kelly, J., Ralph, S., and Driscoll, D. 2009. Physi-
ological and anthropometric characteristics of junior elite
and sub-elite rugby league players, with special reference
to starters and non-starters. Journal of Science and Medicine
in Sport 12(1):215-222.
Henry, G., Dawson, B., Lay, B., and Young, W. 2011.
Validity of a reactive agility test for Australian football.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance.
6(4):534-545.
Meir, R., Newton, R., et al. 2001. Physical fitness qualities of
professional rugby league football players: determination
of positional differences. Journal of Strength and Condition-
ing Research 15(4):450-458.
Pauole, K., Madole, K., Garhammer, J., Lacourse, M., and
Rozenek, R. 2000. Reliability and validity of the t-test as
a measure of agility, leg power, and leg speed in college-
aged men and women. Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Research 14(4):443-450.
Semenick, D. 1990. Tests and measurements: the T test.
National Strength and Conditioning Association Journal
12(1):36-37.
Serpell, B.G., Ford, M., and Young, W.B. 2010. The devel-
opment of a new test of agility for rugby league. Journal
of Strength and Conditioning Research 24(12):3270-3277.
Sheppard, J. M., Barker, M., and Gabbett, T. 2008. Train-
ing agility in elite rugby players: a case study. Journal of
Australian Strength and Conditioning 16(3):15-19.
Sheppard, J. M. and Young, W. B. 2006. Agility literature
review: classifications, training and testing. Journal of
Sports Sciences 24(9):919-932.
Sheppard, J. M., Young, W.B. Doyle, T.L., Sheppard, T.,
and Newton, R.U. 2006. An evaluation of a new test of
reactive agility and its relationship to sprint speed and
change of direction speed. Journal of Science and Medicine
in Sport 9:342-349.
Veale, J.P., Pearce, A.J., and Carlson, J.S. 2010. Reliability
and validity of a reactive agility test for Australian football.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance,
5(2):239-248.
Webb, P., and J. Lander 1983. An economical fitness testing
battery for high school and college rugby teams. Sports
Coach 7(3):44-46.
Williams, A.M., Hodges, N.J., North, J.S., and Barton, G.
2006. Perceiving patterns of play in dynamic sport tasks:
investigating the essential information underlying skilled
performance. Perception 35(3):317-332.
Young, W.B., McDowell, M.H., and Scarlett, B.J. 2001.
Specificity of sprint and agility training methods. Journal
of Strength and Conditioning Research 15(3):315-319.
Young, W.B., James, R., and Montgomery, I. 2002. Is
muscle power related to running speed with changes of
direction? Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness
42(3):282-288.
Young, W., Farrow, D., Pyne, D., McGregor, W., and Handke,
T. 2011. Validity and reliability of agility tests in junior
Australian football players. Journal of Strength and Condi-
tioning Research, 25(12):3399-3403.
205
 © Australian Institute of Sport. Do Not Copy.

View publication stats