At what point did assessing somebody's movement become more complicated than actually training them?
Somewhere along the way, we've found ourselves between a rock and a hard place with movement assessments.
On one end, we have personal trainers pretending to be physical therapists, conducting elaborate table tests that look more like a clinical examination than a personal training session.
On the other, we have functional movement screens that seem designed to make the assessor look smart rather than tell us anything useful about the person being assessed.
In both cases, we're often manufacturing problems that may not even exist, only to turn around and sell people the solutions to the very problems we've convinced them they have.
Meanwhile, the person standing in front of us probably just wants to move better, feel better, and build some muscle. Why don't we spend more time assessing the things that actually matter to them?
Now, this isn't to undersell the importance of having a sharp coach's eye or being able to assess movement in tremendous detail. Quite the opposite.
But here's where I diverge from the consensus: we've gotten so caught up in assessing individual movements that we've lost sight of assessing movement itself.
If we understand the fundamental movement qualities associated with the exercises we're already going to be doing, along with how to regress and progress those exercises, why do we need to create an entirely separate process to assess them?
For today, I'll give you two of my favorite lower-body exercises to assess movement.
1. The Stationary Lunge
First and foremost, are we even strong enough to do a lunge?
Can we organize ourselves with a limited base of support, and are we strong enough to actually resist our own body weight against gravity?
If we can check that box, we can start working down the list:
How do we organize the rib cage and pelvis?
How do we manage weight distribution between the two legs?
Can we access the frontal plane at the front hip (IR)?
Can we access true hip extension on the back leg?
Can we manage some degree of rotation at the pelvis around that fixed femur on the front leg?
Did anyone say foot pressure?
Now, circling back, is this a lazy assessment?
Fuck no.
There are a lot of moving parts, and we're paying incredible attention to detail. But we're using the exercise as an opportunity to assess movement, rather than treating somebody's ability to perform that particular exercise as the assessment itself.
2. The Hinge
My second favorite lower-body assessment is some variation of a hinge.
This could be a dumbbell RDL, or it could be as basic as asking somebody to touch their toes.
A hinge is going to be one of our best opportunities to assess somebody's ability to load their hip extensors.
As the pelvis translates backward, can we:
Find and maintain midfoot pressure?
Achieve IR up the chain?
Maintain a stacked rib cage over the pelvis?
Dissociate posterior translation of the pelvis from posterior translation of the knees?
If we can achieve these things, congrats. We can really load our glutes and use this movement skill set to train similar qualities across a variety of other exercises.
None of these observations automatically tells me that somebody has a dysfunction. They're simply giving me information about how that person organizes movement and what I might want to adjust as we begin training to improve their motor skills.
Assessment Is Part of Training
Now, as you can likely tell, some variation of each of these could easily become part of our first training session.
In some way, shape, or form, we can choose an appropriate variation of these exercises based on information we already know before the client even walks into the gym.
Assuming we've conducted a good intake, like we should have, I could theoretically know that a reasonable starting point for my client is a heels-elevated counterbalance squat, a supported stationary lunge, and maybe simply watching them perform a toe touch before we hop on the leg press.
But this isn't a rigid assessment.
If they demonstrate enough competency with the counterbalance squat, I could easily progress them to a goblet squat from set to set.
If they demonstrate some basic competency with the toe touch, I could add weight and have them perform an RDL.
If they're proficient enough with the supported stationary lunge, I could take away the support.
All within the same session.
Not only are we assessing how someone moves, but we're actively looking for an appropriate starting point for their training.
And that starting point can change as we learn more about them.
The Bigger Picture
The point here isn't that everybody needs to be assessed with a stationary lunge, a hinge, or any other specific exercise.
It's that we should understand the movement qualities associated with the exercises we're prescribing well enough to gather useful information while we're actually coaching them.
If somebody needs additional support, we give it to them. If they demonstrate enough competency to progress, we progress them. If something looks off, we have an opportunity to investigate it further.
And importantly, none of this requires us to stop assessing once the first session is over.
Every exercise, every set, and every adjustment we make is another opportunity to learn something about the person we're coaching.
We don't need more sophisticated assessment protocols or "systems." We need coaches who understand movement well enough to assess it while they're actually coaching.
If you're a coach struggling to assess movement, troubleshoot exercises, or figure out what your clients actually need, let's work on it. Bring me your clients, programs, and questions, we'll work through them together. Book a free coach advisory call.
Get the next article a week early. Subscribe to the Unbranded Performance newsletter.