|
Training Camp Testing
The goal is not to win the month before camp. The goal is to show up ready to play hockey.
|
Welcome back to the Hockey Health Brief.
This week got away from me, so we are rolling with a special Saturday edition. I appreciate you being here and following along.
As training camp testing gets closer, it is easy for players and parents to put too much weight on the numbers. Testing matters, but it is not the whole story. Today, we are going to talk about how to prepare for testing without letting it take over the month, and more importantly, how to keep the focus where it belongs: becoming a better, healthier, more prepared hockey player on the ice.
Training camp testing makes players nervous. That is normal.
As camp gets closer, players start hearing about the 40-yard dash, jumps, shuttle runs, bike tests, body composition, strength numbers, mobility screens, on-ice sprints, repeated skate tests, and first skates with the team. Even confident athletes can start to feel like every workout is being judged.
That pressure can change the way players train. Instead of continuing with the plan, they start chasing more: more skates, more lifts, more conditioning, more testing, and more checking.
But as we talked about in the “Busy Doesn’t Mean Better” newsletter, more work is not automatically better work. The goal is not to win the month before camp. The goal is to show up ready to play hockey.
Testing matters, but hockey is still the test.
The big idea
| Testing can help identify |
Testing cannot fully measure |
| Speed, power, strength, conditioning, mobility, and body composition |
Hockey sense, compete, communication, decision-making, and trust |
| Physical qualities that may support skating performance |
How well a player reads pressure or adapts during a game |
| Areas that may need attention before camp workload increases |
Whether a player belongs or does not belong |
| Injury risk factors like hip/groin deficits or movement asymmetries |
The complete value of the athlete |
| Useful context for training decisions |
The whole season from one number |
Testing gives clues. The ice provides the more complete picture.
Testing is information, not identity
Testing can be useful. A sprint test can tell us something about acceleration. A jump test can tell us something about lower-body power. A shuttle test can tell us something about change of direction. Conditioning testing can give insight into repeat-effort ability. Hip and ankle range of motion can help identify how well a player accesses key skating positions and whether certain areas may need more attention before workload ramps up.
All of that information has value, but none of it tells the whole story.
A test does not show how a player reads pressure, wins a puck battle, supports a teammate, recovers after a mistake, communicates on the ice, or adapts to coaching. It does not fully capture hockey sense, compete level, or trust.
So the goal is not to dismiss testing. The goal is to put it in the right place.
Testing can help identify physical qualities that support performance. It can also help flag areas that may become a problem when camp volume increases. But testing does not determine the level of hockey player someone is.
It gives direction. It should not steal confidence.
If you have been following along, you are in a good spot
If you have been following these newsletters throughout the summer, you have already been building the right foundation.
We have talked about why busy does not mean better. We have talked about managing workload instead of simply stacking more sessions. We have covered hip, groin, and core health. We have talked about recovery, sleep, hydration, nutrition, and the importance of building a body that can tolerate the demands of hockey.
That work matters now.
Training camp is not just about testing well. It is about being ready to skate, compete, recover, and stay healthy once the schedule ramps up.
A player who has trained consistently, recovered well, maintained hip and groin capacity, and avoided the trap of panic volume is in a good position to shine. Not just during testing, but where it really matters: on the ice.
What the tests can actually tell us
Testing gets overvalued when every number feels like a final answer. It becomes more useful when we understand what each test is trying to measure and how that quality may show up in hockey.
| Test area |
What it may tell us |
How it may show up on the ice |
Important reminder |
| Off-ice sprint testing |
Acceleration and speed potential |
Winning races, closing gaps, separating from pressure |
Sprinting is not skating, but it can support skating speed |
| On-ice sprint testing |
Skating acceleration and top-end speed |
First steps, straight-line speed, separation |
This is closer to the actual hockey demand |
| Jump testing |
Lower-body power |
First steps, battles, shot power, explosive transitions |
A jump score matters most when power transfers to hockey |
| Conditioning testing |
General repeat-effort ability and recovery |
Maintaining quality across shifts, drills, and practices |
Conditioning supports hockey. It does not replace hockey |
| On-ice repeated sprint testing |
Shift-to-shift skating fatigue |
Repeating high-speed efforts without mechanics falling apart |
This is one of the key areas off-ice testing may miss |
| Agility testing |
Change-of-direction ability |
Direction changes, body control, transitions |
Hockey agility also requires edges, reads, deception, and puck awareness |
| On-ice agility / cornering |
Skating-specific turning, edge control, and transitions |
Holding speed through turns and changing direction on edges |
This may be more meaningful than off-ice agility alone |
| Hip and ankle testing |
Usable range, strength through range, and position access |
Stride width, edge control, crouched posture, force transfer |
Mobility matters most when the player can use it |
| Movement screening |
Asymmetries, control, and mobility restrictions |
Workload tolerance and injury risk management |
Screens guide training. They do not define ability |
| Body composition |
Lean mass, body fat, and maturation profile |
Strength-to-mass ratio, speed, durability, and development |
Body composition is context, not a character judgment |
Off-ice sprint tests, including the 40-yard dash and resisted sprint variations, have shown relationships with on-ice skating speed and acceleration in hockey players.[1,2] That matters because players need to win races, close gaps, separate from pressure, and create space.
But sprinting is not skating. On-ice speed also depends on edges, stride mechanics, timing, hip position, ankle position, stiffness, confidence, and decision-making. A fast sprint time can give a player more physical tools, but it does not automatically make them effective in a game.
Jump testing is similar. Vertical and broad jump tests can provide useful information about lower-body power, and research has connected these tests to on-ice sprint performance.[3,4] Power matters in hockey. It shows up in first steps, battles, separation, shot mechanics, and the ability to create force quickly. But a jump score still only matters if the athlete can express that power in hockey situations.
Conditioning tests are often the ones players fear most because they are uncomfortable, public, and easy to compare. But the purpose of conditioning testing should not be punishment. The real question is whether the athlete can recover between efforts and maintain quality across repeated shifts, drills, and practices.
That matters because hockey is not one sprint. It is repeated bursts of high-intensity work layered with skill, contact, decision-making, and recovery. Conditioning supports hockey. It does not replace hockey.
Why on-ice testing matters
Off-ice testing can tell us a lot, but it cannot fully recreate hockey. That is why on-ice testing matters.
On-ice tests capture performance dimensions that off-ice tests cannot always replicate, especially repeated-shift fatigue, backward skating, skating-specific agility, cornering, and intermittent endurance.[5–7]
That does not make off-ice testing useless. It just means it is incomplete.
A player can be powerful off the ice and still struggle to express that power on edges. A player can test well in a straight-line sprint and still struggle with turns, transitions, or backward skating. A player can have a strong bike or Wingate score and still fade during repeated on-ice efforts.
That is why the best testing picture usually includes both.
Off-ice testing helps identify the physical engine. On-ice testing shows how that engine performs in hockey.
For example, a 30-meter on-ice sprint can capture acceleration and top-end skating speed. A 30-meter backward sprint can provide information that is especially relevant for defensemen. On-ice pro-agility and cornering tests give a better look at edge control and change of direction. Repeated sprint skate tests help show whether a player can keep producing high-speed efforts as fatigue builds. The Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Ice Hockey Test gives a more hockey-specific look at intermittent endurance than a general run or bike test.[5,8–10]
Those tests are closer to hockey, but they still are not hockey. A player still has to read pressure, manage the puck, win battles, communicate, make decisions, and earn trust.
The test gives information. The game gives the answer.
Benchmarks are context, not a scoreboard
Benchmarks can be helpful, but they need to be handled carefully.
A published number can give context. It can help a player understand what certain levels tend to look like physically. It can help coaches and performance staff identify where an athlete may need more development. It can also flag areas that may increase injury risk when workload ramps up.
But a benchmark is not a label. It should not be used to tell a player, “You are good,” or “You are not good.”
It should be used to ask a better question.
A slower sprint time may point toward acceleration, strength, skating mechanics, or fatigue. A lower jump score may point toward power, training age, body composition, or simply a physical quality that is not the main driver of that player’s role. Limited hip abduction or a poor adductor-to-abductor strength ratio may say more about injury risk and camp durability than whether someone can play the game.
That is the value of testing. It gives direction, but it should not become a scoreboard for the athlete’s identity.
A few useful numbers, with the right lens
| Area |
Useful context from the literature |
How to use it |
| Vertical jump |
Around 50 cm has separated elite from subelite male players in some cohorts [4] |
Use as context for lower-body power, not proof of hockey ability |
| 5-10-5 agility |
Elite senior male players have been reported around 4.76 seconds in one cohort [4] |
Use to understand change-of-direction qualities, not full hockey agility |
| VO₂max |
Professional players often appear to need a threshold around 55–60 mL/kg/min, but higher is not always linearly better [11,12] |
Use as a minimum capacity marker, not a ranking system |
| 30-m on-ice sprint |
Elite players have been reported around 4.49 seconds, with subelite players closer to 4.71 seconds in one cohort [5] |
Use as skating-speed context, not a complete hockey ranking |
| Yo-Yo IR1-IH |
Elite players have been reported around 2,434 m compared with 1,850 m for subelite players [4,5] |
Use as hockey-specific intermittent endurance context |
| Hip ADD:ABD ratio |
A ratio below 0.80 has been linked with much higher adductor strain risk in professional hockey players [13] |
Use to guide groin durability work before camp |
| Hip abduction ROM |
Reduced hip abduction ROM has been associated with later noncontact hip/groin injury in hockey athletes [14] |
Use to identify who may need hip/groin strength-through-range work |
| Ankle dorsiflexion |
Dorsiflexion has been associated with peak skating velocity in national-level hockey athletes [15] |
Use to support skating position and force transfer |
| FMS / Y-balance |
Movement screens can help identify deficits and asymmetries, but should not be used alone to define readiness [16,17] |
Use to guide training, not label the player |
| Body composition |
Lower body fat and higher lean mass have been associated with faster skating and higher-level physical profiles [18,19] |
Use as developmental context, not as a judgment of character or skill |
These numbers can be useful, but only when they are used with the right lens. They are training information, not a verdict.
Why hip and ankle mobility matter for skating
The hip and ankle pieces are especially important because they connect testing to both performance and injury risk.
Hockey skating requires the hips to move through large ranges of motion. The stride demands hip abduction, extension, rotation, and the ability to produce force while the leg is moving away from the body. That last part is important. It is not just whether a player has range. It is whether they can create force through that range.
Research in hockey athletes has shown that hip strength measured at skating-specific joint angles can explain meaningful differences in sprint acceleration and change-of-direction performance.[20] That matters because traditional testing in neutral positions may miss what actually happens during skating.
For hockey players, the hip and groin are not just mobility areas. They are performance areas. They help create stride width, force production, edge control, recovery positions, and repeatability. They also help protect the athlete when training camp volume increases quickly.
This is why our previous hip, groin, and core work matters so much. A player who has maintained adductor strength, hip control, trunk control, and strength through range is not just checking an injury-prevention box. They are building the physical qualities that support skating.
The ankle matters too, even though the evidence is not as strong as it is for the hip. Ankle dorsiflexion has been associated with peak skating velocity in national-level hockey athletes, likely because it helps the athlete access efficient skating positions and transfer force through the boot.[15]
The hockey skate does limit ankle motion, so this is not the same as running or jumping in a shoe. But ankle mobility still matters for how an athlete positions their lower body, manages the crouched skating posture, and expresses force inside the boot.
The goal is not random mobility for the sake of mobility. The goal is usable range that supports the positions hockey requires.
The mistake: letting testing take over training
The biggest mistake players make is turning the final month into a constant tryout.
They run the conditioning test too often. They time every sprint. They max every jump. They treat every lift like it has to prove they are ready. Instead of training the qualities that support performance, they start chasing numbers every day.
That usually does not build confidence. It builds noise.
Testing too often can create fatigue, soreness, anxiety, and frustration. It can also pull attention away from the actual goal, which is becoming more ready to play hockey.
A player does not get better at a conditioning test just by running the test every few days. They get better by developing the qualities underneath it: aerobic support, repeat sprint ability, recovery between efforts, acceleration, strength, power, hip and groin capacity, skating efficiency, and confidence with the format.
That is the difference between preparation and panic. Testing should guide preparation. It should not hijack it.
A better one-month approach
If a player has about a month before camp, the plan should be simple: learn what will be tested, train the qualities underneath those tests, rehearse the format enough that it feels familiar, and then reduce volume as camp gets closer so the body can express what has been built.
| Timeline |
Main focus |
What to do |
What to avoid |
| 4 weeks out |
Learn what matters |
Understand the tests and what qualities they measure |
Randomly adding more work without knowing the target |
| 3 weeks out |
Train the qualities |
Build speed, power, repeat-effort ability, strength, hip/groin capacity, and usable mobility |
Running the test every few days just to check |
| 2 weeks out |
Rehearse the format |
Practice warm-up, pacing, equipment, nutrition, hydration, and mental reset |
Treating every session like the actual tryout |
| Final week |
Express readiness |
Reduce volume, keep speed, stay sharp, sleep well, eat normally |
Panic conditioning, new exercises, new gear, or chasing soreness |
Four weeks out, the athlete should understand what actually matters. A repeat sprint test is not the same as a long aerobic test. A broad jump is not the same as a vertical jump. A hip screen is not the same as a strength test. Once the player understands what is being measured, the training can become more specific without becoming frantic.
Three weeks out, the focus should be on training the qualities. Sprint testing should be supported by high-quality acceleration work. Jump testing should be supported by power work and freshness. Conditioning testing should be supported by repeat-effort ability and pacing. Hip and ankle screens should be supported by usable range, strength, and control.
This is where “busy does not mean better” matters again. If every day is hard, the athlete may lose the quality they are trying to build. Speed drops when fatigue builds. Power drops when the legs are heavy. Confidence drops when every session becomes another test.
Two weeks out, the athlete should rehearse the format. That means practicing the warm-up, the pacing, the order, the shoes or skates, the pre-test meal, the hydration plan, and the mental reset between events. This is especially helpful for athletes who get anxious, because anxiety gets worse when everything feels unknown.
The final week is not the time to build fitness. It is the time to express fitness.
Tapering research generally supports reducing training volume while maintaining enough intensity to stay sharp.[21,22] For hockey players, that means short speed exposures can stay. Light strength can stay. Mobility, activation, and skill touches can stay.
But this is not the time for a brutal conditioning session, a new lift, new skates, a new supplement, or a panic workout.
Fresh beats fried. The athlete should leave sessions feeling like they could have done more.
What it looks like to shine on the ice
Testing may be part of camp, but on-ice performance is still the goal.
| Camp behavior |
Why it matters |
| Starting drills with pace |
Shows readiness and confidence |
| Recovering well between reps |
Shows conditioning that transfers to hockey |
| Maintaining skating quality as fatigue builds |
Shows durability and repeatability |
| Using strong edges and body control |
Shows usable strength, mobility, and skill |
| Competing in battles |
Shows physical qualities in a hockey context |
| Communicating and learning quickly |
Shows coachability and trust |
| Staying available and healthy |
Shows the body is prepared for camp volume |
That is what preparation is for. A number can open a conversation. The ice confirms the player.
What parents should remember
Parents feel testing too. Sometimes more than the player.
The best thing parents can do is lower the emotional temperature around testing. Help with food, hydration, sleep, rides, and logistics. Those things matter more than another car-ride breakdown of how the skate went.
| Helpful parent support |
Usually not helpful |
| Make sure the athlete has food, fluids, and gear ready |
Asking for every score immediately |
| Help protect sleep and routine |
Comparing them to another player |
| Keep the car ride calm |
Turning one test into a season prediction |
| Encourage effort and preparation |
Giving technical corrections right after testing |
| Remind them to move to the next thing |
Making testing feel bigger than hockey |
A better message is simple: prepare well, compete hard, learn from it, and then move to the next thing.
That keeps testing in perspective.
Key takeaways
| Takeaway |
What it means |
| Testing gives information |
It helps identify physical qualities, but it does not define the player |
| Hockey gives the answer |
On-ice performance is still the bigger picture |
| Off-ice testing has value |
It helps identify the physical engine |
| On-ice testing matters too |
It shows how that engine performs in hockey |
| More is not always better |
Panic volume can create fatigue instead of readiness |
| Train the qualities |
Speed, power, repeatability, strength, mobility, and recovery all matter |
| Hip and ankle range matter |
Usable range can support skating positions, force transfer, and durability |
| Benchmarks are context |
They should guide training, not label the athlete |
| The final week should feel sharp |
Reduce volume, keep speed, and avoid last-minute changes |
| Parents can lower the pressure |
Calm support beats post-test interrogation |
The bottom line
Testing is coming, and testing does matter. But testing is not the season.
The goal is to prepare for testing without letting testing take over the month. Learn what is being measured. Train the qualities underneath it. Keep the focus on the ice. Protect recovery. Maintain hip, groin, and ankle capacity. Do not confuse more work with better work.
If you have followed along this summer, especially with the “Busy Doesn’t Mean Better” message, you are already in a good spot. You have been building the habits that matter: consistent training, smarter load management, better recovery, and a body that is more prepared for the demands of hockey.
That will help in testing. More importantly, it will help when hockey starts.
Because the goal is not just to test well. The goal is to play well, stay healthy, and be ready to earn trust when the puck drops.
Testing gives information. Hockey gives the answer.
References
- Janot JM, Beltz NM, Dalleck LD. Multiple Off-Ice Performance Variables Predict On-Ice Skating Performance in Male and Female Division III Ice Hockey Players. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine. 2015;14(3):522–529.
- Thompson KMA, Safadie A, Ford J, Burr JF. Off-Ice Resisted Sprints Best Predict All-Out Skating Performance in Varsity Hockey Players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2022;36(9):2597–2601.
- Delisle-Houde P, Chiarlitti NA, Reid RER, Andersen RE. Predicting On-Ice Skating Using Laboratory- and Field-Based Assessments in College Ice Hockey Players. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2019;14(9):1184–1189.
- Vigh-Larsen JF, Beck JH, Daasbjerg A, et al. Fitness Characteristics of Elite and Subelite Male Ice Hockey Players: A Cross-Sectional Study. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2019;33(9):2352–2360.
- Vigh-Larsen JF, Haverinen MT, Panduro J, et al. On-Ice and Off-Ice Fitness Profiles of Elite and U20 Male Ice Hockey Players of Two Different National Standards. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2020;34(12):3369–3376.
- Legerlotz K, Kittelmann J, Dietzel M, Wolfarth B, Böhlke N. Ice Hockey-Specific Repeated Shuttle Sprint Test Performed on Ice Should Not Be Replaced by Off-Ice Testing. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2022;36(4):1071–1076.
- Peterson BJ, Fitzgerald JS, Dietz CC, et al. Off-Ice Anaerobic Power Does Not Predict On-Ice Repeated Shift Performance in Hockey. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2016;30(9):2375–2381.
- Bond CW, Bennett TW, Noonan BC. Evaluation of Skating Top Speed, Acceleration, and Multiple Repeated Sprint Speed Ice Hockey Performance Tests. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2018;32(8):2273–2283.
- Hajek F, Keller M, Taube W, et al. Testing-Specific Skating Performance in Ice Hockey. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2021;35(Suppl 12):S70–S75.
- Lignell E, Fransson D, Krustrup P, Mohr M. Analysis of High-Intensity Skating in Top-Class Ice Hockey Match-Play in Relation to Training Status and Muscle Damage. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2018;32(5):1303–1310.
- Ferland PM, Marcotte-L’Heureux V, Roy P, et al. Maximal Oxygen Consumption Requirements in Professional North American Ice Hockey. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2021;35(6):1586–1592.
- Cohen JN, Thompson KMA, Jamnik VK, Gledhill N, Burr JF. Relationship of Fitness Combine Results and National Hockey League Performance: A 25-Year Analysis. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2022;17(6):908–916.
- Tyler TF, Nicholas SJ, Campbell RJ, McHugh MP. The Association of Hip Strength and Flexibility With the Incidence of Adductor Muscle Strains in Professional Ice Hockey Players. American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2001;29(2):124–128.
- Secomb JL, Kelly M, Dascombe BJ. Hip Strength Profiling of Ice Hockey Athletes Across Various Joint-Specific Angles: Monitoring and Injury Implications. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2023;37(7):e422–e429.
- Secomb JL, Davidson DW, Compton HR. Relationships Between Sprint Skating Performance and Insole Plantar Forces in National-Level Hockey Athletes. Gait & Posture. 2024;113:436–442.
- Rowan CP, Kuropkat C, Gumieniak RJ, Gledhill N, Jamnik VK. Integration of the Functional Movement Screen Into the National Hockey League Combine. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2015;29(5):1163–1171.
- Chang WD, Chou LW, Chang NJ, Chen S. Comparison of Functional Movement Screen, Star Excursion Balance Test, and Physical Fitness in Junior Athletes With Different Sports Injury Risk. BioMed Research International. 2020;2020:8690540.
- Chiarlitti NA, Delisle-Houde P, Reid RER, Kennedy C, Andersen RE. Importance of Body Composition in the National Hockey League Combine Physiological Assessments. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2018;32(11):3135–3142.
- Czeck MA, Roelofs EJ, Dietz C, Bosch TA, Dengel DR. Body Composition and On-Ice Skate Times for NCAA Division I Collegiate Male and Female Ice Hockey Athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2022;36(1):187–192.
- Secomb JL, Dascombe BJ, Nimphius S. Importance of Joint Angle-Specific Hip Strength for Skating Performance in Semiprofessional Ice Hockey Athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2021;35(9):2599–2603.
- Mujika I, Padilla S. Scientific Bases for Precompetition Tapering Strategies. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2003;35(7):1182–1187.
- Bosquet L, Montpetit J, Arvisais D, Mujika I. Effects of Tapering on Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2007;39(8):1358–1365.
|
