Does flexibility have a negative impact on power output?

[Scott Pelton-Stroud]

I recently started an internship with my school's Strength & Conditioning coach. I was speaking with him about power and explosiveness, and he mentioned that he felt elasticity played a significant role in an athlete's ability to produce power. In other words, he found that athletes who stretched too much and were "overly flexible" actually lost power (for example, a pitcher who spent his off season doing yoga came back with a slower pitch; he also referenced sprinters who could run fast but not touch their toes).

 

I know coach has pointed out that essentially no one out jumps his athletes, meaning they must have a good amount of power despite their flexibility (although I imagine their fantastic strength-to-weight ratio helps, too). 

 

Thoughts? Comments? Does anyone have evidence (anecdotal, scientific, anything) to the contrary or in support of this idea? 

 

(Please note this is focusing on the relationship between power and flexibility, not strength and flexibility)

[Ivan Pavlovic]

Im also curious about that. I heard many times that those who stretch to much are usualy slower in short distance sprinting.

[Brian Li]

It is true that too much flexibility will make your sprinting slower and I think it's the same for other movements.

[Keegan Yentsch]

I think it also depends on how you develop your flexibility and what type of flexibility you have though. For instance Olympic Weightlifters generally have great hip, ankle, shoulder, and spinal flexibility, but they are also generally very explosive (supposedly they even out sprint sprinters at very short distances and are great jumpers).

Sure, if someone only practices/develops passive relaxed flexibility (like your Baseball pitcher who did tons of Yoga in his off season) then they will probably lose explosiveness, but if someone develops dynamic flexibility, active flexibility, and strength through their passive ROM (eccentric flexibility), then they shouldn't lose explosiveness.

[Aaro Helander]

Generally, yes that is true. Now let me take the broscience to a whole new level:

 

I think of it like this: Two steps forward, one step back. You train (express) your "flexibility genes" and you improve in flexibility, and take a step back in strength and explosiveness.

 

Next, you train strength qualities to add up to the new range of motion you have developed, and the cycle goes on and on. The process is slower for developing each attribute, but your overall athletic ability increases at a steady speed and will be balanced (This is the point of the whole Foundation series).

 

So, it could be said that gymnasts have one of the highest overall athletic ability of all athletes. I would define athletic ability as the ability to simultaneously express multiple, sometimes contradicting genes related to physical performance.

 

A weightlifter needs to be just as flexible as is required to achieve the range of motion for a specific lift: Anything more will be detrimental to what he is trying to accomplish. Similarly, a sprinter needs to be just flexible enough, and nothing more. A gymnast, however, requires a lot more of his "athletic genes" to be expressed to achieve what he is trying to achieve, and that's why gymnastics is a very complex sport.

 

And the result of this kind of training is why all of us are on this forum wanting to learn this stuff.

 

All in all, yes, flexibility takes away from your explosiveness. But I would rather be a jack of all trades than be just as explosive as possible.

[Jan Reipert]

it depends where you are tight and where you are flexible.having flexible hip flexor for example wont decrease your power output. actually the opposite is quite true.

 

most oly lifters are also really flexible and stretch a lot: i would not call them not explosive