Revisiting the 'Whys' and 'Hows' of the Warm-Up: Are We Asking the Right Questions?
Key Findings (content)
Warm-up is considered beneficial for raising body temperature, stimulating the neuromuscular system and preparing athletes for training and competition; even slight, transient benefits may improve preparedness for the effort that follows
Performance in training and competition is strongly shaped by contextual factors (e.g. how the opponent is acting), so it is not always clear which warm-up modalities, structure and load suit each athlete and context
The authors propose the warm-up as a pedagogical and training moment: a period to teach or improve skills or physical capacities, not only a preparation for the subsequent effort
The warm-up can serve several complementary goals (raising body temperature, neuromuscular activation, attentional focus) under many structures, modalities and loads
The call for individualized warm-ups should be paired with educating athletes to explore different tasks and loads, so they can take an active, informed part in deciding their own warm-up
Mechanism
Not an empirical paper; it argues from the existing warm-up literature that the "what works" question has no single answer and that individualization needs athlete education, not just prescription.
Practical Application
Afonso et al. 2024 (Sports Medicine commentary): warm-up benefits may be slight and transient but still worth having; because context (opponent, session demands) shapes performance, no single warm-up modality, structure or load fits every athlete — so treat the warm-up as a teaching and training window and educate athletes to explore and choose their own warm-up tasks and loads — an argument for individualization through athlete involvement, not a measured protocol.
Inference, not tested: use the warm-up minutes for something useful beyond warming up — a skill, mobility work, a cadence drill — the commentary's "pedagogical moment".
Not from this paper; the base's own practice: avoid over-complex pre-race routines that add fatigue; whatever is chosen should be rehearsed before an A-race.
Limitations
Commentary / current opinion — no data, no systematic search; positions are the authors' arguments
Gives no protocols, durations or effect sizes; its value is the framing (individualization + education)
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level
regraded 2026-09-27 from A: the DOI and PMID resolve to a commentary, not a systematic review; expert opinion without systematic method
Content correction 2026-09-27
The entry's title ("Effectiveness of Warm-Ups on Exercise Performance: A Critical and Narrative Systematic Review"), type ("Systematic Review"), page range and Key Results (methodological quality, confounding, temperature vs non-temperature evidence, publication bias) were NOT the paper at this DOI/PMID -> the DOI and PMID resolve to Afonso et al. 2024, a Sports Medicine commentary "Revisiting the 'Whys' and 'Hows' of the Warm-Up"; body rewritten to that paper's abstract.Byline was already Afonso J et al., 2024.
Level A -> C+ (commentary, expert opinion). Previous claims ("low-to-moderate methodological quality", "strong evidence for temperature-dependent benefits", "publication bias likely") removed as unsourced.