Strength as a measure of physical fitness Probably nowhere in physical education is there a greater controversy than in the area of fitness. Until the time comes when the definition of fitness is agreed upon and we have the instruments for objectively measuring it, there will continue to be confusion as to what is the best evaluative approach to this problem. By no means does this imply that we should delete appraisal of fitness from the program because the experts fail to agree. On the contrary, we must employ the best and most practical tests available in order to learn more and more about the appraisal of general fitness. We should definitely consider any disagreements in this vital area as challenges rather than inhibitions, and take it upon ourselves to use, study, evaluate, and improve our testing procedures. No one will deny that our present measuring instruments in the area of fitness are far superior to no measurement at all. There are numerous types of tests used in the evaluation of fitness. The majority fall into three groups: muscular performance, organic function, and a combination of the two. Muscular performance tests are tests of activities involving the large muscles of the body, such as running, pull-ups, dips, squat jumps, and broad jump. Examples of organic function tests include such items as pulse rate, pulse pressure, standing and sitting blood pressures, and energy cost of exercise. The third type includes tests in which the effects of a specific exercise are recorded in terms of pulse rate, pulse pressure, and blood pressure, usually both before and after exercise. Strength tests are one of the most practical measures to evaluate fitness of youngsters in schools. Today more and more emphasis seems to be placed on this type of test as a reflector of total fitness for the following reasons: (1) strength is a highly objective measure; (2) strength is affected by disease processes such as infected tonsils, cancers, ulcers, abscesses, and colds, which produce a systemic reaction; and (3) strength is affected by emotional problems. Objectivity of strength testing Strength is a highly objective measure, measurements indicate that consistent results can be obtained with a small margin of error. The reliable results may be obtained from tests of grip strength given over six days to children from two and one-half to six and one-half years of age, and that such results are no less reliable than those obtained when the test is administered to older children.		Home Components of Physical Fitness Clinical Examination Differences Between Fit and Unfit Men Physiological Elements of Fitness The Step Test The Effects of Training on the Physiological Systems Work Output Physical Condition of Muscle Application of Muscular Force Maintaining Optimum Strength Tests of Muscular Strength Strength and appearance Strength as a measure of physical fitness Strength as affected by organic problems Strength as prophylaxis Role of inactivity in production of disease Lack of Sociability in Work Lactic Acid System Muscular Form Capillary Growth Heart Size Heart Rate Training produces physicochemical changes Muscular Strength Nervous Stimulation and Muscular Strength Quality of Champions Factors Which Limit Skill Blood Supply Kinesthesis Balance Reaction Time Skill Muscular Tension Visual Aim Skill Center in the Brain Endurance for Exhaustive and Moderate Work Distribution of Energy