Fitness Testing and Match Performance in NCAA Division III Women’s Lacrosse Original Research

Main Article Content

Jacob Beiting
Eric Schlenk
Greg Farnell

Keywords

linear speed, countermovement jump, talent identification

Abstract

Introduction: NCAA women’s lacrosse is an intermittent, high-intensity sport requiring a blend of aerobic capacity, anaerobic power, and sport-specific skills. While previous research has established fitness profiles for collegiate athletes, the direct relationship between physical testing metrics and match performance in Division III (DIII) programs remains under-explored. This study aimed to report fitness data for a DIII women’s lacrosse team and examine correlations between athleticism and in-game statistics.


Methods: Twenty-one female DIII lacrosse athletes (height 166.2±3.4 cm; body mass 68.8±11.1 kg) underwent fitness testing during the 2025 season. Assessments included twenty- and thirty-yard sprints (using infrared timing gates) and a countermovement jump (CMJ) on dual force plates. Match performance data, including goals, assists, ground balls, and starts, were collected over a 19-game season. Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r) were used to analyze relationships between fitness and performance variables.


Results: Significant correlations were observed between physical metrics and match performance (r=0.43–0.73, p<0.05). Thirty-yard sprint times and estimated top speed significantly correlated with games started, ground balls, and free position goals. CMJ metrics, specifically jump height, relative propulsive power, and modified reactive strength index (mRSI), demonstrated the strongest relationships, particularly with shots, goals, and turnovers. Stature showed no significant relationship with performance.


Conclusion: Sprint and CMJ metrics are moderate-to-strong predictors of match performance in DIII women’s lacrosse. These findings suggest that prioritizing relative power and acceleration may enhance on-field efficacy, providing coaches with objective benchmarks for roster decisions and talent identification.

Abstract 2 | PDF Downloads 1

References

1. Rosenborough C, Collins SM, Smith E, Bowman TG. Effects of Nontraditional Division III Lacrosse Participation on Movement Pattern Quality and Dynamic Postural Control. Int J Sports Phy. Ther. 19(4): 451-465, 2024.
2. Enemark-Miller EA, Seegmiller JG, Rana SR. Physiological profile of women's lacrosse players. J Strength Cond Res 23(1): 39–43, 2009.
3. Hoffman JR, Ratamess NA, Neese KL, et al. Physical performance characteristics in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division III champion female lacrosse athletes. J Strength Cond Res 23(5): 1524–1529, 2009.
4. Vescovi JD, Brown TD, Murray TM. Descriptive characteristics of NCAA Division I women lacrosse players. J Sci Med Sport 10(5): 334–340, 2007.
5. National Collegiate Athletic Association. 2024 and 2025 NCAA Women’s Lacrosse Rules. Indianapolis, IN: NCAA; 2023.
6. National Collegiate Athletic Association. 2024–2025 NCAA Division I Manual. Indianapolis, IN: NCAA; 2024. Bylaw 15.5.3.1.2.
7. National Collegiate Athletic Association. 2024–2025 NCAA Division II Manual. Indianapolis, IN: NCAA; 2024. Bylaw 15.4.2.1.2.
8. National Collegiate Athletic Association. 2024–2025 NCAA Division III Manual. Indianapolis, IN: NCAA; 2024. Bylaw 15.01.3.
9. Barnes JL, Schilling BK, Falvo MJ, et al. Relationship of jumping and agility performance in female volleyball athletes. J Strength Cond Res 21(4): 1192–1196, 2007.
10. Garstecki MA, Latin RW, Cuppett MM. Comparison of selected physical fitness and performance variables between NCAA Division I and II football players. J Strength Cond Res 18(2): 292–297, 2004.
11. Peterson BJ, Fitzgerald JS, Dietz CC, et al. Division I hockey players generate more power than Division III players during on- and off-ice performance tests. J Strength Cond Res 29(5): 1191–1196, 2015.
12. Devine NF, Hegedus EJ, Nguyen AD, Ford KR, Taylor JB. External match load in women's collegiate lacrosse. J Strength Cond Res 36(2): 503–507, 2022.
13. Gentry J, Bunn JA, Myers BJ. Quantification of workload across the careers of Division I women’s lacrosse athletes: A case series. Journal of Science in Sport and Exercise 7(3): 350–356, 2025.
14. National Collegiate Athletic Association. 2025 and 2026 NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Rules and Interpretations. Indianapolis, IN: NCAA; 2024.
15. Kuhlman NM, Jagim AR, Jones MT, Feit MK, Fields JB. A comparison of match external load demands across women's collegiate field sports. J Strength Cond Res 39(2): 234–241, 2025.
16. Ross A, Gill N, Cronin J, Malcata R. The relationship between physical characteristics and match performance in rugby sevens. Eur J Sport Sci 15(6): 565–571, 2015.
17. Smart D, Hopkins WG, Quarrie KL, Gill N. The relationship between physical fitness and game behaviours in rugby union players. Eur J Sport Sci 14(S1): S8–S17, 2011.
18. Vescovi JD. Sprint speed characteristics of high-level American female soccer players: Female Athletes in Motion (FAiM) study. J Sci Med Sport 15(5): 474–478, 2012.
19. Zabaloy S, Freitas TT, Carlos-Vivas J, et al. Estimation of maximum sprinting speed with timing gates: greater accuracy of 5-m split times compared to 10-m splits. Sports Biomech 23(3): 1–11, 2021.
20. Morin JB, Samozino P. Interpreting Power-Force-Velocity Profiles for Individualized and Specific Training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 11(2): 267–272, 2016.
21. Cuschieri S. The STROBE guidelines. Saudi J Anaesth. 13(1): S31-S34, 2019.

Similar Articles

11-19 of 19

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.