New Year’s Holiday Sale: ends december 31st
.png)
Most pitchers obsess over arm action, hip-shoulder separation, or how much their fastball spins. But what if a massive piece of the velocity puzzle, and perhaps even the key to protecting your elbow, starts way before your arm ever gets involved? What if all of these attributes could align or even solve themselves by simply understanding the role stride length plays in your delivery? A 2021 study published in the Journal of Sports Sciences by Manzi and colleagues examined 315 professional pitchers and discovered something that should fundamentally reshape how we think about mechanics. They found that stride length, specifically reaching 80% of your body height or more, acted as a threshold for velocity gains without corresponding increases in elbow varus torque. And honestly, the real story here isn't just about covering more ground. Longer striders restructured their entire rotational strategy, moving toward a pelvis-dominant, transverse-plane approach rather than relying on trunk flexion and sagittal compensations. Stride length doesn't just impact where you land. It determines how your body generates and transfers force from the ground all the way to the baseball.
So let's get into what these researchers actually discovered. They took 315 professional pitchers and divided them into four groups based on stride length as a percentage of body height. The shortest striders, sitting around 71.5%, threw noticeably slower than guys hitting 80% or more. We're talking about roughly 2 mph gained for every 10% increase in stride length.
But here's what caught my attention. Pitchers with longer strides reached foot contact with their pelvis rotated significantly more toward home plate. Longest striders had their pelvis at about 58 degrees from target, while shorter striders sat at 70 degrees, meaning their hips were way more closed. That extra rotation gave pitchers more time to turn the pelvis earlier and for a greater proportion of the delivery. Trunk rotation initiated about 4 milliseconds sooner for every 10% gain, and the torso rotated more aggressively in the transverse plane rather than collapsing into flexion.
Now here's what really matters. Despite throwing harder, these longer-striding pitchers didn't experience higher elbow varus torque when compared in groups. Guys at 71% versus 85% body height showed no significant difference in arm stress. So stride length at or above 80% represents a threshold where pitchers access more velocity through improved pelvis and trunk utilization without necessarily overloading the elbow.
To be honest, this reminds me of a 2025 study [Glover and colleagues] showing the drive leg generates linear momentum while the stride leg converts it to rotational power. Longer strides let both legs do their jobs more effectively. I also think about a 2024 study [Giordano and colleagues] finding that both "tall and fall" and "drop and drive" can work when stride mechanics are maintained individually. What matters is that stride enables efficient rotation.
But maintaining these mechanics requires endurance. A 2025 study [Johnson and colleagues] found that after just 35 pitches, pelvic rotation velocity dropped 2.3 degrees per second per pitch. When hips slow down, the trunk compensates, disrupting timing. Stride length only works if you can execute it repeatedly.
So what does this mean? Does this mean we start training every pitcher to have a longer stride? No, probably not. Especially when we look at evidence indicating stride lengths are likely interdependent with other mechanical and physical factors. But what we need to uncover is how we actually influence stride length in the first place.
While this study didn't uncover exactly that, I think we can deduce some aspects that might help. Things like ground reaction force from the back side, rotational velocities from the pelvis, and overall mobility and force output capacities. However, if there's not a one-size-fits-all stride length for each pitcher, then there's likely not a one-size-fits-all method to developing it either.
The professional pitchers who strode longer weren't just adding inches. They were buying time and space to rotate the pelvis more before foot contact, setting up the entire kinetic chain. That early pelvis rotation allowed the trunk to whip through with greater angular velocity while keeping the arm in a favorable position. The arm still accelerates violently, but as the final link in a chain already loaded by the legs and torso.
To be honest, this reminds me of a 2025 study [Barrack and colleagues] showing that physical qualities can significantly alter elbow torque at a given velocity. In 87 Division I pitchers, every 2.2 mph increase raised elbow torque by 1.8 Newton-meters, but that relationship wasn't fixed. Pitchers with stronger internal rotation and greater shoulder flexion experienced less torque at the same velocities. Stride length works the same way. It's a mechanical modification that changes the velocity-stress relationship, but only if the athlete's system can support it.
The foundation of a well-orchestrated approach is the ability to adapt a training philosophy to meet the athlete, not attempt to fit the athlete into a philosophy. So let's talk about how we actually approach stride length development.
First, measure your stride length during a bullpen by placing markers at your back foot at max leg lift and front foot at contact. Divide that distance by your height. Under 80%? There's likely room to explore. Already there? Focus on maintaining it under fatigue.
Here's where most people get this wrong. They assume stride length is just about flexibility or "getting longer." But it's not. Stride length is a neural expression. It's a well-orchestrated signal that affords the body to express high-quality intent. So while strength development is important, the application of force requires a highly coordinated movement strategy that times force application to maximize energy transfer. If it was just about linear movement, then jumping would be ideal. But it's not. It's about sequencing, timing, and coordinating rotational power through a longer lever.
So how do we develop this? First, we utilize self-exploration through constraints-led approaches or other skill acquisition principles. Instead of rigid drills, we create environments where the athlete discovers how to produce and control longer strides. We might manipulate mound distance, alter timing constraints between pitches, or introduce variable targets requiring different stride strategies. The goal is to let the nervous system solve the movement problem.
Second, we entrench autonomy into our program prescription by discussing the approach and objectives with the athlete and providing clear opportunities for them to weigh in. What feels sustainable? What creates repeatable timing? Where do they feel most balanced and explosive? These aren't just nice questions. They're essential to creating buy-in and allowing the athlete's system to self-organize.
On physical preparation, you need posterior chain capacity. Single-leg Romanian deadlifts, Bulgarian split squats, and step-ups build eccentric strength to control longer landing. The stride leg absorbs tremendous force at foot contact. If it buckles, rotational energy is wasted. Add plyometrics like broad jumps and rotational medball work to train explosive power, but always as building blocks, not the delivery itself.
Hip mobility matters, particularly internal rotation and hip flexion, but we explore ranges through movement variability, letting the athlete discover what positions afford the most power and control. Ankle dorsiflexion plays a role for the drive leg, addressed through loaded movement patterns.
But don't just chase length. Find the stride that lets you rotate your pelvis aggressively before foot contact while maintaining balance. Some max out at 82% and feel stable. Others push to 87%. The key is that stride supports rotational strategy, not hitting an arbitrary number.
Use video to check pelvis position at foot contact. If you're still 70+ degrees closed despite longer stride, you're not capitalizing on the time created. Remember, stride length interacts with everything else. Extending stride without adjusting trunk timing might increase arm stress. Let longer stride facilitate earlier pelvis rotation, allowing trunk to rotate through greater range with better timing.
Here's my opinion on all of this. Stride length isn't some magic bullet, but it's a variable we've likely been underscrutinizing in pitcher development. The research is clear that getting to 80% of body height or more creates a threshold where pitchers access higher velocities through better rotational sequencing, not increased arm stress. But the real value is understanding that stride length is part of a system, not an isolated metric.
My preferred strategy for analyzing stride length starts with simple measurement during live throwing, then moves into understanding what's limiting the athlete from crossing that 80% threshold. Is it mobility? Strength deficit in the posterior chain? A timing issue with early trunk rotation? Or fear-based compensation from previous pain? You need tools to uncover this. Force plates can reveal ground reaction forces and drive efficiency. Motion capture or mechanical analysis can show pelvis and trunk timing relative to foot contact. But even without these, a trained eye and good questioning can get you far.
The foundation of effective stride length development is recognizing it's not just about getting longer. It's about creating conditions where an athlete can explore, discover, and own a movement pattern that maximizes their kinetic chain without sacrificing control or durability. It's about giving them autonomy to find what works for their body while providing the scaffolding to support that exploration.
Stride length might not be the flashiest variable in pitching, but it's one of the most impactful when understood and developed correctly. Train the athlete, not the program. Build the system, not the position. And always remember that throwing hard is about how well you move, not just how hard you try.
.png)
.png)
.png)
