The effects and usefulness of active and passive static stretching have raised heated debates. Over the years, the pendulum has swung from a glorified vision to their vilification. As most of the times, the truth often lies somewhere in-between. But even if there was no controversy surrounding the effects of static and passive stretching (which there is), and even if their effects were homogeneously positive (which they are not), that would not be sufficient to make stretching mandatory for practicing physical exercise, for most populations. Amidst the many discussions, an important issue has remained underexplored: the prerequisites to answer the question “Can I?” are not sufficient to answer the question “Do I have to?”, especially when alternative interventions are available. In this current opinion paper, we address four potential applications of stretching: (i) warm-up; (ii) cool-down; (iii) range of motion; and (iv) injury risk. We argue that while stretching can be used in the warm-up and cool-down phases of the training, its inclusion is not mandatory, and its effectiveness is still questionable. Stretching can be used to improve range of motion, but alternative and effective interventions are available. The role of stretching in injury risk is also controversial, and the literature often misinterprets association with causation and assumes that stretching is the only intervention to improve flexibility and range of motion. Overall, the answer to the question “Can I stretch?” is “yes”. But the answer to the question “Do I have to?” is “no, not really”.
Effects Of Hip Range Of Motion On Balance With Presence Or Absence Of A Warm-up