Fascia & Forces (Part 1)

The Modern Force Landscape: Understanding the Balance of Performance and Injury Prevention

Over the last two decades, athletes across various sports and levels have produced more force at higher velocities and frequencies than ever before. While this progress is encouraging for human performance, it comes with consequences. Early sport specialization and narrow training parameters have led to athletes expressing forces at higher magnitudes but with less variability. This shift is problematic. We've engineered power and precision, but the adaptability bandwidth is shrinking. What was once a broad, dynamic system is now increasingly rigid, optimized for linear force rather than distributed resilience.

Alongside these increases in physical capacity, non-contact soft-tissue injuries have surged over the last two decades (see sites in the above graphic). The question isn't just why these injuries occur, but more importantly, what role have we played in this, and what can we do about it? Modern training often emphasizes precision—focusing on “sport-specific” loading—while largely neglecting the connective tissue layers that transmit, share, and dissipate those forces. While precise inputs are essential for improving physical capacities, we must balance stress inputs for health and longevity. Performance isn't solely determined by capacities and outputs but also by the ability to tolerate variability and demonstrate physical resiliency.

We’ve built a generation of athletes capable of generating extraordinary force but managing it poorly. Velocity is up, intent is high, precision is narrow—and adaptability is fleeting. The modern performance model rewards output while ignoring efficiency. However, the cost is borne by the very tissues responsible for transmitting and distributing load. Muscular systems have been engineered for horsepower, yet the connective web that modulates those forces has lagged behind. Fascia is often overlooked in performance settings, especially when discussing forces and physical outputs. We need to recognize that, despite being somewhat intangible, fascia plays a critical role as the body’s mechanical interface—the medium through which forces are directed, delayed, and dispersed. When that interface loses its ability to tune, the entire system loses tempo.

The Human Resonance System

So, where does fascia fit into this conversation about precision and balance? The easiest way to illustrate this is by viewing fascia as our biological resonance system, the integrative link between health and performance. Fascia sits at the center of this imbalance and speaks directly to how forces are experienced throughout the body. As a collective integrated connective tissue system, fascia serves as the mechanical interface through which the body manages energy. It acts as the invisible governor that attunes how force is produced, transmitted, and attenuated.

If musculotendinous structures are the engine, myofascial structures are the suspension. Think of our fascial system—an epimuscular network of connective tissue—as attuning harmony and coordination of movement. Fascia strongly influences whether forces facilitate movement or contribute to breakdown. Every tissue has a natural resonance frequency—its preferred rhythm of oscillation based on density, stiffness, and hydration (5,9,10). When the frequencies of muscle, fascia, tendon, and bone align, energy flows cleanly through the system. When they diverge, forces amplify instead of propagating; vibration turns into friction, and efficiency gives way to irritation. This is the human resonance system—a dynamic frequency network where fascia acts as a mechanical regulator. It accentuates what’s efficient and attenuates what’s excessive. Mechanically:

• Too much stiffness: Force travels rapidly but loses diffusion—power without control.

• Too little stiffness: Force dissipates prematurely—energy leaks without effect.

• Optimal resonance: Force oscillates through the entire system—efficient, coordinated, sustainable.

  
  

Fascia governs this tuning through its viscoelastic, rate-dependent nature (6, 9). It tightens under speed, softens with time, and constantly recalibrates based on input. Schleip (2023) described this as mechanical intelligence—a living network adjusting in microseconds to keep energy coherent. Healthy fascia doesn’t simply connect; it coordinates intrinsic and extrinsic forces throughout the body. When that resonance fades, so does the athlete’s ability to distribute stress, and the margin for error collapses. Although largely intangible for most coaches and practitioners, we need to understand that resonance isn’t supplemental to, but deeply integrated with mechanics.

Fascia is rate sensitive, meaning that at high velocities, it behaves like an elastic transmitter—stiff, quick, and reactive (this speaks to the viscous properties of the tissue). Under sustained or eccentric load, it exhibits thixotropic behavior: viscosity decreases with motion, improving glide and promoting reorganization of the collagen lattice (3, 6, 9). This is why slow, deliberate loading is essential for fascial health. It drives tissue remodeling, enhances eccentric capacity, and refines the ability to attenuate force efficiently.

So yes, rapid movement teaches fascia to recoil, but slow tension teaches it to reorganize. Both are vital expressions of mechanical intelligence. The hierarchy of stiffness defines the flow of risk. The tissue that adapts fastest, or becomes the dominant conduit for load, often carries the greatest vulnerability when the system detunes. What appears “strong” may simply be the least compliant path left available. It’s not the force that breaks the system; it’s the rate of force applied in conjunction with where the force goes when balance is lost. Resonance defines the quality of our force experience; stiffness dictates its direction. Together, they determine how an athlete stores, steers, and sustains energy.

Force Follows Stiffness

Ultimately, forces are transmitted throughout the body by way of the stiffest available pathways. Similar to how electricity flows through a conduit, the stiffest tissue—or segments of tissue—will be the predominant conductors for mechanical force transmission. Although myofascial tissue is much more compliant than myotendinous tissue, the regional tensioning of epimuscular connective tissue directly influences the stiffness properties of adjacent musculotendinous structures. This explains why localized motor impairment or acute pain/sensitivity is typically associated with fascial stiffness. When fascia becomes overly stiff (i.e., increased viscosity, adhesive), the compliance of the tissue is compromised. This creates undue stress on adjacent musculotendinous structures due to interference with their length-tension relationships. Collectively, this incoherence of force transmission impairs motor output and promotes compensatory strategies or pathways.

Thus, myofascial structures are inextricably significant for how forces are transmitted throughout the body. This isn’t philosophy; it’s physics, and something renowned researcher Keith Baar has spoken about for decades (1, 3, 7). Force travels through the path of least resistance, which, in this context, is the greatest rigidity. Whether that stiffness arises from collagen cross-linking, neural tone, or accumulated scarring, it dictates the route of stress. When one region becomes disproportionately rigid, the system reorganizes around it. Eventually, the tissue that stiffens first, or most frequently, becomes the one most inclined to fail due to load imbalances.

The Fascial Force Network

Force does not move linearly through the body. It spirals, shears, and radiates across an interconnected web of tissues (5, 8, 10). This reinforces the idea that myofascial tissue is not superior or supplemental to other connective tissue structures. The key point to understand is that each connective tissue system/structure plays a specific role in the body, and the myofascial system just happens to be the one we’ve understood and appreciated the least.

• Myotendinous pathways transmit force directly to bone.

• Myofascial pathways distribute tension laterally between fibers and compartments.

• Epimuscular connections bridge across muscles and joints, allowing energy to traverse the entire limb.

  
  

Finni (2023), among others, have proposed that up to 40 percent of muscular force moves through these non-tendinous routes. When these gliding layers densify, lose hydration, or become mechanically “sticky,” the network loses its diffusion capacity. Stress concentrates; variability disappears; resilience fades. Fascia operates less like a spring and more like a dynamic filter—a living material that smooths, redirects, and times the release of mechanical energy. When it’s supple and coherent, movement looks effortless. When it’s chaotic or densified, motion becomes noisy and inefficient. Performance isn’t just about creating force; it’s about conducting it.

And here may be the operative point of this article: since 2000, we have seen a clear disproportionate rise in soft tissue injuries in sport, affecting most sports across all levels. This is a multifactorial consequence of modernized training applications and logistics of sport. Many variables beyond the scope of this discussion need to be considered. But to put it simply, my theory is that we have outpaced our ability to improve human physical capacities relative to our ability to manage them—and THIS is where the fascia points are unmistakably significant. We don’t need to shy away from high force loading or high-velocity exposures; we need to recalibrate the demand for appropriate balance within the performance setting. Keeping athletes healthy doesn’t require taking more time off or being overly cautious about load exposures. Instead, we must understand how and when athletes should be loaded, not if at all.

Strength is a construct—a variable expression more than a single outcome measure. We’ve reached a threshold where force production outpaces force management, and it shows up in every injury report in sport. We have been misled by overweighting the ‘measurables’ of performance in an effort to validate our work as performance specialists. The cost of this has been athletes who can produce tremendous forces but at the expense of availability and longevity. An athlete’s strength is only as valuable as their ability to express it—namely within the context of sport. When athletes are robust in specific and controlled force expressions but lack the dexterity to demonstrate that strength in variable or uncontrolled settings, we miss the plot. This is the major pitfall of being too rigid in our training; we become negligent to the significance of movement bandwidth. This internal disharmony in our contractile and connective tissue development is, in my opinion, a primary driver for the unmitigated rise in non-contact soft tissue injuries. Taking a more myofascially driven approach to training can provide a stopgap to this growing disproportion.

{A practical follow-up to this article will be posted soon}

References

1. Baar, K. (2017). Training and nutrition to improve connective tissue quality: Implications for injury prevention and rehabilitation. Sports Medicine, 47(1 Suppl 1), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0696-3

2. Benjamin, M., & Ralphs, J. R. (2008). The structure of tendons and ligaments. Journal of Anatomy, 212(3), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7580.2008.00864.x

3. Baar, K., & Kjaer, M. (2016). The structure–function relationship of muscle and tendon. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 26(4), 541–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12603

4. Brophy, R. H., Chehab, E. L., et al. (2022). Injury trends in professional baseball: A 20-year review of the Major League Baseball disabled list. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 50(2), 450–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465211041560

5. Fung, Y. C. (1993). Biomechanics: Mechanical Properties of Living Tissues (2nd ed.). Springer-Verlag.

6. Schleip, R., Müller, D. G., & Yucesoy, C. A. (2023). Fascial plasticity and mechanical intelligence of the human body. Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies, 27(1), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2023.01.004

7. Finni, T., et al. (2023). Force transmission and interactions between synergist muscles. Journal of Biomechanics, 155, 111606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2023.111606

8. Stecco, C., Day, J. A., & Pirri, C. (2014). Functional atlas of the human fascial system. Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies, 18(3), 432–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2014.01.003

9. Yahia, L. H., Proulx, R., & Boucher, P. (1993). Viscoelastic properties of the human fascia lata and their clinical implications. Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 15(5), 425–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-5425(93)90013-E90013-E)

10. Wren, T. A. L., et al. (2003). Mechanical properties of the human Achilles tendon. Clinical Biomechanics, 18(6), 491–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0033(03)00072-600072-6)