## 4 Discussion  
Following six weeks of traditional strength training, significant enhancements were observed in 1 RM records across all exercises. Notably, the squat exhibited the most substantial improvement in 1 RM, with a notably large effect size (d = 2.08). Despite this improvement, the squat surprisingly showed no correlation with power output. Conversely, post-training bench press 1 RM demonstrated associations with most performance records, excluding the long jump. Furthermore, post-training deadlift and clean 1 RM exhibited high correlations with several performance tests (deadlift: 20 m and 40 m; clean: 20 m, 40 m, broad jump, L-run). The finding that the greatest improvement in squat performance did not correlate with performance test results is intriguing. Overcoming a sticking point, indicative of a slow or weak phase in the movement, is crucial for increasing squat weights [26]. Athletes are traditionally instructed to push hard with their heels to overcome such sticking points. However, this approach may hinder the kinetic connection between the feet and the hip, potentially resulting in a posterior tilt of the pelvis [27]. Considering the importance of optimal frontal plane foot mechanics in sports movements like changes of direction and sprinting [28], traditional squat exercises for weight gain may not be conducive to athletic performance development. A previous study reported that while the net joint moment of the knee joint was greater than the hip joint when performing a back squat, the net joint moment of the hip was greater when performing a deadlift [18]. In this regard, given that studies have shown that increased gluteus maximus activity is associated with increased maximal running speeds [29], it is likely that the increased knee extensor capacity during squats had less of an impact on the speed-related performance measured in this study. Despite the lack of correlation between squat 1 RM improvement and sport performance in this study, squats remain integral for overall strength and fitness in athletes [30]. In addition, there is a study that showed increasing the squat 1 RM was effective in improving vastus lateralis and gluteus maximus muscle thickness [31]. Therefore, tailoring squat  
Figure 5: Correlation matrix between pre- and post-traditional strength test 1 RM and functional performance test. Larger squares and darker blues indicate strong positive relationships. Larger squares and darker reds indicate stronger negative relationships: BP, bench press; SQ, squat; DL, deadlift; CL, power clean; VJ, vertical jump; BJ, broad jump; BRC, bronco test; L, L-run. training based on the specific characteristics of each sport and applying squats in proper periods based on training periodization may enhance their efficacy, allowing strength and conditioning coaches to maximize athletes' performance. An additional intriguing discovery in this study was the relationship between bench press 1 RM and performance outcomes. Unlike the conventional bench press, which focuses on isolated upper limb strength, subjects in this study employed the modified hip drive bench press method. This method emphasizes kinetic connectivity from a distal body part to the proximal center, requiring a strong pushing toe, lifting heel, and hip muscle contraction during the bench press. This approach likely promotes the connectivity and elasticity of the posterior chain [32]. Previous research has highlighted the posterior chain's role in generating horizontal force, a key factor in sprinting [33; 34]. Additionally, heavy bench presses with hip drive may indirectly teach athletes how to transfer energy from ground reaction force to specific tasks. From a biomechanical perspective, hip joint angular velocity, a crucial factor for speed and power development in athletes, results from energy transfer from the ground. Improving hip angular velocity requires a perfect hip hinge position.