Hamstring endurance is important for sprinting, running, jumping, deceleration, field sport, gym training and repeated hip-extension loading. The Single-Leg Hamstring Raise Test provides a practical way to assess hamstring-biased posterior-chain endurance using minimal equipment.
The result should be interpreted as a lower-limb endurance and capacity measure, not as a standalone diagnostic tool or an isolated hamstring strength test. Stronger interpretation comes from baseline comparison, side-to-side comparison, symptoms, movement quality and related strength or functional tests.
Test name: Single-Leg Hamstring Raise Test
Alternative names: Single-Leg Hamstring Bridge Test, Single-Leg Bridge Test, Single-Leg Hamstring Bridge Endurance Test
Category: Lower-limb strength endurance
Primary score: Number of valid repetitions
Optional scores: Hold time, cadence, symptoms, pelvic control, reason for stopping
Best suited to: Runners, field sport athletes, gym clients and lower-limb progress monitoring
Key limitation: Foot position, knee angle, cadence, pelvic control and range standards strongly influence results
Exercise mat
Bench, box or stable surface if using an elevated heel setup
Stopwatch or Measurz stopwatch
Optional Measurz metronome to standardise cadence
Optional Measurz rep counter to count valid repetitions
Optional Measurz AR measurement to document heel distance, bench height or setup
Optional inclinometer or video analysis if hip or pelvic movement angle is being tracked
MAT tools such as Anker, Gripper or Muscle Meter for related hamstring, gluteal or lower-limb isometric strength testing
Measurz platform for recording side, repetitions, symptoms, compensations and retest comparison
The client lies on their back on a mat.
One heel is placed on the floor, bench or stable support, depending on the chosen protocol.
The working knee angle is standardised. A more extended knee position generally increases hamstring demand.
The opposite leg is held off the ground in a consistent position.
Arms are placed in a standardised position, such as across the chest or relaxed on the floor.
The client lifts the pelvis by pressing through the working heel.
The pelvis rises until the trunk and thigh reach the required endpoint.
The client lowers under control to the start position.
Continue at a consistent cadence until task failure.
Stop when the client cannot achieve adequate height, loses pelvic control, uses excessive compensation, reports intolerable symptoms or chooses to stop.
Record total valid repetitions for each side.
Record:
Left repetitions
Right repetitions
Dominant and non-dominant side
Side-to-side difference
Test setup
Heel position
Knee angle
Surface or bench height
Cadence
Pelvic control
Hamstring, gluteal or low back symptoms
Cramping
Compensations
Reason for stopping
A higher repetition count generally suggests better hamstring-biased posterior-chain endurance under that protocol.
However, interpretation should consider:
knee angle
heel distance from pelvis
bench height
cadence
pelvic control
body mass
cramping
symptoms
fatigue
previous exposure to the exercise
whether the same setup was used at retest
The test should not be interpreted as a pure hamstring isolation test. It also involves gluteal contribution, trunk control and pelvic control.
Single-leg hamstring bridge research has reported clinically useful data, but universal norms remain limited and protocol-specific.
Research in Australian Rules football players has used the Single-Leg Hamstring Bridge Test to explore hamstring injury risk, and later studies have investigated criterion validity, reliability and relationships with isolated hamstring testing.
More recent evidence suggests the test is practical, but it does not measure isolated hamstring endurance perfectly. Therefore, the safest interpretation is that it assesses hamstring-biased posterior-chain endurance under a specific bridge protocol.
Useful comparison methods include:
left versus right
baseline versus retest
relationship to hamstring symptoms
relationship to sprinting, running or sport exposure
relationship to isometric hamstring strength
relationship to Nordic hamstring or hip-extension strength testing
Use these broad ranges only when the same setup, knee angle, cadence and valid repetition standard are used:
Excellent single-leg hamstring endurance: 30+ controlled repetitions each side
Good: 25–29 repetitions
Moderate: 15–24 repetitions
Developing: 8–14 repetitions
Low current hamstring endurance profile: under 8 repetitions
Side-to-side comparison is often more useful than a single universal cut-off.
A side-to-side difference greater than approximately 10–20% may be worth monitoring, especially if it aligns with symptoms, sprinting limitation, running fatigue, reduced confidence or related strength findings.
The Single-Leg Hamstring Bridge Test has been studied as a practical field test for hamstring-biased endurance. Research suggests test-retest reliability can be acceptable when the protocol is standardised, but the test should not be assumed to replace isolated hamstring strength testing.
Reliability improves when:
the same knee angle is used
heel position is standardised
bench or floor setup is recorded
cadence is standardised
valid repetition criteria are clear
pelvic height criteria are consistent
symptoms and cramping are recorded
the same stopping rules are used
Validity depends on the intended use. The test may reflect posterior-chain endurance and capacity, but it is not a direct measure of isolated hamstring strength or eccentric hamstring force.
For a stronger profile, combine it with:
isometric hamstring strength
Nordic hamstring strength or endurance testing
hip extension strength
sprint exposure history
hop tests
running gait assessment
lower-limb strength tests
Common errors include:
changing heel distance between tests
using different knee angles
allowing reduced pelvic height
counting partial repetitions
changing cadence
pushing through the forefoot instead of heel
allowing trunk rotation
allowing the non-working leg to assist
ignoring hamstring cramping
comparing floor and elevated versions directly
Limitations include:
not an isolated hamstring test
gluteal and trunk contribution
cramping may limit performance
setup strongly affects score
no universal repetition norms
fatigue and cadence influence results
symptoms may limit performance before true endurance failure
not a standalone diagnostic test for hamstring injury
The Single-Leg Hamstring Raise Test can help:
assess hamstring-biased posterior-chain endurance
compare left and right sides
monitor progress over time
support return-to-running progressions
support sprint and field sport capacity profiling
identify endurance differences after lower-limb training
compare endurance with isometric strength findings
monitor cramping, symptoms and movement quality
It is especially useful for clients involved in:
running
sprinting
football
soccer
rugby
hockey
basketball
athletics
gym training
field sports requiring acceleration and deceleration
In Measurz / MAT, record:
test name
side tested
repetitions
setup variation
heel position
knee angle
bench height or floor setup
cadence
pain score
hamstring symptoms
cramping
pelvic control
trunk rotation
compensations
reason for stopping
retest date
The Measurz stopwatch can record total test time if needed. The Measurz metronome can standardise cadence, and the rep counter can help count valid repetitions consistently.
Measurz AR measurement can support setup consistency by documenting heel distance, bench height or foot position. MAT tools such as Anker, Gripper or Muscle Meter can add related isometric hamstring, hip or lower-limb strength data for a more complete profile.
Hamstring Raise
Nordic Hamstring Test
Isometric Hamstring Strength
Hip Extension Strength
Single-Leg Calf Raise Endurance Test
Hop Tests
Running Gait Checklist
Single-Leg Bridge Hold
Deadlift Strength
Single-Leg Sit-to-Stand
It measures hamstring-biased posterior-chain endurance during a single-leg bridge raise.
Yes, it is commonly performed as a single-leg hamstring bridge endurance test.
Yes. Side-to-side comparison is highly useful.
This depends on protocol and client context. Around 25–30+ controlled repetitions may suggest strong endurance, but setup and client goals matter.
No. It can support hamstring endurance assessment, but it does not diagnose hamstring injury or identify the exact cause of symptoms.
Record cramping and the point it occurred. Cramping is clinically useful context and may be the reason for stopping.
A metronome can improve repeatability. If used, record the cadence.
No. It is hamstring-biased but also involves the gluteals, trunk and pelvis.
The Single-Leg Hamstring Raise Test measures hamstring-biased posterior-chain endurance.
It is practical, simple and useful for side-to-side comparison.
Setup, knee angle, cadence and pelvic height strongly influence results.
It should not be treated as an isolated hamstring strength test.
Symptoms, cramping and reason for stopping should always be recorded.
Measurz can track repetitions, cadence, setup, symptoms and retest progress.
MAT strength tools can add related isometric hamstring and lower-limb strength data.
Freckleton, G., Cook, J., & Pizzari, T. (2014). The predictive validity of a single leg bridge test for hamstring injuries in Australian Rules Football players. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 48(8), 713–717. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2013-092356
Roberti, D., et al. (2024). The Single Leg Bridge Test does not measure isolated hamstring endurance in healthy physically active men. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy.
Sato, S., et al. (2025). A practical assessment of hamstring muscle endurance and fatigue using the maximum-speed single-leg bridge test. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation.
Timmins, R. G., et al. (2023). Criterion validity and reliability of the single-leg hamstring bridge test. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport.
Worst, H., & Henderson, N. (2026). Establishing normative values and clinician assessment accuracy for the Single Leg Bridge Endurance Test. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 21(1), 34–40. https://doi.org/10.26603/001c.154592
