The Rotary Stability screen in the FMS yields much attention based its unique demands and what seems like an impractical role and very low rate of scoring a 3.
It often is the subject of discussion, confusion, and leads many to stray away from the suggested protocol as per the FMS.

FMS and a great Rotary Stability mobility correction.

So I would like to write up some bullets that come to mind on this particular movement.  Some points may be fairly basic to the experienced user, but certainly there are many users that are self-taught and struggling with context and reliability.  Others I have a feeling you’ve never heard before.
I’ve saved as many e-mails as I’ve could to bundle into this article as well as adding some more context to what I think this screen is and also what it isn’t.

1.  You score the moving arm in both the 3 and the 2 position.  Report the score as Right X, Left X.  In the corrective algorithm, use the lower of the 2 scores as the composite.  It is the 3rd tie breaker when all moves are equal after ASLR and Shoulder Mobility.

2.  It is basically impossible to perform the 3 position without mild shift.  Mild I would define as a shift that still allows the horizontal of the spine to be parallel to the floor, and the contacts of the hand, knee, and big toe are all touching the board.
This shift is difficult to quantify verbally, but as Brett Jones often suggests, you will know a 3 when you see it.  Much like a unicorn.  You know what a unicorn is?  It’s a small horse with a horn sticking out of its head.  That’s a unicorn.  That’s a 3 in the FMS.  You just know.

It's a freakin' horse with a horn sticking out of it's head.

3.  The position of the hand can be described as natural.  It isn’t anything particular, just where you would put your hand comfortably and easily.
The natural hand, knee, and dorsiflexed foot should be all be touching, but not crushing the board.  Not touching = not a 2 or 3.  Not dorsiflexed = not a 2 or 3.

NOT a 2!!!! Maybe could be a 2, but his foot on the downside is not dorsiflexed. PLUS, he is wearing Nike socks and Reeboks from 1992, which is also a good reason to score down.

4.  For the 2 and 3 scores, the elbow touches the knee.  It doesn’t touch the thigh, or the lower thigh.  It touches the KNEE, not close to the knee.  So not everybody gets a 2.  Plenty of people can not touch their elbow to the knee.  And the back is very much allowed to round to touch the knee.  So to assume everyone is a 2 is a mistake especially if you are going to follow the corrective algorithm.
Lee talks about touching the elbow to knee in Episode 91 of the Strength Coach Podcast.
Always remember that anything Lee or Gray say trumps me or this article.  They made the FMS up.  I am just interpreting it.

5.  I have heard several times that folks will start on the 2 position and then do the 3 position.  There’s 2 things on this.
If the reason to start on the 2 position is concern about the individual feeling foolish or frustrated that they can’t do the movement, then I guess that’s defensible.  But if a person ever feels humiliated or deflated about their FMS score, that is the fault of the Screener, not the Screenee.  If you know that someone is going to perform so poorly that they will feel bad about him/herself, then I think best practice is to just skip the movement and give them a 1.  A 1 by definition is unable to do the movement.  You’ve lost an opportunity to screen for pain, but it will come out in the wash anyway when you start training.
The other thing is to me is odd.  If you do the 2 first, and they get it, then you’re going to do the 3.  So how are you saving any time?
So if you predict someone is going to score low on a cardiac evaluation, you don’t do an echo before you take BP.  Just go in order, and you may find that some people can actually nail the 3.

You score low on the FMS, and this is what Nelson Muntz says. Don't be like Nelson. Don't.

6.  The Rotary Stability screen is NOT the hardest to get a 3.  It’s the Hurdle Step.
The cutpoints for 1, 2, and 3 are supported by the Medical College of Virginia, and in a completely heterogeneous and large enough population, in any of the 7 Screens, you should see 20 1′s, 60 2′s, and 20 3′s.
In the end, I suspect that there is much more of a reference point between the 2 and the 3 position in the Rotary Stability, so people easily “feel” and notice that they can’t do the 3 position.  But because there so minimal difference between a 2 and 3 in the Hurdle Step, folks don’t realize they are not getting a 3.  You may also add in that many Screeners are scoring the Hurdle Step generously to a 3, and then we don’t realize the Step is just as elusive or even more so than the Rotary Stability.

BANG! Make it look like that. Anything less is a 2. Very difficult to discern proprioceptively. But that's the hardest one to nail.

7.  What makes the 3 in Rotary Stability so hard in the first place?  I’m not sure there is a complete understanding as to what this position is reviewing in the first place.  It is not some arbitrary difficult Cirque position, nor is it some more difficult version of a Birdog.  And the 2 position is not a Birdog either.
Please keep in mind the ties to the neurodevelopmental perspective in that basically we can categorize all of our ground-based movements can be either ipsilateral, meaning we have support on the same side arm and leg, or contralateral, support on the opposite arm and leg.
I remember clearly texting Gray during my very first DNS class many years ago as we learned that rolling patterns via that methodology.  And the very first time we roll, we land on the same side arm and leg just like the 3 position.  I was thinking, “You SOB, now I know why the 3 position is what it is in the FMS.”  I also remember Clare Frank being so proud that all of this was able to come together because she had questions as well.
So as the aim is to yield the absolute most discriminatory movement screening tool, if we look at Rotary Stability 3 and 2 positions, and in that order because we roll before we crawl, there is a level of screening very neurologically deep and discerning to see if indeed we have a very challenging display of the 2 foundations we need to move.
Ipsilateral = Rolling, Throwing, Leaning in most agility, some Sitting
Contralateral = Crawling, Running/Walking, Reaching Transitioning
Maybe a little more to the FMS and Rotary Stability than you might have known before……………..

Contralateral. 2 position.

Ipsilateral. This is where the 3 position comes from. It comes first. Trust me.

I believe this ipsilateral/contralateral message is what makes Segmental Rolling so powerful.  You can find Disc 5 of Training = Rehab where all of the Segmental Rolling patterns are shown as well as their RNT options.

8.  Ah, but is Rotary Stability really rotary stability?  Well, of course the 2 patterns above are rotation based around varying fixed points.  And these patterns are largely stabilized with “soft core” patterns, meaning the bracing pattern is not hugely loaded.  For example, we brace when we walk normally, but it’s not like we are bearing down with a breath to break the belt or cracking in to take a punch.

But in our fitness and training programs, we often train rotary stability and strength with many other tools like Chops/Lifts, Landmines, and frontal plane punches.  All brilliant choices, but also choices that likely do not often immediately change a pattern.  It’s not that they can’t, and it’s not that they are not hugely useful, but if we can tie semantics into the conversation yet again, there is a big difference between Rotary Stability as per the FMS and Anti-Rotation conditioning as per these excellent exercises that we use.
They are not the same.
Rotary Stability patterns employ the soft core, the inner core, the proper motor control of timing that allows us to move bodyweight very spider-like and effortless.
Anti-Rotation makes you savagely strong to move how you move faster and stronger.
From a practical standpoint though, I am not sure if a 1 in the Rotary Stability pattern = don’t do Anti-Rotation drills from a strength onto dysfunction standpoint.
I, for one, score a miserable 1 on Rotary Stability.  First off, this is one reason to not assume everybody can just get a 2.  I have fair t-spine but very limited GH external rotation, and my ego also leads me to report I have very short humerus and pec girth that makes getting across elbow to knee basically impossible for me.
But I do not find my pattern worsening with lot of heavy and hard landmines.  They are clearly not helping my pattern.  It leads me to believe that Anti-Rotation and Rotary Stability as per the FMS might be linked, but they are not the same.
I am not 100% sure that Anti-Rotation should be on lockdown on a 1.  It should be on lockdown if there is asymmetry.  Running and other longer duration locomotion should be on lockdown if there is a 1.  And now I have my reason for struggling with a 8:00+ mile.

This part I can do.

There are many different versions of the “squat” that take demand certain mechanics or take advantage of specific foot positions.
Below is a brainstorm of some things I can think of in terms of why certain positions are used, desired, or should be avoided.

Toes Straight
1.  FMS Deep Squat
–This is movement-evaluative squat, not necessarily one that would be be regularly exercised.  If you are actually correcting the squat in the rare occasions of 13 with a 1 on the squat or 19 or 20 with a 1 or 2 on the squat, then again the toes would be straight.  The big piece here in terms of keeping toes straight is to appraise relative hip internal rotation.  It is not a measure of internal rotation per se, but if you can keep your toes straight, the tone of hip flexors and/or stiffness in the posterior capsule is graded by the foot position that would challenge those limitations.  If you can keep toes straight, the Screen suggests that internal rotation is adequate.  However, if toes can stay straight in the 2 position, it does not necessarily mean the issue lies in the hip.  It can still be anything or anywhere.

Toes straight means Toes straight.

2.  Competition Squat
–Louie has talked about this, but I have never actually seen someone employ a powerlifting competition squat with toes straight.  If you can make depth and tension out against a straight foot, in theory, the passive tension of the capsule might give you some “free” stiffness in and out of the hole.  I can never feel it, and inherently, the knees collapse.  It makes sense in terms of the hip stiffness, but I don’t think it’s a viable option especially if you are wider than shoulders, not to mention clipping into FAI in the hole as well.

Toes Out
1.  Slacks hip flexors allowing for more relative stability of the pelvis.  As the Rectus Femoris (AIIS) and TFL and Sartorius (ASIS) become toned or even just in their quality resting tension with toes straight, their vector(s) to the fixed point of the lateral calcaneus is to pull the pelvis into an anterior tilt.  This approximation posteriorly, which feels like a hard arch, can likely cut a squat early from negative proprioception in the spine and/or unable to stay big against the anterior weight.  Letting the toes go out, anywhere from 20 degrees to 90 degrees, changes the line of pull of these muscles out of the sagittal plane, thus making the spine easier to centrate in a squatting pattern.

Getting these guys out of the way can make life a lot easier at the moment.

2.  The toes out position puts the ADDuctors on a line of pull that allows them act as sagittal plane hip extenders.  It’s fairly simple biomechanics.  Better line of pull = more force into returning out of the hip hinge.

Kinesiology says I'm a hip ADDuctor. Real life says I'm a hip extender. Winner: Toes Out.

3.  Partially for the spinal and hip implications of 1. and 2., slight toes out is not coincidentally the centrated position of the hip joint.  Centration is the position of the joint where there is maximal bony congruency around the joint as well as equal co-contraction of agonists and antagonists.  This anatomical visual is the basis of stereotypical postures in developmental kinesiology and is believed to yield full-body neurological strength and stability.  When 1 joint is “in place,” the rest of the body will ultimately follow.

4.  Please keep in mind that while there are advantages to handling load with toes out, it must be an option to be out there.  A loss of hip internal rotation may allow for force the toes to go out, but if there is a hallowing of the lateral glutes, this is the loss of centration in the hip joint that will also be forced.  The hallowing will be an indication that the deep stabilizers of the hips are not functioning as stabilizers.  This is an example of a high threshold strategy where the global muscles are contracting before the local muscles in the default pattern.  Toes out are okay, but it must be an option and still have the proper postural stereotype.

5.  Retroverted hips make it okay.  This bony structural change is typically a result of position during fetal development or an imbalance during early stages of development.  Retroversion creates a normal centration of the femoral head in the acetabulum, however, it is connected via a femoral neck that leads to a femur that is rotated externally.  Depending on the degree of retroversion, toes straight will be closer to slight toes out for some people.  Others will get to centration with excessive toes out.  The Craig’s Test is one fair measure of retroversion or anteversion.  It is also worth noting that some resources describe ante- and retroversion as the opposite of each other.  These are benign conditions overall, but they do lead us to stop looking to increase hip rotation when it’s a bony reason that’s preventing it.

Flat Foot
1.  No arch = less power.  I know a lot of people think they have flat feet, but this can be trained in a number of different ways both through training and manual therapy.  Many years ago, I was chatting with a podiatrist who became increasingly annoying, and I got out of the conversation telling him not to send me anybody with flat feet because after I’m done with them, they won’t need your little orthotics anymore.
The foot should have a tripod base of support via the sesamoid of the big toe, the MT head of the 5th toe, and the lateral heal.  The heel is the rear wheel drive, as Pavel would describe, and the front portion is the front wheel drive.  All wheels interacting with the ground = more more.  If the body of the vehicle is bottomed out on the ground, aka a fallen arch, there is minimized drive.
The arch is obligatory.  There are some people that are structurally flat, but this is terribly rare.  It’s also terrible for your squat or closed chain force production, but you did it to yourself during development.

Patrick Ward showing an example of taking advantage of and driving the short foot.

2.  Orthotics giving you a stiff post as an arch may work, or it may not work.  If you have an arch in the open-chain, or it can be achieved with passive overpressure mean there is an arch available in that foot.  Training it reflexively with tension and reaction with the floor will bring out that arch and a whole gang of tension and strength into the lift.  If you need orthotics to stay out of pain, that’s a different story, but can they be regressed in their stiffness or maybe use something like Barefoot Science that has a built in regression and forcing the arch via a reaction, not just giving you one like in most orthotics.

3.  The short foot is the ideal centrated posture of the midfoot along with close to zero degrees of dorsiflexion.  However, like other stability positions like packing the neck, bracing the abdominals, or squeezing the glutes, the desired position can be achieved through feed-forward mechanisms or just along the chain of a feed-back mechanism.  It is useful to force the short foot as if holding a melon under your foot, but it is only to gain a “feel” for the position and the tripod.  Ideally the short foot with the arch should be gained naturally without demanding it.  It will actually feel quite different.

On the list of all-time fraudulent exercises like push-up plus and ball squats.

Toes Curled
1.  Make no mistake about it.  In a static position, closed loop environment, curling the toes into gripping the floor will increase tension as we have learned from Pavel and Stuart McGill’s Superstiffness principles.
Toes curled is also a sympathetic reaction to threat.  Toes curled inhibits the ideal tripod as well, and while there is stiffness and tension with toes curled, it is at the expense of multiple mid-foot muscles being inhibited.
My thought is that the toes curled is an e-brake on the system, and while static tension is measured, I think posterior chain is inhibited without the toe pads gaining proprioception and a signal that the body is ready to propel.
I’m sure many a stud will suggest, just like the packed neck message, that they have had “success” with curling the toes despite the logic and soft science I am suggesting, but also like the packed neck, I think curling the toes is an e-brake that is easy to drive through.
Try shortening the foot with toes curled and without toes curled.  There should be an appreciable difference in the activation of the deep foot flexors.  I think this is something we want in attempting to translate force from the ground up through the chain.  Curling the toes limits that with the approximation and alteration of the tripod.
Just something to think about, but I don’t really want to argue.

Funny, she didn't look Druish.

In most, if not all, medical evaluation rubrics, it is taught that the subjective is the most important part of the evaluation.
Becoming ingratiated into the movement-based approach over the last several years, I have found this to be not nearly as true as some suggest.
In fact, I’ve come to think that at times it is the least important piece of the evaluation, or perhaps better to suggest the most misleading in terms of clinical decision making.
I mean how many times does the person with knee pain tell you that their hip is all jacked up but doesn’t hurt, and that’s where they need coaching?  Or I’m still waiting for the runner to come in and tell me their Superficial Back Line is linking their neck to their plantar fascia.
The subjective is a crucial portion of the evaluation, but not necessarily for me to decide how to help or train the individual.

One of the more legitimate and respected editorial pieces on Regional Interdependence in the literature.

Sometimes there are things other than the need for terminal knee extension in here.

Far more than the patient or client’s impression on their condition, which is honestly just based on their non-expert perception, I am much more interested in what they want out of the training exchange.  Training and rehab are in the service profession, so in the end, I see my role of the coach or clinician to provide what the person wants.  Some of us are more privileged to not have to deal with individuals that think they know how to get what they want, but in the end, I think it’s our job to provide results.  I have been lucky in my career that when someone tells me, “I know my body,” I also know that when it’s 4th and 8, the right move is to punt the individual right out the door.

I hate people that don't punt on 4th down, but I don't hate punting patients.

So herein lies the first question I ask every person I see for the first time.  I ask, “So, how can I help you?  What’s going on that I can help with?”
I have to know what they want in the end.  The details will sort themselves out, but we need to know where the end of the tunnel is before deciding on the best route to get to the tunnel, through the tunnel, and doing it all safely and efficiently.
This is the most important piece of the subjective for me.  I need the person to know that I care about what they want……….even if I really don’t care how they want to get there.

Obviously we are going to go through having the individual describe their pain, what makes it worse or better, how long it’s been going on, etc.  If it’s training, what have they done in the past, what they enjoy doing, is there a definable event or season we are training for.
The pain stuff is more in the common sense piece for the medical evaluation, and the definable event piece is more useful in terms of periodization for the most efficient route of training.
But whether it’s training or rehab, I will likely always ask the following questions…..
1.  So even if you think it’s totally unrelated to what we just talked about with your <painful segment or goals>, do have any (other) current injuries or aches and pains anywhere?
–We’ll run through the whole body, and they ask, it’s a simple response.  Everything’s connected, and everything matters.
If there is a history of a recurrent ankle sprains, is it a surprise that the person is looking for help with knee pain?  And do we not automatically need to also start thinking about intervening with the ipsilateral hip?  And if we’re training, are we not already expecting to see asymmetries in the FMS?
The goal here is to start to either open the curtain to a regionally interdependent approach where rehabilitation of a non-painful area may be the answer and/or that training isn’t chest and tri’s on the finest selectorized machines money can buy.
I think this also separates the clinician from others that the person has worked with.  I think people like “whole body.”  They like “holistic” maybe without saying that word.  They understand that the body compensates in other areas, even though particularly in rehab, most physicians, PTs, and chiros, both don’t know and don’t care about regional interdependence.

Don't talk to me about your low back pain and not talk about your head and t-spine entering the room 5 seconds before the rest of your body.

2.  Do you think you have good balance?
–We’re going after 2 things here.  If they say they have good balance, and they don’t, I’ve found it makes the client a little more deferred and open-minded to training in ways they haven’t done or seen before.
The other route is simply that folks that do admit they don’t have good balance are usually very receptive to understanding that mobility in distant areas is important.  Everybody seems to find balance of value.

3.  Do you think you have good flexibility?
–Same thing as balance.  In mentioning something that you know the person values, I think it further supports the “they know you care” value to the subjective evaluation.  If the person knows you care about them having things they don’t currently have, they will go to work for you.

Are you flexible? Do you have good balance? Do you train on machines or do crunches?

4.  Tell me how you train.  Practice.
–I want to know what I’m up against here.  How much undoing of garbage do we have to do, not just in the body, but in their mind.
I’ve said many times, I ain’t half bad at convincing other people I’m right.  But I am not very good at convincing other people they’re wrong.

5.  Do you have any medical situations that impact training hard?  Social/life situations?
–Certainly finding out about having to take insulin at certain times of the day before training would be a good thing.  But beyond the impactful medical stuff, respecting non-physical stressors is an enormous part of the training picture.

Ultimate Stress Analysis.

To bottom line it, the goals of the subjective for me are 1) the person has my confidence, 2) the person knows I care about them, and 3) the evaluation and training process may not be what they think.