Bodybuilding, as a sports discipline, involves a rigorous training regimen primarily focused on developing muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength. Practiced at both recreational and competitive levels, bodybuilding entails systematic and progressive loading of the musculoskeletal system, resulting in significant biomechanical stress on muscle groups, joints, and myofibrillar units involved (Zemper, 2005). Repeated stress, particularly in the absence of appropriate recovery strategies, increases susceptibility to muscle injuries, which can range from mild muscle strains to partial or complete muscle fiber tears (Orchard & Best, 2002). Muscle injuries not only affect immediate athletic performance but can also significantly impact the continuity of training, functional balance, and, in severe cases, compromise the athlete’s long-term ability to compete at a high level (Järvinen et al., 2005). Consequently, preventing these dysfunctions has become a strategic priority in modern sports performance management (Ekstrand et al., 2011).

The modern age offers many challenges in terms of health related physical condition, such as new technologies, fast and stressful lifestyle, unhealthy diets, alarming statistics on physical activity, etc. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic accentuated the existing problems, being necessary to answer the following questions: what is the fitness level of the population? and how important are physical exercises in human life? The purpose of this paper is to monitor the fitness level of a group of students, with the help of a new fitness test system, providing individualized feedback, guidance, or motivation to the subjects. Thus, we applied the new EFB system (European Fitness Badge), that evaluates certain components of physical condition in relation to health (endurance, strength, coordination, flexibility), on a group of 180 students, 78 male (43.3%) and 102 female (56.7%), with the average age m = 23.59 ± 7.38 years, from different specializations within the U.A.V. Arad. The subjects were divided into two groups: beginners - TP1 (N-93) and advanced - TP2 (N-87). The results showed significant differences in most components of overall fitness depending on the test profile (basic or advanced), demografic factors (sex and age), and student’s major (sport, economics, psychology, etc.), a stronger association between ABSI and overall fitness than BMI, and that test profile acts as mediator between demografic factors (sex and age) and fitness abilities. In conclusion this study evidenced tendencies toward differences between the groups of subjects based on the test profile. Also the advanced profile participant scores were higher than those of the basic profile participants. The results reflect as well a lower BMI and ABSI indexes for the advanced profile participants.