Periodising Power: How to Peak Explosive Capacity for Competition
Summary
Power is the most competition-critical quality for most athletes—and the most difficult to maintain year-round. Here's how to structure a training year to peak explosive capacity when it matters.
Power — the product of force and velocity — sits at the top of the physical performance pyramid for most team and individual sport athletes. It is also uniquely fragile. Maximal strength can be maintained with relatively low training volumes; aerobic fitness responds well to reduced training with maintained intensity. Explosive power, by contrast, requires a specific kind of stimulus that is difficult to deliver alongside heavy strength work, high-volume aerobic conditioning, or significant accumulated fatigue.
Getting this right across a training year is the central challenge of physical periodisation for power-sport athletes.
The Interference Problem
Concurrent training — developing strength and endurance simultaneously — is a practical necessity for most sport athletes. The interference effect (Wilson et al. 1012) shows that high volumes of endurance training impair power development, particularly fast-twitch muscle adaptations, when combined with strength and power work in the same training phase. The mechanism is complex and still debated, but the practical implication is clear: phases that prioritise aerobic development should carry reduced power training volumes.
This does not mean eliminating power work during aerobic phases. It means managing the volume and intensity of power training to maintain rather than develop during aerobic emphasis phases, and being deliberate about when power receives priority.
A Framework for Power Periodisation
Turner (2009) outlined a practical model for power development across a training year that remains a useful starting framework:
Off-season (general preparation, 8–12 weeks): Build the physical base. Emphasise maximal strength (>80% 1RM), hypertrophy where relevant, and general movement quality. Power work is present but not the primary stimulus. The goal is to maximise the force end of the force-velocity relationship — strength is the substrate for later power development.
Pre-season (specific preparation, 6–8 weeks): Transition. Reduce maximal strength volume and increase velocity-oriented work — plyometrics, loaded jumps, moderate sled work, Olympic lifting derivatives. The force-velocity curve begins to shift: strength adaptations carry over into power as training velocity increases. Testing (force-velocity profiling, jump testing) at the start and end of this phase shows whether the shift is occurring.
In-season (competition, variable): Maintain power with minimal volume. 1–2 sessions per week of explosive work — jumps, medicine ball work, short sled sprints — is generally sufficient to prevent detraining if the competitive schedule itself provides high-velocity stimulus. Heavy strength work is reduced to maintenance volumes.
Taper (1–2 weeks before major competition): Reduce training volume substantially (40–60%) while maintaining intensity. Power tends to peak in the taper window as neuromuscular fatigue clears. This is one of the most consistent findings in periodisation research (Bosquet et al. 2007): volume reduction with maintained intensity produces performance improvements in the 2–3% range for power outputs.
The Force-Velocity Profile as a Periodisation Guide
For practitioners with access to sprint profiling, the force-velocity imbalance at the start of each training block should guide the emphasis within that block. An athlete who enters pre-season with a highly force-deficient profile (FVimb >> 1.0) despite a strength-focused off-season needs more velocity work, not more strength. An athlete who enters with a velocity deficit needs the reverse.
Cormie et al. (2011) demonstrated that different training approaches produce different shifts along the force-velocity curve, confirming that periodised prescription — not generic programming — drives the most efficient adaptations.
Practical Monitoring
Track jump testing (CMJ height and RSI) throughout the year. Expect:
- Moderate declines during high-volume general preparation phases (fatigue effect)
- Progressive improvement through specific preparation as fatigue clears and velocity qualities develop
- Peaking during competition phase and taper if the periodisation is correct
If jump performance does not recover through the pre-season despite appropriate loading, the athlete is either carrying too much cumulative fatigue or the power training stimulus is insufficient or poorly targeted.
References
Mark Fisher
Founder, Swift Performance
Mark Fisher is the founder of Swift Performance and has spent 30 years designing and building athlete testing equipment used by elite sport programmes and universities worldwide. He has worked alongside researchers and PhD candidates across biomechanics, sprint mechanics, and strength science — developing the hardware and software they use to collect and analyse performance data. His writing comes from three decades at the intersection of applied sport science and precision measurement technology.
More from Sports Science
