Training Load for Athletes: Why Gradual Progression Matters | Starke Industries

Late August is when many athletes go from summer training to full practices, games, and school all at once. It's also when coaches start talking about "load."

This post covers what training load means, why gradual progression is a sensible principle, and why one popular load metric is more controversial than it often seems.

What is training load?

Training load is how much work an athlete does. It's usually split into two types:

• External load: What the athlete did. Distance run, sprint efforts, sets and reps, jumps, minutes played.

• Internal load: How hard it was for the athlete. Heart rate, or a simple rating of perceived exertion (RPE) multiplied by session duration.

The same practice can be easy for one athlete and very hard for another. That's why many programs track both.

Why gradual progression makes sense

Fitness improves when athletes are challenged and then recover. The challenge needs to grow over time, but not so fast that the athlete can't adapt.

Gabbett's widely cited 2016 paper, "The training–injury prevention paradox," argued that appropriately graded prescription of high training loads should improve fitness, which in turn may protect against injury [1]. The key words are "appropriately graded." High training loads weren't presented as the problem. Poorly planned increases were the concern.

That fits basic coaching sense. An athlete who has done little all summer and then does two-a-days for a week has had a large, sudden increase in workload.

The acute:chronic workload ratio, and the debate

Gabbett's paper also described the acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR): recent load (often the last week) divided by longer-term load (often the last four weeks). It presented the ACWR as a best-practice predictor of training-related injuries [1].

Since then, the ACWR has been heavily criticized.

• Lolli and colleagues (2017) argued that the conventional ACWR calculation has a mathematical coupling problem. The acute week is also part of the chronic average, which can create spurious correlation [2].

• Impellizzeri and colleagues (2020) reviewed the metric's conceptual issues. They concluded there is no evidence supporting the use of the ACWR in training-load management systems or in training recommendations aimed at reducing injury risk. They described it as an inaccurate metric that adds noise and creates statistical artifacts [3].

What does a coach do with that?

1. Keep the principle. Gradual progression is reasonable training practice regardless of the ratio debate. 2. Be careful with the number. Don't treat a ratio as an injury forecast for an individual athlete. 3. Don't confuse association with cause. Even where load patterns have been linked with injury, that link doesn't by itself show the load pattern caused the injury.

Practical ways to manage load

You don't need software to apply sensible load management.

• Know what last week looked like. Plan this week relative to it.

• Increase in steps. Add volume or intensity gradually, not all at once.

• Plan lighter weeks. Periodic reductions give athletes a chance to recover.

• Account for everything. School practices, club teams, lifting, and pickup games all count. Athletes on multiple teams often have more total load than any single coach realizes.

• Ask the athlete. A simple daily check-in (sleep, soreness, mood, energy) adds context the numbers miss.

Where testing fits

Periodic jump or strength testing can add context to load data. If an athlete's numbers drop alongside a heavy stretch, that's a reason to look more closely at the plan, not a diagnosis.

Session RPE and simple wellness questionnaires are practical ways to track how hard training felt and how the athlete is responding.

Questions parents ask

My athlete plays on two teams this fall. Is that too much? It depends on the total schedule, not the number of teams. Add up practices, games, and training in a typical week. If it has jumped compared with summer, talk with the coaches about how to spread it out.

Should we take a week off when things get busy? A lighter week can be useful. Fully stopping and restarting can create the same sudden jumps you were trying to avoid.

A simple way to start tracking

If you're not tracking anything yet, start with session RPE. After each practice or workout, the athlete rates how hard it was on a scale from 0 to 10. Multiply that rating by the session's length in minutes. Add the sessions up for the week. It takes seconds, needs no equipment, and gives you a weekly number you can compare against the week before.

The number isn't the goal. It's a conversation starter. If an athlete's weekly total has jumped sharply, or they keep rating easy sessions as hard, it's time to talk.

The bottom line

Build workload gradually, track it simply, and listen to the athlete. Be skeptical of any single ratio that promises to predict injury. The principle of gradual progression is sound. The certainty some metrics promise is not.

Related reading

• Summer Off-Season Training for High School Athletes: How to Plan the Break
• Training in the Heat: Heat Illness Basics for Summer Workouts
• Squat Jump vs. Countermovement Jump: What the Difference Tells You
• Single-Leg vs. Double-Leg Jumps: Why Test Both
• Sprint Testing 101: 10 m, 20 m, and the 40-Yard Dash
• Back to School: Getting Ready for Fall Sports Tryouts
• The Nordic Hamstring Exercise: What the Research Says
• The Copenhagen Adductor Exercise for Field and Ice Athletes

References

• Gabbett TJ. The training–injury prevention paradox: should athletes be training smarter and harder? Br J Sports Med. 2016;50(5):273–280. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2015-095788 (online Jan 12, 2016)
• Lolli L, et al. Mathematical coupling causes spurious correlation within the conventional acute-to-chronic workload ratio calculations. Br J Sports Med. 2019;53(15):921–922. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098110 (online Nov 3, 2017). Note: this is a short commentary without an abstract; the claim cited matches its title.
• Impellizzeri FM, et al. Acute:chronic workload ratio: conceptual issues and fundamental pitfalls. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2020;15(6):907–913. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2019-0864 (published Jul 1, 2020)
• ---

Fill out our quick contact form at starkeit.com/contact, or call or text (847) 750-3025. Starke Industries is in Palatine, IL.