What Is Velocity Based Training?

"Velocity Based Training: Precision, Power and the Future of Performance Programming."

(GymAware App)

Velocity-based training (VBT) is a relatively novel concept in strength and conditioning, that is growing in popularity as more sports teams use set bar speeds to prescribe and monitor training as an alternative to traditional percentage-based methods (Weakley et al., 2021). As accessible equipment becomes more readily available, it’s important to explore the key concepts behind it and when it’s most applicable in training, looking at its key principles, applications, and evidence to justify its use.

The force-velocity relationship is key when looking at VBT; it’s the understanding that the heavier a load is, the slower it will move (Thompson et al., 2025). Velocity-based training uses objective velocity indices such as mean and peak velocity to prescribe and monitor training, using one of the two main approaches – velocity zones and velocity loss thresholds (Mann, 2021).

One key benefit seen using VBT is the adaptations that can be made to tailor training to an individual, as inter-variability in velocity profiles means different athletes will show varied movement velocity patterns based on their physiology, biomechanics and training age (Guerriero et al., 2018).

Looking at a performer’s velocity profile can also offer insight into sports or activities they could thrive in. Force-dominant athletes can generate high force at slower velocities, for example, powerlifters, whilst velocity-dominant athletes excel at high-speed movements with lower force output, such as sprinters (Walker, 2016).

From powerlifting to team sports, these methods can be applied in a multitude of settings. The instant feedback and motivation that can be provided, ease of comparison between individuals and the ability to monitor fatigue throughout a set, all speak to the benefits of this training technique (Włodarczyk et al., 2021).

The use of appliances like GymAware, wearable devices and even camera-apps allow an athlete to monitor their performance throughout, assessing their progress in line with specific performance goals (Liao et al., 2021). A variety of bar speeds can be used to target different training adaptations, as generally, absolute strength can be trained with heavy loads moved at 0.5m/s or less, lighter loads for power (strength-speed) at 0.75-1.0m/s and even smaller loads for speed at 1.0-1.3m/s (Riscart-López et al., 2025). These specific velocities allow an athlete to pinpoint their training goals and subsequent intensity, justifying not going ‘all-out’ every time they train. Whilst these velocity zones can change depending on the exercise, being able to target specific adaptations is a huge positive offered by VBT (Pérez‐Castilla et al., 2025).

Another key principle that is often associated with the use of VBT is the mental impact it can have on an athlete when performing their resistance training (Weakley et al., 2019). By focussing on velocity, there is a continual focus on maximising the speed of the bar, so the intent of the lift becomes more intensive, and effort can be increased subconsciously (Moiroux--Sahraoui et al., 2024). This can become even more apparent when VBT is used in team sports settings. Traditional percentage-based training can often be very individualistic, due to the amount of weight on the bar being the key measurement. When velocity becomes the focus, teammates can compare the number of reps completed at a specific velocity threshold relative to their personal strength, bringing in competition as another external motivator during training (Weakley et al., 2021).

The use of VBT in team sports and with athletes can also benefit them when looking at their programming, due to it allowing autoregulation (Ramos, 2024). During a season, athletes need to maintain strength but have to balance heavy training and game schedules with their gym-based training. Being prescribed lower velocity loss thresholds can help to maintain neuromuscular abilities, that can then be built upon in the off season with heavier loads and higher velocity losses, as here, athletes can afford to recover for longer periods (Jukic et al., 2023).

Looking at narrative reviews on VBT, it has been found that similar or superior gains in strength, jump and sprint performance can be found when comparing the results to traditional 1RM-based training – especially at the 10% and 20% velocity loss thresholds – however, with the added benefit of lower training volume and perceived fatigue. A study looking specifically at velocity loss thresholds on athletic performance compared 20% and 40% thresholds, finding that the 20% group saw better neuromuscular adaptations like jump height and sprint speed, displaying less fatigue and a lower training volume, whilst the 40% threshold group saw better response in terms of hypertrophy (Pareja-Blanco et al., 2017).

Lower velocity loss training has been found to be particularly effective for neuromuscular adaptations. Whilst there is limited research in the area, some studies also suggest there could be a benefit to combining the use of velocity zones and velocity loss thresholds when looking to optimise results, but this is yet to be tested extensively.

As a flexible method of training, where daily fatigue can be accounted for to avoid over or undertraining, and with constant objective feedback being available after each working set, it’s clear that VBT could offer benefits for many athletes . Additionally, being able to target specific training goals with varied velocity zones, lowering total training volume without compromising or even improving physiological adaptation and reducing excessive neuromuscular fatigue, the advantages of VBT continue to show as more research is carried out.

However, the equipment that has to be used to attain accurate information can be very expensive, and athletes looking to use such devices may take time to learn the correct usage techniques, and to workout ways of interpreting the data that’s produced (Banyard et al., 2017). Additionally, not all exercises are equally suited to velocity monitoring – generally no field testing can benefit from their use, and even in the gym, movements using a bar that moves in a linear path tend to be the most compatible (Weakley et al., 2021). Furthermore, as the velocity zones for desired adaptations can differ between exercises and athletes, programming can become challenging (Pálinkás et al., 2024).

To summarise, the justification of velocity-based training in modern sport environments is clear. The specificity and ability to tailor training to individual daily needs massively supports is use, with elite sports people, injured athletes returning to play, or any athlete looking to maintain strength levels throughout a season potentially seeing massive benefit from implementing the methodology into their training regime. Whilst further, long-term research is needed to provide deeper insight into using VBT alongside more traditional methods, or finding use for it outside of the small range of movements currently associated with it, the upside is clear, and advantages suggest many athletes would benefit from the use of such methods.

Banyard, H. G., Nosaka, K., & Haff, G. G. (2017). Reliability and Validity of the Load–Velocity Relationship to Predict the 1RM Back Squat. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 31(7), 1897. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001657

Guerriero, A., Varalda, C., & Piacentini, M. F. (2018). The role of velocity based training in the strength periodization for modern athletes. Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology, 3(4), 55.

Jukic, I., King, A., Sousa, C. A., Prnjak, K., & McGuigan, M. R. (2023). Implementing a velocity-based approach to resistance training: The reproducibility and sensitivity of different velocity monitoring technologies. Scientific Reports, 13, 7152. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-34416-0

Liao, K.-F., Wang, X.-X., Han, M.-Y., Li, L.-L., Nassis, G. P., & Li, Y.-M. (2021). Effects of velocity based training vs. traditional 1RM percentage-based training on improving strength, jump, linear sprint and change of direction speed performance: A Systematic review with meta-analysis. PloS One, 16(11), e0259790. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259790

Mann, B. (2021). Velocity-based training. In Strength and Conditioning for Sports Performance (pp. 529–534). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780429330988-31/velocity-based-training-bryan-mann

Moiroux--Sahraoui, A., Mazeas, J., Jhingoor, J. M., Douryang, M., Bouzerkraoui Alaoui, I., & Forelli, F. (n.d.). Relationship Between Force-Velocity Characteristics and Sprint Performance in Elite Sprinters: A Pilot Study. Cureus, 16(8), e65944. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.65944

Pálinkás, G., Béres, B., Utczás, K., Tróznai, Z., & Petridis, L. (2024). Large inter-individual variability in force-velocity profile changes in response to acute high-load resistance training. Physiology International, 111(2), 186–198. https://doi.org/10.1556/2060.2024.00370

Pareja-Blanco, F., Rodríguez-Rosell, D., Sánchez-Medina, L., Sanchis-Moysi, J., Dorado, C., Mora-Custodio, R., Yáñez-García, J. M., Morales-Alamo, D., Pérez-Suárez, I., Calbet, J. a. L., & González-Badillo, J. J. (2017). Effects of velocity loss during resistance training on athletic performance, strength gains and muscle adaptations. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 27(7), 724–735. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12678

Pérez‐Castilla, A., Ruiz‐Alias, S. A., Ramirez‐Campillo, R., García‐Pinillos, F., & Marcos‐Blanco, A. (2025). Reliability and Acute Changes in the Load–Velocity Profile During Countermovement Jump Exercise Following Different Velocity‐Based Resistance Training Protocols in Recreational Runners. European Journal of Sport Science, 25(5), e12309. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsc.12309

Ramos, A. G. (2024). Resistance Training Intensity Prescription Methods Based on Lifting Velocity Monitoring. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 45(4), 257–266. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2158-3848

Riscart-López, J., Sánchez-Valdepeñas, J., Colomina-Clemens, F., Crespo-García, E., de Castro-Maqueda, G., Rosety-Rodríguez, M. Á., León-Prados, J. A., & Pareja-Blanco, F. (2025). Effects of Different Ranges of Loads on Physical Performance Using Velocity-Based Resistance Training. Sports, 13(4), 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports13040121

Thompson, S. W., Fernandes, J., Dorrell, H., Greig, L., & Bishop, C. (2025). A Coach’s Guide to Velocity-Based Training: Definitions and Diagnostics. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 47(2), 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0000000000000886

Walker, O. (2016, January 28). Force-Velocity Curve. Science for Sport. https://www.scienceforsport.com/force-velocity-curve/

Weakley, J., Mann, B., Banyard, H., McLaren, S., Scott, T., & Garcia-Ramos, A. (2021). Velocity-based training: From theory to application. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 43(2), 31–49.

Weakley, J., Till, K., Sampson, J., Banyard, H., Leduc, C., Wilson, K., Roe, G., & Jones, B. (2019). The Effects of Augmented Feedback on Sprint, Jump, and Strength Adaptations in Rugby Union Players After a 4-Week Training Program. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 14(9), 1205–1211. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0523

Włodarczyk, M., Adamus, P., Zieliński, J., & Kantanista, A. (2021). Effects of Velocity-Based Training on Strength and Power in Elite Athletes—A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105257