MaximiSing Results with Optimal Training Intensity Strategies

I've coached Olympic weightlifters for a few years now, and there's quite a lot of debate amongst coaches about training frequency and intensity. This longer post outlines my thinking about evidence-based training and optimising the training effect.

In summary, my approach is based on a very simple idea of using three intense training sessions weekly. Workloads (repetitions and sets) are calculated and cycled as percentages of 1RM. This post does not address how I integrate technical development, thinking skills or competition peaking - those are posts for another day.

So first question - What’s the evidence for optimal Olympic weightlifting gains from 3 weekly intense workouts

Olympic weightlifting is a blend of technique and power. Effective training hinges on balancing intensity, volume, and recovery. The assumption that “more is better” is not supported by data that supports smarter but not necessarily more frequent, programming. Recent evidence suggests that three intense carefully structured workouts per week can be a sweet spot for many athletes.

Several studies have examined the effects of training frequency on strength and power. Here are three examples:

• Rønnestad et al. (2015): Found that well-trained individuals can maintain or improve maximal strength and power output with as few as two or three resistance training sessions per week, provided each is performed at high intensity.

• Grgic et al. (2018) (Meta-analysis): Concluded that frequency plays a secondary role to volume, meaning similar strength gains can be achieved through fewer workouts if total volume and intensity are preserved. This supports the efficacy of three sessions per week if well-structured.

• Haff & Triplett (2016) (Essentials of Strength Training): Emphasise their conclusion that advanced lifters often benefit from more complex programming—but also stress the value of recovery in adaptation. For non-elite athletes, three weekly intense sessions allow for supercompensation without overtraining.

It’s all about recovery and neuromuscular adaptation

Olympic lifts—snatch and clean & jerk—place significant demands on the neuromuscular system and central nervous system (CNS). The critical point here is that Intense sessions require recovery time for adaptation:

• CNS Fatigue: Heavy explosive lifting stresses the CNS, which takes 48–72 hours to fully recover. Spacing out three sessions allows this recovery to occur.

• Hormonal Response: Cortisol and testosterone responses tend to normalise with appropriate rest periods. Overtraining from excessive frequency can hinder muscle protein synthesis.

• Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness (DOMS): Although less common in trained lifters, DOMS from high-intensity sessions can impact subsequent performance without adequate rest.

Unsurprisingly, the quality of training matters

Three intense workouts per week requires a clear intent - training with purpose:

• Higher Technical Quality: Less frequent training enables athletes to approach each session with greater mental clarity and technical focus.

• Auto-regulation: Athletes can better gauge readiness and modify intensity (e.g. using Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) or velocity-based metrics).

• Periodisation Models: A three-day split can effectively incorporate undulating or block periodisation, alternating stimulus while allowing recovery (e.g., Day 1: Power focus; Day 2: Strength; Day 3: Technique).

So what does this mean for the aspiring and/or high-performance lifter

While many elite Olympic lifters often train multiple times daily, they regularly experience the law of diminishing returns. In other words, evidence suggests that daily intense training makes it very difficult for the CNS and neuromuscular system to adapt optimally.

It’s clear, however, that the “three-workout” model I’m talking about is especially useful at all levels:

• The recreational athletes and/or novice lifter

• Intermediate (in New Zealand C to A grade lifters) benefits from intensity and recovery without the risk of overtraining.

• Older athletes: Recovery capacity typically diminishes with age, making moderate frequency with high intensity more sustainable.

• Athletes cross-training or managing life demands: Balancing Olympic lifting with other sports, work, or family life favors sustainable frequency.

When properly programmed, three intense Olympic weightlifting sessions per week can yield impressive results. This frequency strikes a balance between maximising neuromuscular adaptation and minimising fatigue. By focusing on intensity, technical precision, and recovery, lifters can optimise strength and explosive power gains.

References:

Rønnestad BR, Hansen J, Vegge G, Tønnessen E, Slettaløkken G. Short intervals induce superior training adaptations compared with long intervals in cyclists - an effort-matched approach. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2015 Apr;25(2):143-51.

Grgic J, Schoenfeld BJ, Davies TB, Lazinica B, Krieger JW, Pedisic Z. Effect of Resistance Training Frequency on Gains in Muscular Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. 2018 May;48(5):1207-1220.

Haff, G. G., & Triplett, N. T. (Eds.). (2016). Essentials of strength training and conditioning (4th ed.). Human Kinetics.