REF-110 · Mujika, 2010 · Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, Vol. · Paper

Intense training: the key to optimal performance before and during the taper

B+moderate evidenceMeasured on a mixed groupWritten before October 2026, being re-checked

Mujika argues that the training-load reduction of the taper should come from volume (and/or frequency), not from intensity.

Training at high intensity BEFORE the taper is what induces maximal physiological and performance adaptations, in both moderately trained subjects and highly trained athletes; high-intensity training DURING the taper maintains or further enhances those adaptations while overall load falls.

Training volume can be markedly reduced without hurting performance, whereas cutting intensity risks detraining. The same logic is extended to team sports, where intense exercise decides match play and a pre-tournament taper should be built around high-intensity activities.

Key Findings (principles)

High intensity BEFORE the taper — induces maximal physiological and performance adaptations.
High intensity DURING the taper — maintains or further enhances adaptations while load is reduced.
Volume can be markedly reduced without a negative impact on performance; the load should not be reduced at the expense of intensity.
Reducing load carries a risk of detraining; the paper does not put a number of weeks on it.

Practical Application

Going into a taper, cut training load by reducing volume (and if needed frequency) while keeping the high-intensity sessions: high-intensity work before the taper drives the adaptations, and high-intensity work during the taper preserves or extends them, whereas volume can be cut markedly without losing performance.
Not from this paper: the pooled taper optimum — about 2 weeks, volume down 41-60%, intensity and frequency kept — is the Bosquet 2007 meta-analysis REF-107.
Not from this paper; the base's own practice: in the final week before the event we keep two short high-intensity sessions plus openers and cut only the easy volume.

Limitations

Narrative review in a conference supplement; no systematic search, no effect sizes; team-sport recommendations are extrapolations from individual-sport data.
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level

regraded 2026-09-27 from A: narrative review without systematic method, from the leading taper research group (Mujika); no pooled data

Content correction 2026-09-27
"Remove intensity → detraining in 2 weeks" -> the abstract says only that reduced load carries a risk of detraining; the 2-week figure deleted.
"Final week: 2 × short HIT + openers" -> relabelled as the base's own practice; the pooled optimum pointed to REF-107.
Level A -> B+ (narrative review from the leading taper group).