A Practical Approach
to the Taper
Jacob M. Wilson, MSc, CSCS,1 and Gabriel J. Wilson, MSc, CSCS2
1
Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida; 2University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois
SUMMARY
TAPERING IS A TECHNIQUE OF
SYSTEMATICALLY DECREASING
TRAINING LOAD TO FACILITATE A
PHYSIOLOGIC FITNESS PEAK. THE
TAPER IS A COMPLEX TECHNIQUE
BECAUSE LOAD CAN BE REDUCED
THROUGH THE MANIPULATION
OF NUMEROUS VARIABLES, SUCH
AS TRAINING INTENSITY, VOLUME,
DURATION, AND FREQUENCY. AN
EXTENSIVE BODY OF RESEARCH
HAS BEEN DEDICATED TO
ANALYZING THE OPTIMAL
COMBINATION OF THESE
VARIABLES. THE PURPOSE OF
THIS ARTICLE WAS TO BRIDGE
THE GAP BETWEEN RESEARCH
AND PRACTICE, AS IT PERTAINS
TO THE TAPER.
INTRODUCTION
thletes who are driven to
‘‘A
succeed or driven by others
may not rest enough to
satisfy the needs of their body. They
are desperate to get better and improve
and feel that time off may set them
back in training. By failing to rest and
enable the body to recover more fully,
they gradually become more fatigued,
and performance starts to slip. Initially,
overtraining may occur in a bid to
return their performance to its original
standard, but staleness and burnout can
be the end result’’ (8).
Athletes who experience persistent per-
formance deficits despite 6 weeks of
relative rest have been classified as
overtrained (5). The prevalence of this
phenomenon is shown by the statistic
that 10% of endurance athletes appear
10 VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2008
to suffer from overtraining yearly (5).
Although there is much cognitive dis-
sonance in the field on markers of over-
training syndrome and proper treatments,
the one consensus is that overtraining is
partially the result of consistent increases
in training load (8,9,17). Therefore, the
need to decrease training load to treat
and optimally prevent overtraining is
clear. The question becomes how
training load should be reduced.
One extreme end of the spectrum is to
stop training altogether. However,
results indicate that a temporary dis-
continuation of physical activity leads
to detraining, defined as ‘‘the partial or
complete loss of training induced
anatomical, physiological, and perfor-
mance adaptations’’ (21). In an exten-
sive review, Mujika and Padilla (21)
found that short term (,4 weeks)
cessation of training resulted in a dec-
rement in numerous performance
parameters including an 8% to 13%
decrease in knee extension force, a 13%
decrease in swim power, a 20% de-
crease in muscle glycogen, a 3% to 14%
decrease in Vo _ 2max, a 4% to 25%
decrease in endurance performance,
and a decrease in insulin sensitivity,
oxidative enzymes, and cross-sectional
area, among other important markers
of performance. Based on these find-
ings, Zatsiorsky and Kraemer (31) pro-
posed the law of continuous training as
follows:
‘‘Long breaks in training ruin physical
fitness and athletic performance.
De-adaptation inevitably takes place.
Detraining occurs. After a prolonged
period of inactivity, an athlete has to
start from a decreased level of physical
fitness. Time and effort are unneces-
sarily spent on recovering the pre break
Copyright Ó National Strength and Conditioning Association
level of fitness.As in mountaineering,
if you want to scale the summit of
a high mountain, why get halfway up
the mountain, go back down, and then
climb the whole mountain?.The laws
of physical training must be obeyed if
one wants to be successful in sport. The
need for continuous training is one
such law.’’
In contrast to taking time off, the
maintenance of training intensity with
a partial decrease in volume has led to
an 8% to 9% increase in knee extension
strength (18), a 5% to 25% increase in
swim power (7,15,29), an 8% to 15%
increase in muscle glycogen concen-
tration (26), and a 6% increase in
_ 2max (23). This technique of sys-
Vo
tematically decreasing training load to
facilitate a physiologic fitness peak is
known as the taper.
The taper is a complex procedure
because load can be reduced through
the manipulation of numerous varia-
bles, such as training intensity, volume,
duration, and frequency. An extensive
body of research has been dedicated to
investigating the optimal combination
of these variables. The purpose of this
article is to bridge the gap between
research and practice, as it pertains to
the taper. This article covers the
theoretical basis, expected benefits,
and optimal exercise prescription for
inexperienced and experienced anaer-
obic and aerobic athletes and provides
practical applications for the taper. An
anaerobic activity can be defined as
a short-term (,5 minutes) maximal or
KEYWORDS:
taper; training; reduced training;
detraining; performance
supramaximal intensity event that pri-
marily relies on the anaerobic energy
pathways (i.e., ATP-CP and glycolysis)
(4). An aerobic activity can be defined
as a long-term (.30 minutes) sub-
maximal intensity event that primarily
relies on the aerobic energy pathways
(i.e., oxidative phosphorylation) (4).
The emphasis of this article is on
peripheral factors, such as changes in
body composition and muscle tissue
energetics, whereas central and neuro-
muscular factors, such as changes in
recruitment patterns, are discussed
only briefly. For this article, inexperi-
enced individuals were defined as
having less than 1 year of training
experience, and experienced individu-
als had more than 1 year of training
experience.
PHYSIOLOGIC BASIS OF THE
TAPER
Banister et al. (2) provided a 2-factor
mathematical theory on human per-
formance. Their theory suggested that
an athlete should be viewed as a system
that receives input in the form of a
training impulse and produces output
in the form of performance. For
strength training, the impulse is calcu-
lated by the weight lifted multiplied by
the number of reps the exercise is
performed (e.g., total work done). The
model suggests that the training im-
pulse leads to the build up of fitness and
fatigue in the athlete and that perfor-
mance is a result of the difference
between these 2 variables (2). An exam-
ple of a fitness gain would be an in-
creased capacity to recruit motor
units, whereas an example of fatigue
would be increased muscular damage.
The model is useful because it causes
athletes, coaches, and scientists to
acknowledge that stress can cause
increases in fatigue and fitness simulta-
neously, rather than just a simple cause-
and-effect relationship as proposed by
other popular models, such as the basic
supercompensation model. For an in-
depth discussion, see Chiu et al. (6).
Briefly, the basic supercompensation
model suggests that a fatiguing stimu-
lus initially lowers an athlete’s pre-
paredness, which triggers the body to
supercompensate by increasing physi-
ologic parameters above pretraining
values. For example, depletion of
muscle glycogen has been shown to
lead to increased storage of muscle
glycogen when adequate carbohy-
drates are provided. Conversely, in
the fitness and fatigue model, fatigue
and fitness are simultaneously present.
Although fatigue is generally thought
to have a higher initial effect on the
athlete than fitness is, gains in fitness
have greater stability and therefore last
longer than fatigue does (6). For
example, fatigue may lead to an initial
4% decrement in 1-repetition maximum
performance after a weight-training
session. In a few days, when the fatigue
has dissipated, the more stable, but
lower magnitude fitness effects may
allow for 1% to 2% greater lifting per-
formance than initial values. However,
after weeks of training, fatigue may
accumulate to the point that further
training will contribute more to fatigue
before an event than to fitness, leading
to a plateau or decrement in perfor-
mance (3). Thus, a period in which
the training impulse is lowered is
needed before competition so that
the underlying fitness can be truly
revealed.
EXPECTED PERFORMANCE GAINS
The ultimate goal of the taper is to
maximize performance and numerous
underlying variables that affect perfor-
mance. Studies on tapering have been
replicated across a wide range of sports
and activities, including cycling (18),
running (21), weightlifting (19), tri-
athlon (3), and swimming (7,15). Based
on the literature, an athlete can expect
the following physiologic changes and
performance gains after a taper
(16,23,24,30):
 5–6% improvements in criterion
competition performance gains.
 Up to 20% increases in power,
neuromuscular function, and
strength.
 10–25% increases in cross-sectional
area of muscle tissue.
 1–9% improvements in Vo _ 2max.
 Up to an 8% increase in running
economy.
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org
 Changes in resting, submaximal, and
maximal heart rate and in blood
pressure are unclear after a taper, but
generally remain unchanged.
 Up to a 15% increase in erythrocyte
volume.
 Up to a 70% decrease in muscle
damage after a workout, as indicated
by creatine kinase concentrations.
 Serum testosterone, an indicator of
anabolism, may increase by 5%, with
a corresponding 5% decrease in
catabolic hormone cortisol.
 Catecholamines, a marker of stress
and overtraining, may be reduced by
up to 20%.
 A 10% increase in anti-inflammatory
immune cells, with a concomitant
decrease in inflammatory cytokines.
 Tapering also facilitates positive
affective mood states. Results in-
dicate that tapering can reduce the
rate of perceived exertion, depres-
sion, anger, and anxiety and increase
vigor.
 Tapering appears to lower sleep
disturbances, as indicated by a 40%
decrease in movements during sleep
after a taper.
In addition to these physiologic and
psychological changes, the taper has
also been shown to affect muscle
glycogen and body fat stores. How-
ever, these effects depend on diet.
Reducing training volume while main-
taining caloric intake may result in
a slight increase in body fat. Therefore,
athletes who are concerned with body
composition may slightly decrease
caloric intake when tapering. Muscle
glycogen stores have been found to
increase proportionally with the dura-
tion and volume reduction of the taper.
The increase can range from 17% to
34%. This value may increase by 15% if
carbohydrates are increased during the
taper (i.e., from 48% to 78% of caloric
intake). Therefore, athletes concerned
with peak performance after the taper
should load with carbohydrates during
the taper.
HOW TO IMPLEMENT THE TAPER
OPTIMALLY
Variables that can be manipulated
during the taper include training
11
A Practical Approach to the Taper
intensity, frequency, volume, duration,
and the type of taper performed.
INTENSITY
Intensity is defined as a percentage of
a maximal performance. Examples of
maximal intensities include 1-repetition
maximum in weight training, and the
_ 2max, and heart rate in endurance
Vo
events. Research indicates that reduc-
ing intensity results in a decrease in
performance for aerobic and anaerobic
activities independent of training ex-
perience (12,23,26,28). For instance,
Hickson et al. (12) found that a 30%
to 60% decrease in intensity during
a 15-week taper decreased anaerobic
and aerobic performance by 20% to
_ 2 peak by 7% to 10%.
30% and Vo
Conversely, Shepley et al. (26) found
that a 20% increase in training inten-
sity, while lowering running from 80 to
10-km during a 1-week taper, resulted
in a 22% increase in running time and a
15% increase in muscle glycogen con-
centrations in trained middle-distance
runners. Collectively, results suggest
that anaerobic and aerobic athletes
should maintain or slightly increase
training intensity during the taper.
VOLUME AND DURATION
Volume is defined as total work done
and is estimated in weight training by
the product of sets and reps (1). When
the objective task requires the partic-
ipant to carry his or her own body over
long distances, such as in swimming,
bicycling, or running, volume can be
determined by the distance covered or
the duration of the activity. Studies
indicate that optimal volume reduc-
tions during the taper depend on the
previous training load, duration of the
taper, and experience of the athlete.
An extensive review in primarily ex-
perienced athletes by Mujika and
Padilla (23) found benefits from low-
ering volume, ranging from 50% to 70%
for anaerobic events (22,29) and 50%
to 90% for aerobic events (18,25). A
recent simulated model by Thomas
and Busso (28) in untrained endurance
participants found that optimal volume
reductions should range from 30% to
40%. Thomas et al. (28) suggested that
12 VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2008
the difference between their findings
and those of Mujika et al. (23) may be
attributed to the capacity of trained
athletes to sustain greater training
loads and therefore accumulate more
fatigue than untrained individuals. This
contention was supported by Thomas
et al., who found that 15 weeks of
training followed by a brief overreach-
ing cycle in which training was in-
creased by 20% resulted in 10% greater
reductions in volume to optimize the
taper than 15 weeks of normal training.
Similarly, greater volume reductions
become necessary when previous train-
ing durations are longer. For example,
a study examining 30%, 50%, and 75%
reductions in volume during the taper
found that the 50% reduction was
optimal after 3 weeks of training in
male cyclists (25). However, a 1-week
taper after 15 weeks of training in
middle-distance runners found that an
85% reduction in volume resulted in
significant decreases in submaximal
oxygen consumption, 5-km running
time, and calculated energy expendi-
ture (13).
Whether training experience has an
effect on anaerobic activities is rela-
tively unknown. However, we propose
the possibility of a minimal threshold
of training volume, which is necessary
to maintain or improve performance.
For instance, an experienced and in-
experienced weight trainee may per-
form 30 and 10 sets, respectively, for
knee flexion and extension exercises
per week. In such a case, a reduction in
volume by 70% would still allow
experienced athletes to perform 9 sets
of thigh exercises per week. However,
a 70% reduction in volume for in-
experienced athletes would result in
only 3 sets of thigh exercises per week,
which may not be enough total volume
to maintain adaptations.
The optimal duration for the taper
depends on volume reduction and
previous training loads. The tapering
studies reviewed by Mujika et al. (23)
found results ranging from 1 to 4 weeks
in duration for anaerobic and aerobic
activities; however, most studies lasted
fewer than 15 days. Thomas et al. (28)
found that in inexperienced endurance
athletes, the optimal duration of the
taper was 20 and 30 days for normal
training and overreaching, respectively.
Thomas et al. (28) suggested that if
a taper is performed for fewer than 20 to
30 days, training volume should be
reduced to a greater extent than the
recommended optimal volume of 30%
to 40%. With tapers 1 to 2 weeks in dura-
tion, volume can be reduced by 70% and
90% for inexperienced and experienced
endurance athletes, respectively.
Clearly, determining the optimal vol-
ume and duration of the taper is
a challenging task, and recommenda-
tions cannot be given with extreme
precision. However, based on current
research, we offer the following general
guidelines for experienced aerobic and
anaerobic athletes:
 For minimal fatigue (i.e., ,4 weeks of
normal training), the taper should
range from 7 to 10 days in duration,
with a 50% reduction in training
volume.
 For moderate fatigue (i.e., .3
months of normal training), the
taper should last 10 to 20 days and
reduce volume by 60% to 75%.
 For extreme fatigue (i.e., after an
overreaching training cycle), the
taper should last 14 to 28 days and
reduce volume by 60% to 90%.
Based on the research of Thomas et al.
(28), we offer the following general
guidelines for inexperienced endurance
athletes:
 For minimal fatigue (i.e., ,4 weeks of
normal training), the taper should
range from 7 to 10 days in duration,
with a 30% reduction in training
volume.
 For moderate fatigue (i.e., .15
weeks of normal training), the taper
should last 20 days and reduce
volume by 30%.
 For extreme fatigue (i.e., after an
overreaching training cycle), the
taper should last 30 days and reduce
volume by 40%.
Research on inexperienced anaerobic
athletes is currently lacking, and there-
fore, no firm recommendation can be
given.
FREQUENCY
Training frequency can be defined as
the total number of training sessions
performed for a given skill, task, or
body part in a given period. The time
measured is typically a week (18).
Research for aerobic events indicates
that training frequency can enhance
performance when lowered from 20%
to 50% in minimally to moderately
trained individuals (23). However, in 1
study, the maintenance of frequency in
highly trained endurance individuals
resulted in improved performance after
a taper, whereas lowering frequency by
30% resulted in no changes in perfor-
mance (20).
Currently, no studies have investigated
the effects of lowering training fre-
quency on anaerobic performance. It is
thought that any benefit derived from
lowering training frequency occurs
through volume reductions (20). How-
ever, studies in the anaerobic domain
suggest that volume may be optimized
at higher training frequencies. This sug-
gestion is strongly supported by studies
that have examined training or practice
scheduling on strength, power, and skill
acquisition. For example, Häkkinen and
Kallinen (11) investigated the effects of
volume distribution on neuromuscular
adaptations in 10 elite strength athletes.
With volume held constant, partici-
pants increased strength and muscle
cross-sectional area when their volume
was divided into 2 daily sessions, rather
than a single session. In contrast,
no changes in performance or cross-
sectional area were found when all sets
were performed in a single training
session. In another study, 3 sets of
resistance training divided over 3 days
resulted in 38% greater increases in
strength than performing the same 3
sets in a single training session (19).
These findings suggest that distributing
volume into smaller, more frequent
units may create optimal conditions
for muscular hypertrophy and neuro-
logic adaptations critical for anaerobic
events. One theoretical rationale is that
higher frequencies maintain the feel of
technical skills (19) and facilitate pos-
sible increases in fitness and ultimately
performance during a period of low-
ered training load.
Based on this research, it is recom-
mended that inexperienced endurance
athletes should maintain or slightly
lower training frequency during the
taper (#20%) (23), whereas experi-
enced aerobic athletes and inexperi-
enced and experienced anaerobic
athletes should maintain training fre-
quency during the taper.
TYPE OF TAPER
A final variable to consider is the
format in which the taper is used.
Typically, 3 tapering formats have been
used in the literature. The first is
known as a step taper and involves
a complete and immediate decrease in
training volume (e.g., decreasing vol-
ume by 50% on the first day of the
taper and maintaining this throughout
the duration of the taper). The final 2
formats are progressive in nature and
include linear and exponential decre-
ases in volume. A linear taper involves
decreasing volume in a progressive,
linear fashion (i.e., by 5% of initial
values every workout). Lastly, the ex-
ponential taper can be used, in which
volume decreases at a rate proportional
to its current value in a nonlinear
fashion.
Consider the illustration of an athlete
whose volume has a half-life of 2 days.
This simply means that every 2 days,
the individual’s volume will have de-
creased by half. For instance, if a group
of distance runners originally ran 12
miles per day at the start of a taper, 48
hours later, they would reduce the
volume to 6 miles. Two days later, the 6
miles would again be decreased by half,
meaning that they would run 3 miles
total. The key factor is that volume
reduction occurred relative to the value
of the remaining volume on the day
examined, as opposed to a percentage
of the original value, as it occurs in
a linear taper. Lastly, exponential
tapers can be incorporated with a rel-
atively fast or slow decay rate.
The literature on the optimal taper
format is limited. Banister et al. (3) first
examined the optimal taper format for
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org
aerobic and anaerobic events, with
a group of 11 Ironman triathletes.
The experiment lasted 94 days and
consisted of a bout of rigorous training
for 31 days, followed by a 2-week taper,
followed by another bout of rigorous
training for 33 days, followed by
another 2-week taper. The criterion
tests were 5-km running performance
and power. Participants in the first
taper were divided into 2 groups; group
1 performed a step taper with a 22%
reduction in volume, and group 2 per-
formed an exponential taper with a
half-life of 3.5 days and a 31% re-
duction in volume. Using an exponen-
tial taper decreased the 5-km criterion
running time by 4% and increased the
maximal ramp power by 5% above
baseline. The step taper did not affect
the 5-km running time, but increased
the power by 1%.
Participants in the second taper were
also divided into 2 groups: a fast
exponential decay taper (i.e., half life
of 2.8 days) and a slow exponential
decay taper (i.e., half life of 5.5 days).
Volume reductions throughout the
taper were 65% and 50% for the fast
and slow exponential decay conditions,
respectively. Using a slow exponential
taper decreased the 5-km running time
by 2.4% and increased the maximal
ramp power by 3.6% above baseline.
The fast exponential decay taper de-
creased the 5-km running time by 6.3%
and increased the power by 7%. These
results indicated that an exponential
taper results in greater power than
a step taper does and that a fast decay
taper increases power to a greater
extent than a slow decay taper does.
Similar trends were seen for decreases
in the 5-km running time; however,
intergroup differences for the 5-km
running times were not significant.
The confounding variable in these
results is volume. The exponential
taper performed 30% less volume than
the step taper, and the fast exponential
taper performed 24% less volume than
the slow exponential taper. Although
these differences were not statistically
significant, with a larger sample size,
they would have quickly reached
13
A Practical Approach to the Taper
Table 1
Summary of optimal tapering methods for anaerobic athletes
Inexperienced athletes
Volume
Duration (d)
Intensity
Frequency
Type
Experienced athletes
Volume
Duration (d)
Intensity
Frequency
Type
When to implement the taper
Diet
significance. Therefore, it may be that
lower volume, rather than the format
of the taper, at least partially contrib-
uted to the greater power and faster
running times.
The previously mentioned simulated
experiment by Thomas et al. (28) also
examined the optimal tapering format
for inexperienced endurance athletes.
This study compared step to progres-
sive linear tapers and optimal decay for
exponential tapers. There were no
differences between step and progres-
sive tapers with normal training. How-
ever, a linear slow decay taper resulted
in 1% greater performance gains than
a step taper after participants had
overreached. Unfortunately, a linear
slow decay taper also required longer
optimal taper duration (i.e., 48 days)
than a step taper (i.e., 30 days). This
longer duration of tapering, for a 1%
greater improvement in performance,
14 VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2008
Training load before the taper
Normal Overreaching
Unknown Unknown
Unknown Unknown
Maintain or slightly increase
Maintain
Unknown
Normal Overreaching
50–75% reduction At least 75%
7–20 14–28
Maintain or slightly increase
Maintain
Unknown
Before a contest, maintenance training, in
a periodized program, when overtrained
Athletes concerned with body
composition should slightly decrease
caloric intake when tapering. Athletes
concerned with peak performance after
the taper should load with
carbohydrates during the taper
may be impractical. For instance, in-
stead of tapering longer, the athlete
may have begun a normal training
routine again and perhaps obtained
greater performance gains during the
same period. In contrast to the results
of Banister et al. (3), Thomas et al. (28)
found that a slow exponential taper
optimized performance relative to a fast
exponential taper. Again, it is notewor-
thy that the simulated model analyzed
the optimal taper type relative to opti-
mal duration, which was 1 ½ months in
their study. In the study by Banister
et al. (3), the taper lasted 2 weeks,
which may have required a faster decay
to lower volume to a threshold neces-
sary to dissipate fatigue.
Further concerns when using the
results of Banister et al. (3) and Thomas
et al. (28) to find the optimal taper type
include the volume before the taper
and the experience level of the athletes
examined. Before the taper in the study
by Banister et al. (3), participants were
involved in a rigorous training regimen
that could have been considered over-
reaching. If their volume had been
lower, the outcomes on the optimal
taper may have differed. Lastly,
Thomas et al. (28) examined inexperi-
enced athletes, and Banister et al. (3)
examined experienced triathletes. This
difference makes it difficult to compare
the findings of these studies.
With the lack of research in this area
and the possible confounding variable
of training volume, we cannot give
a clear recommendation to athletes in
regard to the optimal format for
tapering. Instead, athletes must make
an educated decision based on the
evidence presented herein. For now,
we recommend that athletes strongly
consider volume reductions when de-
ciding which type of taper to use and to
factor these reductions relative to the
overall duration planned for the taper.
For example, an athlete should have
a relatively larger decrease in volume
through step reduction if the taper is to
last for shorter periods, with corre-
spondingly smaller decreases over
longer durations. Similarly, athletes
may optimize progressive reductions
in volume (linear or exponential) with
slow decays over longer durations and
fast decays over short duration tapers.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
This article began by discussing the law
of continuous training proposed by
Zatsiorsky and Kraemer (31). This law
suggests that long breaks result in
detraining. Evidence shown in this
article supports this law and indicates
that tapering is a superior method to
the complete discontinuation of train-
ing. Tapering is a technique of system-
atically decreasing training load to
facilitate a physiologic fitness peak.
The taper is a complex technique
because load can be reduced through
the manipulation of numerous varia-
bles, such as intensity, volume, dura-
tion, and frequency. An extensive body
of research has been dedicated to
analyzing the optimal combination of
these variables. The findings of this

Summary of optimal tapering methods for aerobic athletes
Inexperienced athletes
Volume
Duration (d)
Intensity
Frequency
Type
Experienced athletes
Volume
Duration (d)
Intensity
Frequency
Type
When to implement the taper
Diet
article indicate that a taper should be
implemented in the following fashion:
OPTIMAL INTENSITY
 Aerobic and anaerobic athletes
should maintain or slightly increase
training intensity during the taper,
regardless of training experience.
OPTIMAL VOLUME AND DURATION
FOR EXPERIENCED AEROBIC AND
ANAEROBIC ATHLETES
 For minimal fatigue (i.e., ,4 weeks of
normal training), the taper should
range from 7 to 10 days in duration,
with a 50% reduction in training
volume.
 For moderate fatigue (i.e., .3
months of normal training), the
taper should last 10 to 20 days and
reduce volume by 60% to 75%.
 For extreme fatigue (i.e., after an
overreaching training cycle), the
taper should last 14 to 28 days and
reduce volume by 60% to 90%.
Table 2
Training load before the taper
Normal Overreaching
30% reduction 40% reduction
7–20 30
Maintain or slightly increase
Maintain or decrease by #20%
Unknown
Normal Overreaching
50–75% reduction 60–90% reduction
7–20 14–28
Maintain or slightly increase
Maintain
Unknown
Before a contest, maintenance training, in
a periodized program, when overtrained
Athletes concerned with body composition
should slightly decrease caloric intake
when tapering. Athletes concerned with
peak performance after the taper should
load with carbohydrates during the taper
OPTIMAL VOLUME AND DURATION
FOR INEXPERIENCED AEROBIC
ATHLETES
 For minimal fatigue (i.e., ,4 weeks of
normal training), the taper should
range from 7 to 10 days in duration,
with a 30% reduction in training
volume.
 For moderate fatigue (i.e., .15
weeks of normal training), the taper
should last 20 days and reduce
volume by 30%.
 For extreme fatigue (i.e., after an
overreaching training cycle), the
taper should last 30 days and reduce
volume by 40%.
OPTIMAL VOLUME AND DURATION
FOR INEXPERIENCED ANAEROBIC
ATHLETES
 Research on inexperienced anaero-
bic athletes is currently lacking, and
therefore, no firm recommendation
can be given.
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org
OPTIMAL FREQUENCY
 Inexperienced aerobic athletes
should maintain or slightly decrease
training frequency during the taper
(#20%).
 Experienced aerobic and experi-
enced and inexperienced anaerobic
athletes should maintain training
frequency.
OPTIMAL TYPE OF TAPER
 With the lack of research in this area
and the possible confounding vari-
able of training volume, we cannot
give a clear recommendation to
athletes in regard to the optimal
format for tapering. Instead, athletes
must make an educated decision
based on the evidence presented in
this article. What we do recommend
is that athletes strongly consider
absolute volume reductions relative
to total taper duration regardless of
the type of taper used. The longer
the taper duration is, the slower the
reduction in volume should be, and
vice versa.
DIET
 Reducing training volume while
maintaining caloric intake may result
in a slight increase in body fat.
Therefore, athletes who are con-
cerned with body composition may
slightly decrease caloric intake when
tapering.
 Tapering results in glycogen super-
compensation; this process is facili-
tated by increasing carbohydrate
intake. Therefore, athletes con-
cerned with peak performance after
the taper should load with carbohy-
drates during the taper. For in-depth
reviews on optimal carbohydrate
loading techniques, refer to Ivy (14)
and Sherman (27).
WHEN TO IMPLEMENT THE TAPER
The taper has often been suggested as
a precompetition strategy, but we
propose that it should be implemented
under a number of additional scenarios.
 Overtraining: If an athlete ex-
periences signs of overtraining,
such as burnout, a taper should be
performed.
15
A Practical Approach to the Taper
 Periodization: A proper periodized
split should program periods of
tapering into training cycles to avoid
overtraining and staleness. For an in-
depth analysis on periodization, refer
to Haff (10).
 Before competition: Before a contest,
to maximize performance, a taper
should be performed.
 Maintenance: If an athlete wants
to maintain a skill that he or she
considers a strong point, while
prioritizing weaknesses with greater
training volumes, he or she may
implement the methods of tapering
on the skill that must be maintained.
If the athlete wants to take a break
from normal rigorous training, he or
she can implement the strategies of
tapering for his or her entire pro-
gram. Even if an athlete cannot
maintain the optimal tapering pre-
scription prescribed in this article, by
doing his or her best to visit the gym
whenever he or she can, while
training with high intensity during
the sessions, he or she will still
maintain adaptations to a greater
extent than complete discontinua-
tion of training.
A summary of these practical applica-
tions can be found in Tables 1 and 2.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE
RESEARCH
The research in the area of tapering has
excelled, and we give our highest
complements to all who have contrib-
uted to this body of knowledge. We
offer the following suggestions for
future research in the study of tapering:
 More studies are needed on the
optimal taper format (i.e., step,
linear, or exponential). Researchers
should be careful to control for
possible confounding variables, such
as volume. More research is needed
in this area with experienced and
inexperienced athletes. It should be
considered that perhaps a combina-
tion of tapering formats may opti-
mize results. For instance, in the case
of reducing volume to a large extent
(i.e., 75%), it may be optimal to begin
with a step taper, immediately re-
duce volume by 30%, and then
16 VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2008
gradually decrease volume in an
exponential or linear fashion, until
the desired volume reduction is
reached.
 The simulated model study of un-
trained aerobic participants by
Thomas et al. (28) should be repli-
cated in trained aerobic participants
and in trained and untrained anaer-
obic athletes.
 Research should continue to study
the optimal volume and duration of
a taper for athletes under various
scenarios.
 Current research indicates greater
results during a taper when training
intensity is maintained or increased.
However, the two have not been
compared in a single study. Future
research should examine this ques-
tion. j
Jacob Wilson is
a doctoral student in the
Department of Nutrition,
Food, and Exercise
Science at Florida State
University and is
President of abcbodybuilding.com.
Gabriel Wilson is
a doctoral student in the
Division of Nutritional
Sciences at the University
of Illinois and is Vice
President of abcbodybuilding.com.
REFERENCES
1. Baker, D, Wilson, G, and Carlyon, R.
Periodization: the effect on strength of
manipulating volume and intensity.
J Strength Condition Res 8: 253–242,
1994.
2. Banister, EW, Carter, JB, and Zarkadas,
PC. Training theory and taper: Validation in
triathlon athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup
Physiol 79: 182–191, 1999.
3. Banister, EW, Calvert, TW, and Savage,
MV. A systems model of training for athletic
performance. J Sports Med 7: 57–61,
1975.
4. Brooks, G, Fahley, T, White, R, and
Baldwin, K. Human Bioenergetics and Its
Applications (3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA:
Mayfield Publishing, 2000.
5. Budgett, R. Overtraining and chronic
fatigue: the unexplained underperformance
syndrome. Int Sport Med J 1: 67–68,
2000.
6. Chiu LF and Barnes, LJ. The fitness-fatigue
model revisited: Implications for planning
short- and long-term training. Strength
Condition J 25: 42–51, 2003.
7. Costill, DL, King, DS, and Thomas, R.
Effects of reduced training on muscular
power in swimmers. Physician Sports Med
13: 94–101, 1985.
8. Goodger, K, Lavellee, L, Gorely, T, and
Harwood, C. Burnout in sport.
Understanding the process—from early
warning signs to individualized
interventions. In: Applied Sport
Psychology: Personal Growth to Peak
Performance. J.M. Williams, ed. New York:
McGraw Hill, 2006. pp. 541–565.
9. Hoffman JR and Kaminsky, M. Use of
performance testing for monitoring
overtraining in elite youth basketball players.
Strength Condition J 22: 54–62, 2000.
10. Haff G. Roundtable discussion:
periodization of training—part 1. Strength
Condition J 26: 50–69, 2004.
11. Häkkinen K and Kallinen, M. Distribution of
strength training volume into one or two
daily sessions and neuromuscular
adaptations in female athletes.
Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 34:
117–124, 1994.
12. Hickson, RC, Foster, C, Pollock, ML,
Galassi, TM, and Rich, S. Reduced training
intensities and loss of aerobic power,
endurance, and cardiac growth. J Appl
Physiol 58: 492–499, 1985.
13. Houmard, JA, Scott, BK, Justice, CL, and
Chenier, TC. The effects of taper on
performance in distance runners. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 26: 624–631, 1994.
14. Ivy, JL. Muscle glycogen synthesis before
and after exercise. Sports Med 11: 6–19,
1991.
15. Johns, RA, Houmard, JA, Kobe, RW,
Hortobagyi, T, Bruno, NJ, and Shinebarger,
MH. Effects of taper on swim power, stroke
distance, and performance. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 24: 1141–1146, 1992.
16. Kubukeli, ZN, Noakes, TD, and Dennis, SC.
Training techniques to improve endurance
exercise performance. Sports Med 32:
489–509, 2002.
17. Smith, LL. Tissue trauma: the underlying
cause of overtraining syndrome? J Strength
Condition Res 18: 185–193, 2004.
18. Martin, DT, Scifres, JC, Zimmerman, SD,
and Wilkinson, JG. Effects of interval
training and a taper on cycling performance
 and isokinetic leg strength. Int J Sports
Med 15: 485–491, 1994.
19. McLester, JR, Bishop, P, and Guilliams,
ME. Comparison of 1 day and 3 days per
week of equal-volume resistance training in
experienced subjects. J Strength
Condition Res 14: 273–281, 2000.
20. Mujika, I, Goya, A, Ruiz, E, Grijalba, A,
Santiseban, J, and Padilla, S. Physiological
and performance responses to a 6-day
taper in middle-distance runners: influence
of training frequency. Int J Sports Med 23:
367–373, 2002.
21. Mujika I and Padilla S. Detraining: loss of
training-induced physiological and
performance adaptations. Part I: Short term
insufficient training stimulus. Sports Med
30: 79–87, 2000.
22. Mujika, I, Goya, A, Padilla, S, Grijalba, A,
Gorostiaga, E, and Ibanez, J. Physiological
responses to a 6-day taper in middle
distance runners: influence of training
intensity and volume. Med Sci Sports Exerc
32: 511–517, 2000.
23. Mujika I and Padilla, S. Scientific bases for
precompetition tapering strategies. Med
Sci Sports Exerc 35: 1182–1187, 2003.
24. Mujika, I, Padilla, S, and Busso, T.
Physiological changes associated with the
pre-event taper in athletes. Sports Med 34:
891–927, 2004.
25. Neary, JP, Bhambhani, YN, and McKenzie,
DC. Effects of different stepwise reduction
taper protocols on cycling performance.
Can J Appl Physiol 28: 576–587,
2003.
26. Shepley, B, MacDougall, JD, Cipriano, N,
Sutton, JR, Tarnopolsky, MA, and Coates,
G. Physiological effects of tapering in
highly trained athletes. J Appl Physiol 72:
706–711, 1992.
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org
27. Sherman, WM. Metabolism of sugars and
physical performance. Am J Clin Nutr 62:
228S–241S, 1995.
28. Thomas L and Busso, T. A theoretical study
of taper characteristics to optimize
performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 37:
1615–1621, 2005.
29. Trappe, S, Costill, D, and Thomas, R. Effect
of swim taper on whole muscle and single
muscle fiber contractile properties.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 32: 48–56,
2000.
30. Wittig, A, Houmard, J, and Costill, D.
Psychological effects during reduced
training in distance runners. Int J
Sports Med 13: 497–499,
1989.
31. Zatsiorsky VM and Kraemer, WJ. Science
and Practice of Strength Training (2nd ed.).
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2006,
p. 106.
17