Source credit: Based on the PubMed-indexed BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed 42343406, DOI 10.1186/s13102-026-01567-2.
A new systematic review and meta-analysis in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation gives strength coaches a current evidence check on force-velocity-profile-based individualized training.
The review compared individualized force-velocity strength programs with non-individualized strength training. Across six eligible studies, programs typically ran 7 to 10 weeks, used two weekly sessions, and combined heavier strength work with velocity-oriented or plyometric work depending on the athlete’s profile.
The meta-analysis favored individualized training for several force-velocity profile measures and vertical jump height. The authors reported large effects for theoretical maximal force, theoretical maximal velocity, force-velocity imbalance, and vertical jump height. Effects for theoretical maximal power and sprint performance were not statistically significant.
That makes the finding useful, but not a blank check. The authors also emphasized heterogeneity across the included studies and called for cautious interpretation. In plain gym terms, force-velocity profiling may help coaches choose whether an athlete needs more force-oriented or velocity-oriented work, but the testing and programming have to be done carefully.
Why it matters for lifters
For bodybuilders, powerlifters, weightlifters, and field-sport athletes, this review reinforces a practical point: two athletes can need different strength prescriptions even when they have similar maxes. One lifter may be force-deficient and benefit from heavier work, while another may need more speed, jump, or intent-focused training.
The vertical jump signal is especially relevant for athletes using strength training to improve explosiveness. It suggests that matching the training emphasis to the athlete’s force-velocity profile can be more productive than giving everyone the same generic block.
For general lifters, the takeaway is simpler: measure what matters, adjust the program, and avoid copying advanced velocity-based plans without the testing context. A well-run individualized plan still needs progressive overload, recovery, movement quality, and enough time to adapt.
What to watch next
Watch for larger controlled trials that separate strength athletes, team-sport athletes, and recreational lifters. The next useful step would be clearer guidance on which tests are reliable enough for everyday coaches and which force-velocity cutoffs actually change programming decisions.
Also watch whether future studies show transfer beyond jump height. Sprint performance and theoretical maximal power did not show significant effects in this meta-analysis, so coaches should be careful about promising across-the-board athletic improvements from force-velocity profiling alone.
Health disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice. Strength and power training can carry injury risk, especially when loads, jumps, or sprint work are progressed too quickly. If you have pain, a medical condition, or are returning from injury, work with a qualified health professional or coach before changing your training plan.