In a recent discussion, Rob explored the concept of training power for tactical athletes, diving into the methodology, results, and lingering questions from a four-week mini study. The conversation peeled back layers of complexity surrounding power development, assessing its relevance for tactical athletes and examining the best ways to train it.
Defining Tactical Power
The idea for the study stemmed from a request by an Army Lieutenant Colonel, a long-time follower of MTI programming, who wanted to explore power training. But before structuring a cycle, the first challenge was defining what “power” means in a tactical context. Traditional strength and conditioning views power as force multiplied by velocity—often assessed through Olympic lifts, plyometrics, and explosive movements. However, the tactical world presents additional variables: load, fatigue, and dynamic environments.
MTI’s working definition of tactical power emerged as:
“The integrated capacity to explosively generate and apply force rapidly across strength, speed, and agility-based movements under load, fatigue, and dynamic conditions, directly enhancing the operational effectiveness of tactical athletes in high-stress environments.”
Assessing Power in Tactical Athletes
With a definition in place, Rob selected four assessments:
- Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) Medicine Ball Throw – The only current U.S. military test for power, albeit controversial.
- Rotational Sandbag Throw – Added to introduce a practical, full-body rotational movement.
- Power Clean + Push Press (5 reps at 75% bodyweight for time) – Introduced to measure loaded, explosive endurance.
- 75-Meter Prone-to-Sprint Shuttle (with 45 lb ruck) – Designed to mimic real-world movement under fire.
Each assessment aimed to capture different aspects of power in a tactical setting, where movements rarely occur in isolation.
Building a Training Plan for Power
With the assessments established, the study moved into training. The methodology pulled from multiple strength traditions, integrating elements from traditional powerlifting, Olympic lifting, and sport-specific agility training. Each session followed a structured progression:
- 1RM Strength Assessment – To set a daily baseline for scaling loads.
- Cluster Training (85% 1RM, 3 reps with short rests) – Designed to maintain explosive intent under heavy loads.
- Speed Training (50% 1RM, 3 fast reps, followed by box jumps) – A method drawn from Westside Barbell’s dynamic effort training.
- Ballistic Strength Work (30% 1RM, loaded jumps or plyometric movements) – To reinforce explosiveness at lighter loads.
- Tactical Agility Drills – Sprints, jumps, and reactive movements relevant to real-world tactical demands.
The goal was to integrate multiple power development strategies rather than isolating one, creating a balanced approach that included both heavy lifting and high-speed movements.
Results: Did It Work?
After four weeks, the study showed measurable improvement across all assessments:
- 6% increase in medicine ball throw distance.
- 15% increase in sandbag throw distance.
- 11% faster power clean + push press completion time.
- 17% faster prone-to-sprint shuttle performance.
- 7% increase in max strength despite the primary focus being power.
These improvements suggest that the varied approach to power training—blending heavy lifts, speed-strength work, and tactical agility drills—had a direct transfer to performance. Notably, strength also improved, reinforcing the idea that strength and power can be developed simultaneously.
What’s Next?
While the results were promising, they also raised new questions. Which element of the training was most responsible for the improvements? Could one or two methodologies be removed to streamline the programming? And ultimately—does tactical power training deserve its own category, or should elements of it simply be incorporated into broader programming?
Future studies may refine the methodology by isolating training variables or shifting focus to aerobic base development—another long-debated aspect of tactical fitness. As Rob noted, sometimes the best way to test a theory is to throw ideas at the wall and see what sticks. This study marked an important first step in the evolving conversation around power and its place in tactical performance.