How many arrows do you shoot per week? It is probably the question archers ask each other most often when training comes up, and almost always the least useful one, because volume is only one dimension of planning. Intensity, technical focus, recovery and the timing of your peak matter just as much, and for decades training theory has grouped them under a single name: periodisation.
The idea originated in strength and endurance sports, where it was systematised largely by the Eastern European school and refined over the following decades, and almost everything that follows comes from there: it is general training theory, adapted to archery by reasoning. Periodisation reached skill sports later, but the underlying idea is the same: given equal talent and equal hours, giving the load a structure should pay off more than training by feel.
In practice the season is built like this: choose the two or three competitions that matter, divide the time left into blocks of a few weeks with one theme each, rotate session types within the week, put mental training on the calendar a few months ahead and cut volume before the target competition. On some of these steps studies of archers provide figures, and you will find them below; the structure as a whole, however, has not been tested on archers.
The core principles of periodisation
Periodisation rests on a set of physiological and psychological principles drawn from general training theory, and understanding them helps you see why certain choices work and others do not, rather than accepting them on faith.
-
Supercompensation
After a training load the body does not simply return to baseline: it adapts to a slightly higher level. This adaptation is the source of improvement.
-
Overload threshold
Triggering adaptation requires a sufficiently demanding stimulus: below the threshold no improvement occurs, which is why repeating the same session week after week leads to a plateau.
-
Overtraining threshold
Beyond an individual ceiling adaptation reverses, and the body regresses instead of progressing. Chronic overload is one of the most insidious enemies of performance.
-
Specificity
Adaptation is specific to the stimulus: shooting arrows improves shooting, whereas shooting them in exactly the same way for years can slow adaptation. That is why specificity also calls for some variation.
-
Reversibility
Adaptations are lost if they are not reinforced: after a long break the strength built with the bow goes down, and over months of reduced training, in the only study on archers, the score fell, as the section on the taper shows.
These five principles apply to any sport, but in archery the load has a particular shape. Metabolically, shooting is a light-intensity activity: in eight Brazilian national team archers, over a simulated competition of 144 arrows, lactate stayed around or below 3 millimoles per litre. What gives way is the set of muscles holding the bow in position and, with them, the aim. In seven university archers who held the shooting position until exhaustion, the posterior deltoid showed the electrical signs of fatigue and the tremor between eight and twelve hertz reappeared in the oscillation of the limb; in twelve Italian archers, after a fatigue protocol, lateral bow sway increased in every one of them, by 20% on average. In the registry the claim that muscle fatigue increases bow sway while aiming is reported, on the strength of two small studies with no control group. Hence the view, common among coaches, that in archery overload shows as technique losing consistency rather than as breathlessness, and that the season's stimuli should rotate across technique, strength, attention and arousal management, each of which adapts on its own timeline.
Macro, meso, micro: the structure of the season
Periodisation organises time across three different scales, each with its own function.
Macrocycle (annual)
This is the full season, typically 8 to 12 months, and it is where you decide on your main objectives (the championships, qualifications and competitions that matter) and, above all, when you need to peak and when you can afford not to. Everything else rests on the answer to a single question: which two or three competitions do I genuinely want to win this year?
The classic mistake is wanting to be in peak form for every competition on the calendar, something hardly anyone can sustain without being a full-time professional with a support staff. The two or three target competitions become planned peaks; the others become test runs, useful for assessing where you are, but not events your morale should depend on.
Mesocycle (4 to 8 weeks)
These are themed blocks, and for an archer a typical sequence runs like this: a technical rebuild block, a block of scapular strength and endurance, a block of technical intensity under pressure, and a competitive block. Each has a primary focus and a secondary one, and often a three-week internal progression of increasing load followed by a deload week.
The logic is to give each block a priority: bring one skill to a stable point, consolidate it, then move on to the next. With a clear focus it is also easier to tell, at the end of the block, what worked and what did not.
Microcycle (1 week)
This is the structure of the week, where volume, intensity and session types are distributed. An archer typically works with four kinds of session: the technique session (moderate volume, focused work on precise motor patterns), the volume session (high arrow count, lower technical intensity), the competition simulation (few arrows, high intensity, a context that creates pressure) and the deload (low volume, active recovery).
A good week is not four identical sessions: the four types alternate in a rhythm that lets you work hard without building up needless fatigue. Two common patterns are high-low-medium-high and technique-volume-recovery-simulation, and there are many possible combinations, but they all follow the same rule: do not repeat the same session twice in a row.
How many hours go into that week depends enormously on level. The elite groups described in studies are all above fifteen hours: eighteen hours in nine sessions at a Malaysian national sports school, about twenty-one for eight French recurve archers in the national top twenty, thirty hours of shooting plus six in the gym for the Turkish national team. At the European Youth Championships two hundred archers aged 13 to 20 reported an average of 14.9 hours of training and competition, with a standard deviation of almost eight hours, while in a Polish adult club archers trained on fewer than two days a week. In the registry the claim that an elite archer spends more than fifteen hours a week training is reported, but the threshold on its own does not separate levels: a group of Iranian provincial archers already reported fourteen.
The claim that higher-level archers train more than the rest is reported too. Ten British national team archers of Olympic level reported 34.5 hours a week against 4.4 for ten archers at a university club, and archers at the European championships reported about 700 arrows a week in training, against 274 for those at the German indoor championships. These are reported hours, though, collected once from different groups, and nobody has followed the same archers over time: nobody knows whether volume makes the level or the level makes the volume possible. For planning, these figures give a sense of scale, not a target to copy.
Linear or undulating: two schools
Historically, periodisation has divided into two broad families.
-
School A
Linear periodisation
The classical approach, codified in the 1960s by the Eastern European school, begins with phases of high volume and low intensity (general preparation) and progresses towards phases of low volume and high intensity (specific preparation, then competition).
This remains the dominant structure in strength and endurance sports. It works well when the goal is a single annual peak and when the athlete needs to build a broad base before refining.
- Character
- Classical school
- Best for
- Single annual peak
-
School B
Undulating periodisation
This is a more recent approach, which alternates very different load types over short periods, within the week or even from one day to the next: a technical session today, a volume session tomorrow, a strength session the day after.
Whether undulating periodisation really produces more varied adaptation and fewer plateaus in archery is still an open question, because it has not been tested on archers. In theory it suits anyone with a dense competition calendar who has to peak more than once.
- Character
- More recent approach
- Best for
- Several peaks a season
In practice many archery coaches blend the two into a hybrid approach: linear at the macrocycle level, undulating within the microcycle. Across the year the plan follows a progression (volume first, then intensity, then the peak), while within a given week sessions are deliberately varied so that the body does not settle into a fixed pattern.
Mental training in the season
In many archers' plans mental training turns up late, often in competition week, when the tension starts to rise. The data that exist point the other way. A Korean meta-analysis of seventeen studies of psychological skills training with archers found that programmes longer than twelve weeks have a larger average effect than shorter ones, g = 0.58 against 0.39, while neither the number of sessions per week nor their length made a difference. In the Chinese national team, after five months of psychological preparation, mood and confidence improved significantly only once the programme was over, not during it.
In the registry the claim that mental training pays off more when it runs for at least twelve weeks is reported, with a limit that matters: the comparison is between different studies, not between two durations tried on the same archers, and in the same meta-analysis the gap between university theses and journal articles (0.75 against 0.38) is larger than the gap due to duration. Nor is a short programme necessarily useless: in twenty-three Taiwanese university archers, after eight mindfulness sessions over four weeks, the score over 72 arrows at 70 metres went from 613.5 to 621.7, although with no control group.
For the season the consequence is practical. If you want a mental training programme ready for the target competition, you start it in the first blocks, alongside the technical rebuild, with at least three months in hand; in the week before the competition you rehearse it, you do not start it.
There is also a weaker finding, about rhythm. Twenty Ukrainian Paralympic archers who shoot seated in a wheelchair were followed for twelve weeks, and at each block they had to reproduce a five-second interval from memory. In the group that stayed on its usual training the estimate grew shorter from one block to the next, down to its lowest point before and after the control competition, while in the group that had added simulator work, more arrows, massage and swimming, time perception improved, according to the authors. In the registry the claim that with ordinary training alone, a Paralympic archer's sense of time gets worse over the course of the preparation is reported, but it is thin: the groups were not randomised, the task was built by the authors and nobody has checked that estimating five seconds well matters for the score. The comparison between the two groups says little about the mechanism either, because the intervention mixed four things and there is no telling which of them held the estimate steady; for the season it remains a hint, not a rule, in favour of blocks in which the work changes.
The taper: the most underestimated phase
The taper is the phase I see skipped most often. In the last week or two before the target competition, volume is cut substantially while technical intensity stays the same or rises slightly. How much to cut is something to tune to yourself, because in the registry the claim that cutting arrow volume in the days before a competition improves performance is listed as not studied, because in archery nobody has measured how much to cut, for how many days or with what effect on the score. It feels like throwing training away, which is why many archers do not do it.
The taper is purposeful rest rather than rest for its own sake: fewer arrows are shot, but every one of them to the highest technical standard; strength and mobility sessions are kept at reduced volume, while pure volume sessions are dropped; and you rehearse the mental routine built over the previous months instead of starting a new one. It is a delicate phase, because if you taper too little you do not arrive fresh, and if you taper too much you arrive flat.
That cutting back for a long time, or stopping, has a cost is shown by two studies, both a long way from a taper. Nine young sub-elite archers at an Indonesian training centre, measured before and during the pandemic restrictions, went from 302.4 to 280.7 points over 36 arrows, an average drop of 21.7 points that varied a great deal from one archer to the next. In the registry the claim that a spell of reduced training makes the score drop is reported, on this single study, which has no comparison group and did not measure how much those archers actually trained, during a period that changed habits, shooting venues and motivation all at once.
The strength figure, on the other hand, comes from beginners: young sedentary men who shot barebow for twelve weeks and then stopped completely for another twelve. At the elbow flexors strength had gone from 33.6 to 49.1 pounds-force and fell to 41.7 after the break; almost every muscle measured lost between 15% and 20% of the level it had reached, while still staying above the starting point. The claim that the strength gained from shooting is partly lost when you stop is reported as well. Neither case resembles one or two weeks of reduced volume with quality arrows: the restrictions lasted months and the break was complete, for three months. What they do show is the direction things take when the reduction becomes long, which is why they matter for the end-of-season break: after months off, strength is no longer what it was, although nobody has measured how much a trained archer loses or how long it takes to come back.
The signs that a taper is working are the ones coaches have always watched: the shot feels easier and asks for less conscious effort, residual fatigue clears after the first few warm-up arrows and you sleep better the night before the competition. Many also watch morning heart rate variability, HRV, and here caution is needed. In the registry the claim that heart rate variability tells you whether the training load is right is transferred: it rests on a review of elite endurance athletes, in which both rises and falls have been linked to poor adaptation and, in very well-trained athletes, variability can drop just as form improves. Read as an average over several days and against the individual athlete's profile, it tracked fitness and freshness before a major event in those athletes; in archers, whose sport asks far less of the heart, it has not been studied.
Four common periodisation mistakes
When I work with intermediate archers the same mistakes keep coming back, and knowing them in advance saves you from making them yourself.
-
Mistake 01
Constant volume
Shooting the same number of arrows on the same days all year round means giving the body the same stimulus for twelve months.
After a few weeks the adaptive response tends to run out and the rest becomes maintenance, yet it is the pattern I come across most often in clubs.
-
Mistake 02
No off-target phases
Constantly mixing technique and competition work makes it hard to solve specific technical problems.
You need blocks in which you work on a single detail without keeping score, because without them certain errors become ingrained rather than corrected.
-
Mistake 03
Multiple peaks in quick succession
Wanting to be in peak form for every competition during the year means never being fully at peak for any of them.
It is better to choose two or three real objectives and organise the calendar around them, treating the rest as tests rather than finals.
-
Mistake 04
Ignoring fatigue in the aim
In archery the fatigue that matters most is not felt in the lungs: it shows in the aim, as falling consistency, more visible tremor and errors you cannot explain. It needs to be recognised and managed with rest, not with more arrows.
How many arrows it takes to get there is unclear: in the only group of club archers measured at a hundred arrows, electromyography saw a shift of work between the shoulder muscles rather than a breakdown, and the claim that beyond 100 arrows per session the shoulder muscles become fatigued is contested in the registry.
How to build your own periodisation
Good periodisation starts with three precise questions, answered honestly before writing any detailed plan.
-
What are my target competitions this year?
Two or three at most, well spaced and ideally in separate blocks, because more peaks dilute the preparation. In your first seasons, one is enough.
-
What is my critical variable?
A single variable to improve, not three or five, identified from an analysis of past performance.
-
How much time do I realistically have?
Answer honestly, because planning six sessions a week and completing three is worse than planning three and doing them well.
With those three answers in hand you build a macrocycle that holds together. You divide it into themed blocks, each with a clear technical or physical focus, put mental training in from the start, then translate each block into weeks that rotate session types. What comes out is a simple structure, and that is an advantage: plans that are complicated to follow tend to be abandoned within a few weeks, while simple ones are seen through.
There is no such thing as a perfect periodisation, only the one you actually follow, monitored and adjusted month by month against your own performance data. The plan written in September should be reread in February, April and June, and updated in light of what has happened in the meantime.
Practical tools for periodisation
Following the season and correcting it as it goes takes only a few tools, all within anyone's reach.
The first is a training log, and a notebook or a spreadsheet is fine: record how many arrows you shot, how hard the session felt on a scale of 1 to 10, what you focused on and how you felt. After a few weeks of consistent entries patterns start to appear: which days you shoot best, how many rest days you need to feel sharp, which blocks worked and which did not.
The second is the RPE scale, a rating from 1 to 10 of how hard the session was, given as soon as it ends. It sounds trivial, but in sport RPE is a common way of estimating internal load, because it costs nothing and, used the same way every time, gives ratings you can compare from one week to the next.
The third, optional, is morning heart rate variability, measured with a chest strap or a ring. If you use it, follow it as an average over several days against your own profile, which takes a few weeks of measurements to build, because a single morning's value says little: a clear and sustained drop may point to too much load, but in endurance athletes, where this practice comes from, even a rise has been linked to poor adaptation. It remains an indicator borrowed from another sport.
With the log and RPE, which cost nothing, any archer can keep track of their season: a few minutes after each session, written down regularly, are enough.
Adapting periodisation to your level
What is described here is a general framework. To bring it into practice it needs to be calibrated to your starting point, the time you actually have and your technical experience. An archer in their first competitive season does not need the same structure as someone who has been competing for eight years, and copying the experienced archer's plan is one of the surest ways to overload yourself.
For the advanced beginner (one to two years of technique behind them) the priority is still building a solid motor foundation. The periodisation stays simple: two four-week blocks on basic technique, separated by deload weeks, and a single target competition in the season. The typical mistake here is imitating an advanced athlete's plan and overloading the system before the fundamentals are in place.
At the intermediate stage (three to five years of practice) a first structured weekly undulation comes in. The week begins to alternate session types, and the blocks take on more precise themes: scapular strength, technical intensity, pressure management. Target competitions can rise to two, each with its own peak during the year.
For the advanced archer (more than five years of competition) periodisation becomes the main tool for avoiding plateaus. The linear-undulating hybrid applies in full, with RPE recorded for every session, monthly plan reviews and, if you use it, heart rate variability followed as a trend. At this level volume is already high, and the margins lie more in how it is distributed than in adding more.
At any level the principle is the same: periodisation is updated and corrected as you go. In January it will not tell you for certain what you will be doing in July, but it does give you a direction and a framework for reading the signals from your body and your technique as they arrive.