ENDUROX Training Hierarchy of Needs for HYROX

Our approach to HYROX and hybrid training is built around a Hierarchy of Training Needs. The framework has been shaped through years of experience in elite sport and informed by established training science, but at its core it reflects a simple principle: performance qualities must be developed in the right order.

The idea parallels Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. In Maslow’s model, basic physiological needs sit at the base of the pyramid. Without them, higher-level outcomes cannot be achieved. The structure is sequential. You cannot pursue self-actualisation if food and safety are missing.

Training follows the same logic.

There is little point in prioritising highly specific race simulations if frequency and volume are insufficient. There is limited value in focusing on high-intensity threshold development if the underlying training load cannot be sustained. Each layer depends on the one beneath it. When the base is unstable, everything above it is compromised.

This hierarchy applies whether you are an elite competitor or preparing for your first HYROX event. The scale may differ, but the order of importance does not.

In the sections that follow, each level of the pyramid will be outlined in turn, from frequency and volume at the base, through intensity distribution and threshold development, to strength qualities, race-specific preparation, and finally peaking. The aim is not to overcomplicate training, but to clarify what matters most, and when.

Frequency and Volume of Training

At the base of the pyramid sits frequency and volume, because training is fundamentally a dose–response relationship. There is no clever workaround here. All else being equal, the more you train, the more you adapt, and the better you get. This is not a motivational slogan, it is basic physiology.

This is why frequency and volume underpin the entire hierarchy. Before we concern ourselves with intensity distribution, session design, or race specificity, athletes must first establish how often they train and how much total work they are doing. Frequency refers to how many sessions are completed each week, while volume reflects the total training load, most simply expressed as hours.

When you look at the best athletes in HYROX, particularly those competing at the Elite 15 level, a clear pattern emerges. They train more. Not occasionally, not selectively, but consistently over time. This is not accidental, and it is not optional at the highest level.

Of course, real life imposes constraints. Work, family, and recovery capacity all limit how much training an individual can realistically absorb. These constraints matter, but they do not invalidate the principle. Progress still depends on gradually increasing frequency and volume within the limits of what can be sustained.

For this reason, athletes must first strive to build more training opportunities into their week before looking further up the pyramid. Without sufficient frequency and volume, refinements elsewhere have little effect. You cannot optimise what does not exist.

Training Intensity Distribution

Training intensity distribution sits directly above frequency and volume because the two are inseparable. You cannot meaningfully discuss how hard training is without also considering how much of it is being done. A 400-metre run is hard. A marathon is hard. The stress comes from a different interaction between intensity and volume, not from one in isolation.

Once sufficient frequency and volume are in place, intensity distribution becomes the key regulator of whether training can be sustained. For the majority of athletes, this means deliberately keeping most training at a lower intensity, typically below the first aerobic threshold. In practice, this often equates to roughly 70 to 80 percent of training being performed at low intensity, with the remaining work carried out at higher intensities.

This distribution is not about training easy for the sake of it. It is what allows athletes to tolerate higher training volumes, recover effectively, and avoid excessive fatigue, burnout, or injury. Lower-intensity training places less strain on the autonomic nervous system, supports recovery between sessions, and enables consistent aerobic conditioning. Crucially, it provides repeated molecular signals that drive long-term adaptation when applied week after week.

Training intensity distribution is not fixed. When athletes are limited in how much they can train, whether by time, recovery capacity, or life constraints, intensity distribution often has to shift. Training remains a dose–response relationship, and when volume cannot increase, intensity sometimes must. However, once frequency and volume reach a meaningful level, the balance must shift back toward predominantly aerobic, lower-intensity work to keep the system functioning.

This pattern is seen repeatedly in elite sport. As athletes progress and accumulate more training hours, a greater proportion of their work is performed at low intensity. More training does not mean more suffering. It means more control over intensity so that high-quality work can be repeated consistently over time and the aerobic system developed.

Threshold Development and High-Intensity Intervals

Sitting above training intensity distribution in the hierarchy is threshold development and high-intensity interval training. This is the point at which truly demanding work is introduced, but only once it is supported by sufficient frequency, volume, and an appropriate balance of intensities underneath.

Threshold development comes first. In HYROX, this is particularly important because race intensity typically sits close to threshold for a large proportion of the event. For most athletes, this means working at a slightly sub-threshold intensity, often comparable to half-marathon pace in running terms, although this varies depending on an athlete’s strength and efficiency at the stations.

Once threshold work is well tolerated and consistently repeatable, higher-intensity interval training can be layered in. High-intensity intervals are defined as efforts performed above threshold, moving toward the VO₂max domain. This type of training is undoubtedly important, but in the context of HYROX, it is generally secondary to threshold development. Athletes with a higher sustainable threshold tend to outperform those with a higher VO₂max but a lower ability to sustain work overtime.

That said, threshold and VO₂max are not independent qualities. Improvements in VO₂max can raise the ceiling for threshold performance, and improvements in threshold often reflect more effective use of available aerobic capacity. The key is balance. High-intensity interval training should support, not dominate, the overall programme.

Importantly, in HYROX, threshold and high-intensity training are not limited to running alone. These sessions can include EMOMs, metabolic conditioning work, and hybrid intervals incorporating the Sk iErg, Row Erg, wall balls, and other race-specific stations. The defining feature is not the modality, but the sustained high intensity under fatigue, closely reflecting the demands of competition.

At this level of the hierarchy, the goal is not to train harder for its own sake, but to develop the capacity to hold demanding intensities repeatedly, without eroding the foundations built below.

Strength Endurance, Maximal Strength, and Power Development

The next layer of the hierarchy is strength endurance, maximal strength, and power development. For many athletes, it may come as a surprise that this sits relatively high in the pyramid, particularly in a sport that appears, on the surface, to be heavily strength-dominated.

This placement is deliberate. Strength qualities are undeniably important in HYROX, but their effectiveness is entirely dependent on the aerobic and metabolic foundations beneath them. Without sufficient frequency, volume, and appropriate intensity distribution, strength becomes expensive rather than useful. It raises fatigue faster than it raises performance. Of course that’s not to say it’s not very important.

Repeated submaximal force production under fatigue is strongly influenced by an athlete’s underlying maximal strength and neuromuscular efficiency—stronger athletes operate at a lower relative intensity for the same load, delaying fatigue and preserving movement quality.

Strength endurance does not develop in isolation. A robust base of maximal strength is a prerequisite. Increasing maximal force improves neural drive, motor unit recruitment, and musculotendinous stiffness, enhancing movement economy and reducing the relative cost of race loads. Evidence consistently shows that athletes with higher 1RM values perform repeated submaximal efforts more efficiently because each repetition represents a smaller percentage of their maximum capacity. Without sufficient maximal strength, the ceiling for strength endurance remains limited.

To translate maximal strength into race performance, strength capacity and power development are essential. Strength capacity work in the 8–10RM range improves tolerance to sustained tension and enhances local metabolic resilience—critical for high-rep stations like lunges and wall balls. Concurrently, power training improves rate of force development, supporting sled acceleration, efficient transitions, and the ability to maintain force output as fatigue accumulates. Maximal strength sets the ceiling, strength capacity builds repeatability, and power development ensures force can be applied quickly—together forming the strength endurance profile required for high-level HYROX performance.

HYROX-Specific Race Simulation

Approaching the top of the pyramid, training becomes increasingly HYROX specific. This is where race simulations are introduced, sessions that closely mirror the demands of competition and, in some cases, almost replicate the race itself.

These sessions sit at the very top of the hierarchy for a reason. Without the foundations below, frequency, volume, appropriate intensity distribution, and well-developed endurance and strength qualities, there is little value in performing highly specific simulations. They are demanding, expensive in terms of recovery, and offer minimal benefit if the underlying capacities are not already in place.

HYROX-specific simulations are not about building fitness from scratch. They are about refining performance. This is where athletes practice the feel of racing, improve movement efficiency, and rehearse transitions between running and stations under fatigue. These sessions help athletes understand pacing, manage discomfort, and develop confidence in their ability to execute on race day.

Because of their specificity and cost, this type of training is typically reserved for later phases of preparation, closer to competition, once the rest of the hierarchy is firmly established. At this point, simulations serve as a final layer of preparation, sharpening what has already been built rather than compensating for what is missing.

At the top of the pyramid, the goal is not more work, but better execution.

Tapering

At the very peak of the pyramid sits peaking and tapering. Somewhat fittingly, this is the phase where the goal is no longer to build fitness, but to reveal it. In HYROX, where accumulated fatigue from high training volumes, strength work, and race simulations is substantial, tapering becomes a critical performance lever.

Tapering occurs in the final period before competition and is designed to dissipate the fatigue accumulated during training while guarding against detraining. For HYROX athletes, this typically involves a meaningful reduction in training volume, often around 40 to 60 percent, while maintaining training frequency and selectively preserving intensity. The aim is to arrive on the start line rested, neurologically sharp, and metabolically ready, not flat or underprepared.

Because HYROX places unique demands on both the aerobic system and neuromuscular coordination, tapering is not about doing nothing. Short, sharp efforts are often retained to maintain running economy, station efficiency, and the ability to transition smoothly between modalities. Strength work is reduced in volume but not completely removed, helping athletes maintain force production without adding unnecessary fatigue.

Of course, tapering is not a shortcut. There is no benefit in tapering if the training has not been done. A taper does not create fitness, it simply removes the fatigue that is masking it. When applied on top of a well-executed training hierarchy, tapering allows athletes to express the adaptations they have already earned.

At the top of the pyramid, the work is finished. The only task left is to get out of the way of the performance.

Supporting Structures of the Hierarchy

Once the fundamentals of the training hierarchy are in place, there are several supporting elements that must also be addressed. These do not replace the core training principles, but without them, progress becomes inconsistent and fragile. Two of the most important are recovery and movement efficiency.

Recovery

Recovery is a critical concept because adaptation does not occur during training itself. Training provides the stimulus, but improvement happens during recovery. If recovery is insufficient, training stress simply accumulates as fatigue rather than translating into performance gains.

Within ENDUROX and HYROX training, we consider recovery through three primary pillars.

The first is periodisation, though not in the traditional long-term sense. Here, periodisation refers to how training is organised within shorter timeframes, such as a microcycle, to allow recovery between demanding sessions. This is where frequency, volume, and training intensity distribution are brought into balance. Lower-intensity sessions, typically performed below the first ventilatory or aerobic threshold, are deliberately placed between higher-intensity days to support recovery, particularly of the autonomic nervous system.

To support this process, we often monitor heart rate variability and other recovery markers to assess how well athletes are adapting to the training load. These tools help guide adjustments, ensuring that training remains productive rather than progressively exhausting.

The second pillar is nutrition. Nutrition underpins recovery by providing both the energy required to support training and the building blocks needed for repair and adaptation. Our philosophy is to prioritise protein intake first, ensuring sufficient daily intake to support muscle repair and strength development, while also matching overall calorie intake to training demands.

The third pillar is sleep. Sleep is often the most challenging recovery variable for busy, high-performing individuals, yet it is also the most powerful. Sleep is when the majority of physiological recovery occurs, including hormonal regulation, neural recovery, and tissue repair. While perfect sleep is rarely achievable, consistently improving sleep duration and quality has a disproportionate impact on training sustainability and performance.

Movement Efficiency

The second supporting structure is movement efficiency. While it is closely tied to many aspects of training, it deserves specific attention because of the technical and repetitive demands of HYROX racing. Small inefficiencies, when repeated across multiple stations and kilometres of running, accumulate rapidly into fatigue.

Movement efficiency focuses on identifying where energy is being wasted and how that cost can be reduced. This includes mobility, core stability, and technical execution across the stations. For example, in movements such as wall balls, effective core control plays a significant role in maintaining posture, timing, and force transfer, all of which reduce unnecessary fatigue and improve repeatability.

Rather than existing as a separate block of training, movement efficiency is integrated throughout the programme. Mobility work may be included at the start of sessions or embedded within gym-based training. Core training is typically present year-round, supporting both running mechanics and station performance without adding excessive load.

Technique efficiency is also a key component. This includes how athletes move within each station, how they transition between stations and running, and how well they manage pacing and positioning under fatigue. With appropriate technical guidance and feedback, athletes can often improve performance not by working harder, but by moving better.

When layered onto a well-developed training hierarchy, improved movement efficiency lowers the cost of racing. It allows athletes to express their fitness more effectively, conserve energy where it matters, and maintain performance deeper into the race.

Conclusion

That was a whirlwind tour of the ENDUROX training hierarchy, and by no means all the detail required to build a complete HYROX training programme. But it should make one thing clear: effective preparation is rarely about doing more random hard sessions, and almost always about putting the right work on top on the right work.

The hierarchy exists to highlight the many bases that need to be covered when preparing for HYROX, from frequency and volume, through intensity distribution and threshold development, to strength, race simulation, and finally peaking. Around this sit the supporting structures of recovery and movement efficiency, without which even the best training plans struggle to hold together.

‍