Client Resource, Training
Most training programmes focus on strength. But the physical quality that determines functional independence as you age is not strength. It is power.
Power is the product of force and velocity: how much force you can apply, and how quickly. It is what allows you to catch yourself when you trip, get out of a chair without using your arms, sprint for a train, or react fast enough in a collision. It is the physical quality most directly linked to functional independence, fall prevention, and the ability to meet the sudden demands of everyday life.
The research on power and ageing contains a finding that most people in fitness do not fully appreciate: power declines faster than strength with age, and the decline begins earlier. You can retain meaningful strength while your power has already deteriorated to a point where functional capacity is compromised.
Longitudinal data shows power declines at approximately 3–4% per year after age 40, compared to roughly 1–2% per year for strength. Studies that have assessed both in the same sample report a loss of strength 2–5 times slower than the loss of power. (Skelton et al.; Reid and Fielding, 2012)
This is not an abstract concern for the distant future. The neuromuscular changes that underpin power loss begin in the fourth decade and accelerate progressively. And most standard resistance training programmes, which focus on slow, controlled movements at moderate loads, do very little to address it.
Maximal strength (the amount of force you can produce at slow speeds) and power (force produced at high velocity) are related but distinct physical qualities. A person can be strong but have poor power if they cannot apply that strength quickly. Power is mathematically the product of force and velocity: P = F x v. Improving it requires training that develops not just how much force you produce but how fast you can produce it. Rate of force development (RFD) is the measure of how rapidly force rises in the initial phase of a muscular contraction, the 0–200 millisecond window that governs most real-world tasks like catching a fall or reacting to sudden movement. RFD is increasingly recognised as the more functionally relevant strength metric for ageing populations.
Key distinction: You can test strength with a 1RM lift done slowly. You cannot adequately capture power that way. Power requires assessment of force production at speed, which is what The Benchmark's Wattbike 6-second sprint and VALD dynamometry directly measure.
The differential rate of decline is the critical insight. Longitudinal studies comparing muscle mass, strength, and power in the same ageing cohorts consistently find that power deteriorates significantly faster than either mass or maximal strength. By age 75, an individual may retain reasonable strength on a slow maximal effort test while having lost a disproportionate fraction of their power and rate of force development. This is why older adults can sometimes demonstrate adequate grip strength or leg press scores while still struggling functionally, the slow-speed test does not capture the velocity-dependent quality that is actually failing. The Skelton et al. data on master athletes is particularly instructive: even in individuals who maintain training throughout their lives, power output shows earlier and steeper decline than strength.
Numbers: A 60-year-old who has been consistently active may have retained 70–80% of their peak strength but only 50–60% of their peak power. The gap widens with each decade.
The mechanisms behind accelerated power decline are primarily neuromuscular. With age, there is preferential loss of type II (fast-twitch) muscle fibres, the fibres responsible for high-velocity, high-power contractions. Concurrently, the nervous system becomes less efficient at recruiting motor units rapidly, reducing the rate at which the neuromuscular system can generate force in the critical early milliseconds of a contraction. Aagaard et al. demonstrated that age-related declines in RFD are accompanied and substantially caused by reductions in rapid motor unit discharge rate and changes in neural activation patterns, independent of muscle mass loss. This means that even with preserved muscle mass, the speed of the neural signal is slowing, and that is what matters for power.
Implication: Training to preserve power must address the neural component, not just muscle mass. This requires exposure to high-velocity movements and maximal-intent training, neither of which is achieved by slow, controlled gym work at moderate loads.
Falls are the leading cause of injury-related death in adults over 65, and a major driver of loss of independence from the sixth decade onwards. The research on fall risk consistently identifies lower-limb power and RFD as stronger predictors of fall incidence than measures of maximal strength or balance in isolation. The reason is mechanical: catching a trip or stumble requires generating sufficient counter-force in 100–200 milliseconds. If your RFD is too low, the corrective response arrives too late regardless of your maximal force capacity. A 2004 study by Skelton et al. found that leg power was the physical characteristic most strongly associated with difficulty performing daily activities in older women, more so than strength or any other measured physical quality.
Practical consequence: Fall prevention programmes that focus only on balance or slow-resistance training are missing the primary mechanical failure mode. Power and RFD training are necessary components.
The good news is that power and RFD respond to appropriate training even in older adults. The training stimulus required is different from standard strength training: it requires either high-velocity movements at moderate loads (power training) or maximal-intent training where the intent to move fast is present even when the bar moves slowly under heavy load. The latter principle, often called the "intended velocity" approach, produces neural adaptations even in slow lifts. The evidence on explosive-type resistance training in older adults (jumps, medicine ball throws, loaded jumps, fast-tempo resistance work) consistently shows improvements in power, RFD, and functional performance that exceed those produced by traditional slow-tempo strength training alone. Combining both modalities produces the best outcomes.
Practical protocol: Include at least one session per week with power-emphasis movements: box jumps, med ball throws, or compound lifts performed with maximal intent on the concentric phase. Even for people with joint restrictions, seated power or upper-body explosive work maintains the neural adaptation.
Peak power output is measured in watts (W) or watts per kilogram of bodyweight (W/kg). The Wattbike 6-second sprint test, used in The Benchmark's Power pillar, gives a direct measure of peak power output. A 40-year-old male in reasonable condition might produce 800–1,000W peak. An elite-level recreational athlete might exceed 1,400W. What matters is your individual number and how it changes over successive assessments, not comparison to population averages. The Benchmark also includes countermovement jump (CMJ) and squat jump testing, which assess lower-limb explosive power and the contribution of the stretch-shortening cycle. CMJ performance in particular is a validated, reliable marker of neuromuscular power that correlates with functional capacity and fall risk. Tracking these numbers provides an objective picture of whether your training is maintaining or developing the physical quality most predictive of long-term functional independence.
At The Benchmark: Peak watts and W/kg are measured on the Wattbike 6-second sprint. CMJ and squat jump height are measured separately to assess lower-limb explosive power. Both are retested at follow-up to track change over time.
Beyond absolute power output, left-right asymmetry in force production is an independent risk factor for falls, injury, and functional decline. Asymmetries of greater than 10–15% between limbs are associated with increased fall risk and altered gait biomechanics. They are common following lower limb injury, joint replacement, or neurological events, and often persist unaddressed for years because most standard training does not identify or target them. The VALD DynaMo dynamometry used in The Benchmark's Strength pillar measures bilateral force output and calculates left-right asymmetry with a degree of precision not available through standard gym testing. Identifying a significant asymmetry is the first step to correcting it through targeted unilateral training.
At The Benchmark: Left-right asymmetry is measured across grip, leg extension, and hip abduction in the Strength pillar. Asymmetries are flagged and factored into the coaching recommendations.
If your entire training programme consists of slow, controlled resistance work at moderate intensity, you are addressing one physical quality while another one quietly declines. Strength is necessary. Power is what keeps you functional, independent, and injury-resistant across the decades.
Train with intent. Move with speed when the movement allows it. Include explosive work. Measure peak power output so you can track it over time. The alternative is not staying where you are, it is declining at 3–4% per year without knowing it.
Measure your power at The Benchmark →Aagaard P, Suetta C, Caserotti P, Magnusson SP, Kjaer M, Role of the nervous system in sarcopenia and muscle atrophy with aging: strength training as a countermeasure. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2010;20:49–64. The primary paper on neural mechanisms of power decline and RFD in ageing.
Skelton DA, Greig CA, Davies JM, Young A, Strength, power and related functional ability of healthy people aged 65–89 years. Age and Ageing 1994;23(5):371–377. The foundational paper on differential strength vs. power decline rates.
Reid KF, Fielding RA, Skeletal muscle power: a critical determinant of physical functioning in older adults. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2012;40(1):4–12. Comprehensive review on power as a predictor of functional capacity and independence.
Alcazar J et al., Relative sit-to-stand power: aging trajectories, functionally relevant thresholds and absolute reliability. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2020. Evidence on power-based functional thresholds in ageing populations.
Tøien T, Nielsen JL, Berg OK et al., The impact of life-long strength versus endurance training on muscle fiber morphology and phenotype composition in older men. J Appl Physiol 2023;135(6):1360–1371. Evidence on preserving fast-twitch fibres and RFD through strength training across the lifespan.