Because when we train, we break down the body. We stress it in order for it to build back stronger.

Meaning development requires breakdown that temporarily impairs performance.

As a result, recovery became my main focus.

Because if I could have players train hard and recover fast, I would deliver on both tasks.

I therefore frequently used strategies like cold and heat therapy to manipulate players' physiology.

Strategies that many people use wrongly.

But strategies that I believe could be applied by the business leader or founder working long hours while training for a Marathon, Ironman or Hyrox.

These people need to perform every day, but also need to ensure continued athletic development. So recovery is key.

Both cold and heat therapy are extremely simple and easy to use.

And both have been proposed to enhance recovery from exercise-induced muscle damage.

But how can two fundamentally different techniques cause the same outcome?

First, we must understand the ways in which cold therapy works:

Heat therapy works in the opposite direction:

When we want an overview of the effects of a certain intervention, systematic reviews are always a good place to start.

In a review by Veen et al. (2026), the authors looked at studies published between 2009 and 2025, all investigating the effect of cold-water immersion on soccer players' performance following a match, compared to passive recovery.

Results showed that cold water immersion significantly improved muscle strength recovery at 24, 48 and 72 hours post-match compared to passive recovery, while also producing slightly smaller but still positive effects on explosive power.

Seems promising.

However, looking at results from a systematic review by Rousse et al. (2025), the picture gets more nuanced.

The authors examined the effects of both cold and heat therapy on recovery across different exercise types.

Here, only about 33% of studies found a positive effect of cold therapy on recovery, while around 63% found positive effects from heat therapy.

How can that be?

As described, cold therapy decreases blood flow and inflammation, which essentially contains the damage.

Heat therapy, on the other hand, activates anabolic processes that stimulate adaptation.

Soccer is characterized by repeated eccentric muscle actions that cause substantial muscle damage, which is likely why cold water immersion appears especially effective in that context.

But here is what’s important to note; cold temperatures suppress inflammation.

And inflammation causes impaired performance in the short term, but also drives long-term adaptation.

The question becomes: what is your goal with recovery?

If you want to ensure a quick return of performance - and can accept a slight compromise on maximal adaptation - cold therapy is your best tool.

If long-term adaptability matters more than quick recovery, heat therapy is likely the better choice.

It's entirely context dependent.

If you would like guidance building your recovery protocol, reply to this mail and I will reach out to set up a free call to learn whether I could help.

👉 If you want more frequent updates, check out my X

👉 Or try out my free 7-day sleep and recovery web app, design to mimic the experience of being coached by me.