Behind the Design: Real OPEX Program Design Examples From Daniel Persson
If you've ever looked at a workout and thought, "This seems simple, but it's going to hurt," you already understand part of what great program design does. The goal is intent, not novelty.
In this Behind the Design session, the coaches walked through several real examples Daniel Persson has been sharing. Daniel and Brandon Gallagher discuss the coaching thinking behind them), from competition prep to coming back from injury.
Kickoff: CrossFit Open 26.1, and why simple tests are so effective
We opened up talking about the CrossFit Open (and how it keeps changing). We also laughed at the timing of it all, because Daniel had just posted tips for masters athletes around programming.
His rule of thumb was clear: he usually avoids high volume, low percentage knee flexion, especially when it's dynamic. He called out things like wall balls, box jumps, and thrusters as common culprits for soreness and cranky knees in masters populations.
Then the Open dropped 26.1, and it landed right on that exact point.
Two weeks after Daniel posted those tips, 26.1 showed up with the very stuff he was warning masters athletes about.
A bunch of Daniel's clients still did the workout anyway. He said he had about 15 to 20 clients complete it, mostly people with a CrossFit background. The result was predictable: legs blew up. One athlete told him she wasn't just sore, she was in pain and could barely move. She had to call in sick to work because her job required a lot of movement.
That's the thing about these Open-style tests. You can't hide from basic squatting, jumping, and repeated knee flexion. It's also a solid reminder for coaches who tend to overbuild workouts.
Simplicity in testing (and a reminder for coaches)
One of the best points in the discussion was that the Open often tests people with almost nothing fancy. Sometimes it's just wall balls and box jumps. That simplicity exposes true capacity.
If someone wants to design fun and engaging sessions, they don't need five movements, two odd objects, and a complicated rep ladder. The Open proves that every year.
Daniel has shared several of these program design ideas on his Instagram, including the posts that sparked this whole discussion. You can find him at Daniel Persson on Instagram.
How the Open works now (and why week one stays inclusive)
Brandon mentioned he hasn't done an Open workout in a while, but he still watches the programming because it shows how CrossFit chooses to test athletes each year. He also remembered his first Open in 2016, including a workout that featured overhead walking lunges, plus chest-to-bar pull-ups or pull-ups (he didn't recall the full workout details).
The structure has shifted over time. Daniel summed up the current flow like this:
Open
Quarterfinals
Semifinals
Games
The details can change year to year, but the point stays the same. The first workout is often the most inclusive. It gives people a way to test themselves, see progress year over year, and get a real "capacity" check without skill being the main limiter.
Real OPEX Program Design Examples From Daniel Persson
Design 1: Competition prep is not a deload (and it changes how I program)
Daniel's first example was built for competition prep. He made an important distinction that comes up all the time with athletes: comp prep and a deload can look similar on paper, but the goal is different.
A deload pulls back so you can absorb training and set up the next block. Competition prep still manages fatigue (often with less volume), but it also needs to build confidence and readiness to perform on a specific date.
Here's the simple way I think about it, based on how Daniel explained it.
Before the table, keep in mind that both approaches can reduce volume. The "why" is what changes.
ElementDeloadCompetition prepPrimary goalReduce fatigue, prepare for next blockPerform well on a specific dayCommon adjustmentLower volume, sometimes intensityLower volume, keep key exposuresAthlete focusRecover and resetBuild confidence, rehearse competingRisk if misusedUnder-stimulusConfidence hit right before the event
The big takeaway is that comp prep still needs smart training stress, just with tighter guardrails.
Piece A: Rower build-up to create fatigue on purpose
This session ran A to B to C, back-to-back. It started with a row:
5 minutes easy pace
5 minutes medium pace
2 minutes hard pace
The point was to raise heart rate and create some fatigue before lifting.
That matters because competitions rarely give you a perfect setup. You often have to hit heavy lifts with a bit of stress, noise, and elevated heart rate. So this opener created a realistic starting point, then forced the athlete to practice composure.
Piece B: Build to a 1RM snatch, with a built-in limiter
Next came a 10-minute window to establish a 1-rep max snatch. The twist was the limiter: every attempt cost 5 calories on the air bike.
That single constraint did a lot of coaching work:
It pushed the athlete to plan jumps instead of taking endless small attempts.
It punished reckless volume without the coach needing to say, "Don't do 10 attempts."
It practiced recovering heart rate quickly after the row and between attempts.
It built confidence through a harder context (hit a big lift while paying a conditioning cost).
Daniel also pointed out something that matters for remote coaching. When you can't stand next to an athlete and manage their decision making in real time, the session format can do that job for you.
Brandon liked that approach for the same reason: instead of hoping the athlete makes good choices, you create a setup that requires it.
Piece C: Technique under fatigue, without "AMRAP brain"
The last piece was 5 minutes on the clock:
3 snatches at 60 kg
6 bar-facing burpees
Daniel was careful with intent here. He didn't want this read as a five-minute AMRAP where the athlete just redlines. He wanted fast singles on the snatch and smooth, consistent burpees.
One coaching line stuck with me: there's skill in bar-facing burpees, just like there's skill in a snatch. The goal was efficiency, less leakage, and keeping the last round looking like the first.
Daniel also talked about doing burpees in "gears," depending on the plan:
Jump down, jump up
Jump down, step up
Step down, step up
That kind of conversation gives an athlete options under pressure. It also keeps them from making emotional decisions mid-event.
Design 2: Controlled-volume mixed modal conditioning (so I know exactly what I'm dosing)
This next design was a format Daniel uses a lot, especially with masters athletes, because it solves a common problem. In mixed modal work, coaches often lose track of real volume. A 25-minute piece might be "about right," but the actual number of hard contractions can vary wildly across athletes.
Daniel's solution was what he called controlled volume. The structure was simple: every 5 minutes for 5 sets. At the start of each 5-minute block, the athlete completes a fixed set of non-cyclical work, then uses the remaining time for conversational pace cyclical work.
That way:
The session stays time-capped.
The hard reps are known and trackable.
The recovery work is still productive, not random standing around.
In this example, the athlete did two 25-minute pieces in the same session, with about 10 minutes rest between.
Piece 1: Pull bias with skills, then conversational pace
The first 25-minute piece started each five-minute block with:
3 to 4 bar muscle-ups
1 rope climb
30 double-unders
Row at a tough pace
Then, whatever time remained in the five-minute window was spent on the air bike at conversational pace.
Daniel noted an important detail: if "conversational pace" shows up in the session, he has the athlete find it in the warm-up. Otherwise, it's just a vague phrase, and people guess.
This format also makes progression easier. You can track exactly how many bar muscle-ups and rope climbs happened, then progress with clarity over weeks.
Piece 2: Press bias, then conversational pace on the rower
The second piece shifted the pattern bias. It included:
Ring push-ups
Shoulder-to-overhead
Burpee shuttle runs
Then the athlete used the remaining time at conversational pace on the rower.
I like this because it's repeatable without being boring. You can keep the structure, change the patterns, and still know what you're asking the body to do.
How I'd scale this idea for lifestyle clients or lower skill levels
Brandon asked the obvious question: what if someone can't do bar muscle-ups, rope climbs, or double-unders?
Daniel's answer was to keep the format, then swap movements based on patterns. For example, a lifestyle version might be dumbbell bench press and ring rows, followed by the bike.
He also shared a simple progression that's easy to miss: start by using cyclical work that complements the resistance work, then later use cyclical work that challenges the same muscles. Bike first, then rower, for example.
If you're unsure about reps early on, Daniel suggested small assessment formats. You can run short intervals, require sets to be unbroken, and track how long each effort takes. That gives you better estimates before you commit to a longer controlled-volume session.
Design 3: "Nowhere to hide" conditioning that forces urgency
This piece was the classic example of a simple workout that feels awful because it removes comfort zones.
It was a 9-minute AMRAP:
7 burpee box jump-overs
5 toes-to-bar
5 calories on the ski erg
The purpose wasn't to show off skill. Daniel used it closer to competition to train urgency and reduce wasted time. He even mentioned that if he coached this live, he'd be watching downtime, not just reps.
Transitions can become a sneaky rest. If I want to compete well, I have to practice moving through them with urgency.
He tied this idea back to workouts like wall balls and box jump-overs. Athletes often resist breaking early because they think it "costs time." Daniel's point was that it depends what your break looks like.
A smart break can be dropping the ball, taking two breaths, then getting right back to it.
A wasteful break looks like wandering, shaking out, looking around, talking, checking the clock, then trying to "make up" time with a huge set that blows you up again. That loop kills performance.
Brandon added another angle I liked: even on machines like the ski erg, there's built-in rhythm where you can recover without stopping. Learning where rest hides inside a movement matters, especially when the workout is short and aggressive.
Design 4: Breaking snatch plateaus by changing the context
This design hit a problem I've seen a lot in mixed modal athletes. The snatch looks great until heavier percentages show up. Then confidence drops, tension rises, and the lift falls apart.
Daniel's solution wasn't a pep talk. He changed the context so the athlete stopped comparing the day's performance to past 1RM attempts.
Prep work that solves the right problem
The session began with positioning drills that matched the athlete's needs:
Low hang muscle snatch plus overhead squat (find the overhead position, reinforce hip drive)
No-contact, no-feet snatch on the minute (to reduce excessive bar contact and horizontal force)
Slow pull power snatch (to stop rushing from floor to past the knee)
Daniel built those drills because he had video history and knew what tends to break down.
Main piece: rope climb and double-unders before heavy snatches
The main work was six sets of:
1 legless rope climb
20 double-unders
2 singles at 90 kg on the snatch
Rest
The conditioning before the snatches wasn't there to gas the athlete. It was there to remove familiar "1RM expectations." When the format is new, the athlete can focus on execution.
Daniel gave another example of the same idea: one snatch every 90 seconds for eight sets, but each set starts with 10 double-unders. Ten double-unders won't change strength, but it changes the mental reference point.
This tied into a bigger coaching theme he stated clearly: play to win, not to avoid losing. Athletes who start protecting numbers often perform worse, even in training.
Design 5: Returning to squats after a back injury, without feeding fear
The last example was about coming back from a lower back injury that happened during back squats. The athlete was physically fine, but the movement still felt scary.
Daniel programmed five sets of:
3 back squats with 2 to 3 reps in reserve, tempo 3 seconds down and 3 seconds up
Straight into a heavy sled push
Rest 2 to 3 minutes
He used tempo and RIR to keep the squat from getting into the danger zone mentally. Then he used the sled to get the hard leg stimulus that the athlete still needed.
The sled worked because it was lower complexity, didn't load the spine the same way, and let the athlete push hard with confidence.
Brandon gave an analogy that landed well. It's like getting $100 as one bill versus five $20s. You still get the stimulus, it's just split across tools in a way that fits the person.
What I'm taking from these program designs
The details matter, but the bigger themes showed up in every example:
Pacing is a skill, and it needs practice in clear terms (easy, medium, hard, conversational).
Constraints make athletes smarter, especially in remote coaching setups (like the 5-calorie penalty per snatch attempt).
Volume control keeps training sustainable, because you can track real reps, not just time.
Urgency is trainable, and transitions are often where people bleed performance.
Context changes confidence, which is why altering a format can unlock a stuck lift.
The "right" plan depends on the person, especially when fear, expectations, or injury history show up.
If you want to follow the coaches from this session, you can find them on Instagram at Brandon Gallagher on Instagram and Daniel Persson on Instagram. If you're also exploring OPEX resources, there's a CoachRx free trial and details on the OPEX Method Mentorship.
At the end of the day, the best designs weren't complicated. They were honest, trackable, and built to make the athlete better at the thing they're about to face. That's the standard I'm aiming for, and it's a good one to steal.
Connect with the coaches
Brandon Gallagher: Brandon’s Instagram (@bgperform_)
Daniel Persson: Daniel’s Instagram (@danielcapersson)
Join us live on Tuesdays mornings 11:30am EST on the OPEX YouTube Channel
Start your free 14-day CoachRx trial and bring principled programming, habit tracking, and high-touch communication all in one seamless coaching command center.
