Strength Training for Triathletes:

Blending Anecdotal and Empirical Evidence to Improve Triathlon Performance

by
Kevin J. Le

A THESIS

submitted to

Oregon State University

Honors College

in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of

Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Kinesiology

(Honors Scholar)

Presented June 4, 2018

Commencement June 2018
2
 3

AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF

Kevin J. Le for the degree of Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Kinesiology presented

on June 4, 2018. Title: Strength Training for Triathletes: Blending Anecdotal and
Empirical Evidence to Improve Triathlon Performance.

Abstract approved: Erica McKenzie

Triathlon is an endurance sport consisting of back-to-back swimming, cycling, and

running. There are four popular distances: sprint (.75km swim, 20km bike, 5km run),
Olympic (1.5km swim, 40km bike, 10km run), half-ironman (1.9km swim, 90km bike,
21.1km run), and ironman (3.8km swim, 180km bike, 42.2km run). Even at the shortest
distances, elite triathlon performance requires excellent aerobic fitness (maximum rate of
oxygen consumption and lactate threshold) and movement economy.1 Strength training,
defined here as weight lifting targeted at primary movers of large muscle groups, is
becoming popular as a means of improving performance. Empirical evidence shows
heavy strength training to benefit endurance sport performance in laboratory settings.
However, optimal training changes in the context of confounding variables of life, such
as family and work, and the additional stress they create. The purpose of this project is to
explore both the scientific and unscientific elements of triathlon training to aid triathletes
in developing a plan for strength training (or none at all) to improve their performance.

Key Words: strength training, resistance training, weight lifting, triathlon

Corresponding e-mail address: [email protected]

 4

©Copyright by Kevin J. Le
June 4, 2018
All Rights Reserved
 5

Strength Training for Triathletes:

Blending Anecdotal and Empirical Evidence to Improve Triathlon Performance

by
Kevin J. Le

A THESIS

submitted to

Oregon State University

Honors College

in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of

Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Kinesiology

(Honors Scholar)

Presented June 4, 2018

Commencement June 2018
 6

Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Kinesiology project of Kevin J. Le presented on June

4, 2018.

APPROVED:

_____________________________________________________________________
Erica McKenzie, Mentor, representing Carlson College of Veterinary Medicine

_____________________________________________________________________
Sean Newsom, Committee Member, representing College of Public Health and Human
Sciences

_____________________________________________________________________
Aaron Seipel, Committee Member, representing College of Public Health and Human
Sciences

_____________________________________________________________________
Toni Doolen, Dean, Oregon State University Honors College

I understand that my project will become part of the permanent collection of Oregon
State University, Honors College. My signature below authorizes release of my project
to any reader upon request.

_____________________________________________________________________
Kevin J. Le, Author
 7

Acknowledgements

Thank you to my mentor and OSU Triathlon Club coach, Erica McKenzie, for giving me

both independence and guidance during the journey of writing this thesis.

Thank you to Jay Penry for being an excellent instructor and finding time to discuss my

thesis and tangents, such as cycling, endurance training, and ways I can further my

education at OSU.

Thank you to Sean Newsom for also being a great professor and stepping in last second

to listen to my defense.

Last but not least, thank you to Aaron Seipel for being a great friend, roommate, training

buddy, competitor, motivator, and someone I can complain to about almost anything.

And… thank you to Blair Bronson, Staci Partridge, and the rest of Oregon State Triathlon

for being a second family to me.

 8

Table of Contents

Preface ………………………………………………………………………………… 9

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………... 9

Challenges of Triathlon ……………………………………………………………… 11

Time 12
Energy: The Stress Budget 12
Limitations of Science 15
Individuality 17

Strength Training Physiology and Benefits ………………………………………… 19

Physiological Demands of Triathlon Performance 19

Basic Muscle Physiology 19
Strength Training and Endurance Performance in Trained Individuals 22
Injury Rehabilitation and Prevention 24
General Health 25

Art: A Balancing Act ………………………………………………………………… 26

If Strength Training is Desired: How-To …………………………………………... 28

Summary ……………………………………………………………………………... 33

Decision-Making Flowchart ………………………………………………………… 34

Guidelines for Levels of Focus ……………………………………………………… 35

References ……………………………………………………………………………. 38
 9

Preface

All opinions in this text are products of personal knowledge and experience with

triathlon, both of which stem from several years of training, racing, coaching, and

education (undergraduate Kinesiology degree and self-guided reading). This is not an

assertion of personal views as golden rules; they are only personal. However, read with

an open mind, and this text may lead to seeing something in a different light and new

realizations.

Introduction

This text is intended to be a discussion about strength training for triathletes.

Here, strength training is defined as weight lifting to increase maximum force production

and rate of force production within major muscle groups. Strength training does not refer

to rehabilitative exercises like those found in physical therapy programs. This text

reviews current scientific literature related to strength training and endurance sport

performance, but it also considers abstract elements of triathlon that are not able to be

evaluated in randomized controlled trials. It includes significant influence from

practice—the art of coaching, training, and racing—and anecdote, two unscientific but

important and highly-prevalent forces in endurance sport training and racing. This text is

not a formal scientific review nor does it propose there is a single best way to strength

train for triathlon. There are no example strength training programs included in this

document, as there are plenty of free or inexpensive resources with adequate weight

lifting routines. This work does include, however, guidelines on how to approach strength

training, how much energy to put toward strength training, and general goals for different
 10

levels of strength training. Through a combination of the abstract elements of triathlon

training and scientific principles, this text is intended to inform athletes how they might

take their personal needs into consideration in deciding what role strength training can

play in their athletic pursuits.

Triathlon is a young sport full of contradictory opinions on how to optimize

performance on race day. Because of its time demands and its complex nature as a

combination of three sports, training can be considered as much of an art as it is a

science. It can be argued other endurance sports are more informed by science due to

greater simplicity (training a single sport vs. three) allowing for more applicable

experimental results; however, it is difficult to apply the results of traditional research

trials to triathlon with great validity because of the following factors. Research

experiments take place in controlled laboratory settings with controlled variables and

often reveal distinct, objective outcomes. However, countless variables impact both

training and race-day performance for triathletes, and these interactions are impossible to

dissect. For example, how does a high volume of run training impact the athlete’s ability

to swim with proper technique? How does a subsequent bike workout after a run workout

impact the potential adaptations that would follow an isolated run workout? Does

replacing a swim/bike/run session with a strength training session yield better

performance on race day? There are certainly no clear answers to these questions, and the

answers likely differ between individuals.

The umbrella question governing all decisions related to optimizing training is:

“What should I do right now to maximize my performance on race day?” Under this

question falls many more specific questions. Some of them, related to this text, include
 11

should I do more swim/bike/run volume or intensity? Is more always better? Should I lift

weights, and how should I lift weights? Should I lift weights in addition to my endurance

training or in place of a portion of it? Should I train through tiredness and fatigue, or

should I rest? This text will demonstrate how much the answers to these questions can

vary and are dependent on wide range of factors. The individual’s path to optimal athletic

performance constantly changes with the confounding factors of everyday life. For

example, a period of illness or injury alters the optimal sequence of workouts leading up

to a race, or a few stressful weeks at work impacts personal motivation and changes the

best path to maximum performance. Hopefully, reading this text will help athletes to

think about their training and to create a plan for strength training suited to their own life.

Challenges of Triathlon

The individualism of triathlon training is rooted in the challenges posed by the

need to be competent in three sports. Training three sports simultaneously creates

questions on how to budget time and energy. It also creates uncertainty in how training

should be structured due to the impacts of prior workouts on subsequent training within

and between days. There is minimal scientifically-based information to direct the

organization of training three sports to yield optimal adaptation and performance. The

unlimited possible combinations of discipline and duration introduce countless variables,

which are impossible to test in a controlled laboratory setting. There are so many

technical skills and elements of fitness that can be developed in triathlon training that this

becomes a large balancing act, consisting of working on weaknesses, capitalizing on

strengths, and preparing to race.

 12

Time

A survey of 83 elite triathletes and 25 coaches provides insight into how much

elite triathletes train. The athletes in this study averaged approximately 25 km/week of

swimming, 305 km/week of cycling, and 80 km/week of running (Fernandez, Acero,

Lopez, & Pereiro, n.d.). While the authors did not record duration of training, it is

estimated the total time to complete these distances would be 25-30 hours per week (7

hours for swimming, 15 hours for cycling, 7 hours for running). The elite athletes

achieved peak volumes of over 40 km/week of swimming, 470 km/week of cycling, and

100 km/week of running (with peaks for each sport occurring on different weeks). On the

contrary, age-group triathletes with full-time employment and other life commitments

may average only 12-13 hours of training per week.

Retrospective studies show a large majority of elite endurance athletes achieving

superior results by adopting a polarized training regimen with about 80% of training

performed at low intensities and 20% at high intensities (Stöggl & Sperlich, 2015). For

the aforementioned elite triathletes, this means 20-25 hours a week are dedicated to low

intensity training. Age-group triathletes come nowhere close to these training volumes.

Thus, a potential limiter of performance for age-group triathletes is simply the time they

put toward training.

Energy: The Stress Budget

Fulfilling performance potential requires short-term and long-term mental and

physical fortitude. It requires an open mind and the desire to achieve confidence and

competence in every aspect of the sport. Colloquially, triathlon is said to be not a

 13

destination, but a journey involving constant challenges that affect all areas of life. Jesse

Kropelnicki, founder and head coach of QT2Systems and a USA Triathlon coach of the

highest rank (Level III; achieved by less than 30 individuals in the USA), illustrates his

“stress budget” concept in lay articles and at USA Triathlon coaching clinics. The ‘stress

budget’ is the maximum amount of stress an individual can experience without it

becoming counterproductive to success as an athlete. It encompasses everything in life,

including employment, family, finances, and sport, and is very much related to time

availability. Stress is not inherently detrimental, because it is a stimulus for growth, but

there is only so much energy or effort that an individual can direct toward managing

stressors. Excessive stress results in burnout, demoralization, and, ultimately, regression

(J Kropelnicki, 2017).

Stress is dynamic and multifaceted with physical, mental, and emotional elements

all contributing to an end-product: short- and long-term performance in all areas of life.

In the context of triathlon training, strength training is an additional stressor composed of

the physical stress of lifting weights and the mental stressors related to traveling to the

gym, paying for a membership, fitting the workout into a schedule—thinking about an

entirely new item within a training program. The daily requirements of strength training,

such as commuting and completing the session, are short-term stressors. There is a

significant long-term stressor associated with strength training too; workouts must be of

quality and have consistency in order to provide optimal benefits. As with any kind of

goal-oriented practice, lifting weights every other month will not create effective

progress. Emotional stressors become relevant when the athlete starts to worry about

missing workouts or feels anxiety when making sacrifices to make time for strength
 14

training. It is a balancing act: how much stress from various areas of life yields the best

triathlon performance.

One must also consider the individuality of perception of stress and distinguish

between absolute and relative stress. Training load quantification measures an absolute

stress, such as time spent training or miles run per week. However, 20 hours of training

(absolute stress) may be perceived as easy to an elite athlete, whereas the same amount of

training would be perceived as difficult to a beginner athlete (relative stress). Perception

of stress changes over time, as the beginner athlete may progress to an elite status and

now perceives a previous challenge as relatively easy.

Fortitude allows one to manage a large amount of stress, and differences in

fortitude between individuals helps govern how much stress they can cope with without

negative side effects. Those who succumb to small amounts of absolute stress will make

minimal progress, while those who effectively manage large amounts of absolute stress

will adapt and grow. Developing fortitude and resilience increases the size of the stress

budget.

To summarize, an athlete’s ability to manage stress determines the size of their

stress budget, and the size of the stress budget, along with its distribution between

stressors, determines the athlete’s potential for success. The individual who makes the

most efficient use of the largest stress budget has the greatest chance of achieving the

high level of performance they have prepared for.

 15

Limitations of Science: Confounding Variables, Emotions, and Interactions between

Sports

Empirical evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCT) is an excellent tool

for designing effective training. Countless studies that have evaluated short term (several

weeks) adaptations to various kinds of workouts. Within endurance sports, for example,

high intensity training (HIT) yields greater improvements in VO2max and lactate

threshold than does sustained low intensity training (Milanović, Sporiš, & Weston, 2015).

In fact, a few sprints—totaling three minutes in duration—can provide the same

physiological benefits as hours of high volume low intensity training (HVLIT) (Gibala et

al., 2006). These results may suggest time is best spent training at high intensities, and

training at low intensities yields inferior results. Lay articles in particular tend to interpret

such experimental results

However, observational studies clearly show superior endurance sport

performances in individuals who accumulate massive amounts of time training at very

low intensities (Stöggl & Sperlich, 2015). Elite athletes spend thousands of hours over

the course of their careers at easy efforts.

It is impossible to have long-term longitudinal studies comparing an intensity-

based training plan to a volume-based training plan. Observational studies indicate it is

the years of accumulated low-intensity mileage that give elite athletes their physiological

capabilities (Seiler, 2010). Studies lasting 6 to 12 weeks will show relatively little

adaptation with HVLIT and much more adaptation with HIT, but they do not address the

sustainability of progress. They do not provide information regarding the long-term

effects of either, nor can they incorporate the mental and emotional components of hard
 16

training. Will the high-intensity-induced adaptations continue to occur at week 24, or will

the athlete plateau and/or experience burnout by week 16? Does a HVLIT-based program

have great success due to the long-term sustainability of its associated mental, emotional,

and physical exertion?

Studies like that conducted by Gibala et al. occur in relative isolation of external

variables. The athletes’ training plans are standardized and closely monitored, and the

athletes are not training all three sports in multiple workouts per day. Such a study also

does not address the potential detrimental effects of maximal cycling intervals on

performing other workouts in a triathlete’s training regimen. Furthermore, in the real

world, the extrinsic motivation provided by the researchers in the laboratory does not

exist. Six weeks of sprint-based cycling workouts may yield superior results in the

laboratory, but they may also cause psychological burnout when performed on the living

room stationary bike due to the sheer discomfort of maximal effort. Sustainability is

crucial in real-world triathlon training and is achieved via a delicate balance of taxing and

restorative efforts. RCTs comparing various types of workouts simply do not address the

emotional and mental components of endurance training—they, by definition, cannot.

For example, an athlete experiences fatigue from performing frequent high

intensity bike workouts, and this fatigue interferes with his ability to swim with proper

body position. Even though his bike fitness may be optimized by such sessions, the

tradeoff with swim technique development may lead to non-optimal race day

performance. Consider an athlete who has poor cycling endurance and running speed.

Perhaps doing short, fast running intervals is the best possible way to improve the

athlete’s running ability. But if these intervals cause excess leg or central nervous system
 17

fatigue and interferes with endurance-focused cycling workouts, another tradeoff must be

made.

Strength training has physical, mental, and emotional considerations like those of

swim/bike/run training. If an athlete strongly dislikes strength training, they will need to

draw on sheer willpower to deal with the time demands, discomfort, and physical effort

of lifting weights. This is likely unsustainable due to the transient nature of behavior

changes that draw from willpower, especially when the contribution of the behavior

change (strength training) to the outcome (race performance) is difficult to quantify

(Woolley & Fishbach, 2017). If the athlete enjoys lifting weights but has limited time for

additional training on top of existing swim/bike/run workouts, adding in regular strength

training sessions may be harmful if the stress budget is exceeded. Replacing a portion of

swim/bike/run with strength training might improve performance, but this topic has not

been well-researched in triathletes, especially in triathletes who are extremely time-

limited and are doing minimal amounts of swim/bike/run.

Individuality: History, Genetics, and Fortitude

For most people, with so many skills to develop across the three disciplines, there

will always be strengths and weaknesses. Athletic history, personality, and work ethic—

individuality—are unique to each individual and determine the path to optimal race

performance. Science is limited by its inability to determine the impact of individuality

on the effectiveness of different types of training. Individuality creates room for a form of

art—the abstract nature of deciding what is best for an athlete’s unique physiology and

psychology.
 18

Athletic history refers to the training an athlete has accumulated to present day.

An individual who grew up swimming will have a solid foundation in swim technique,

whereas an athlete who started swimming during adulthood will be heavily limited by

technique. Former swimmers will not need to spend nearly as much time training their

swim and can spend those resources on developing cycling and running abilities. A

similar philosophy applies to other sports; athletes who grew up running can sustain

greater volumes of running with relatively low risks of injury. Newer runners need to be

more cautious when increasing run mileage.

Each athlete also has different genetics and fortitude. Genetics, similar to the

concept of talent, in part determines the potential of an athlete and how quickly and

effectively they can achieve their potential. Fortitude refers to the athlete’s work ethic, or

how much effort they are willing to expend trying to improve. There are countless

physical and psychological factors that impact both grit and genetics. Many factors are

also impossible to quantify, such as pain tolerance, motivation, or the ability to deal with

lack of motivation or stress. The best approach to designing triathlon training identifies

these abstract elements of life and integrates them, whereas a training program that

constantly conflicts with life will result in missed workouts and additional stress.
 19

Strength Training Physiology and Potential Benefits

Physiological Demands of Triathlon Performance

Elite triathlon performance is marked by high aerobic capacity (VO2max), lactate

threshold, and movement economy (Sleivert & Rowlands, 1996). VO2max is an

individual’s maximum capacity for oxygen consumption during exercise. Lactate

threshold refers to an exercise intensity at which an athlete transitions to a greater

reliance on anaerobic metabolism as opposed to aerobic metabolism; exercising at an

intensity greater than lactate threshold exponentially reduces time to exhaustion.

Movement economy describes how much power or speed can be produced with a defined

amount of oxygen; a more economical athlete can produce greater power with a lower

demand for oxygen (Bassett & Howley, 2000).

Basic Muscle Physiology

Skeletal muscle is under voluntary control and allows for locomotion. For

example, contracting the quadriceps extends the leg at the knee, and contracting the

biceps flexes the arm at the elbow. Skeletal muscle fibers are typically categorized as

Type I, Type IIa, or Type IIx fibers. Type I fibers are also known as slow-twitch fibers,

and Type II fibers are also known as fast-twitch fibers. The following table describes

characteristics of each type of fiber relative to each other.

 20

Type I (slow) Type IIa (fast-oxidative) Type IIx (fast-glycolytic)

• High fatigue resistance • Medium fatigue • Low fatigue

• Highly aerobic energy resistance resistance
production • Moderately aerobic • Anaerobic energy
• Low cross-sectional energy production production
area • Moderate cross- • High cross-sectional
• Low force production sectional area area
• Low rate of force • Moderate force • High force production
production production • High rate of force
• High rate of force production
production
(Gollnick, Armstrong, Saubert, Piehl, & Saltin, 1972)

Triathlon is an aerobically-demanding endurance sport and requires fatigue

resistance, so faster race times are correlated with greater proportions of Type I fibers

(Inbar, Kaiser, & Tesch, 1981). However, fiber type is not the most important

determinant of success in endurance events, as athletes with a variety of proportions of

fiber types have seen success. Other factors, such as aerobic capacity, lactate threshold,

and movement economy, play large roles in determining one’s performance as well

(Coyle, 1995). There is also debate over whether or not training can induce a

physiologically-meaningful conversion of Type II fibers to Type I fibers within a muscle

(Wilson et al., 2012). Regardless of fiber composition, performance can be significantly

improved via adaptation of existing fibers. Endurance training improves capillary density,

mitochondrial function, force production, and cross-sectional area of Type I fibers.

Endurance training can also cause a shift in Type II fibers from the more anaerobic Type

IIx to the more aerobic Type IIa (Hawley & Stepto, 2001).

The effect of strength training on skeletal muscle depends on parameters such as

load (weight), number of repetitions, number of sets, and speed of contraction.

Adaptations to strength training include increased muscle size (hypertrophy), strength,

 21

endurance, and/or rate of force production and can be summarized by the strength-

endurance continuum: fewer repetitions (1-6) heavy loads improve strength, many

repetitions (15+) of light loads improve endurance, and rate of force production is

improved by lifting with high contraction velocities (Schoenfeld, Peterson, Ogborn,

Contreras, & Sonmez, 2015).

Popular weight lifting sources commonly state moderate repetitions (8-12) of

moderately-heavy loads lead to greatest hypertrophy, while performing many repetitions

with lighter loads do not yield hypertrophy. However, similar degrees of hypertrophy

have been observed across the strength-endurance continuum irrespective of load

provided the total volume of the workouts are the same across conditions i.e. 3 repetitions

of 100 pounds vs. 15 repetitions of 20 pounds (Haun Cody T. et al., 2017). These

observations lead to theories suggesting hypertrophy is governed significantly by total

metabolic stress and muscle damage—lifting to closer to failure, therefore inducing high

metabolic stress and muscle damage, may be more important than the weights used in

yielding hypertrophy (Schoenfeld, 2010). However, reaching such metabolic stress and

muscle damage with light loads takes much more time, which makes using heavier loads

more efficient in achieving hypertrophy. A practical subjective measure of metabolic

stress and muscle damage is how fatigued the athlete feels after the workout—an

extremely demanding bout of weight lifting likely creates more hypertrophic stimulus,

whereas a relatively unchallenging workout does not.

 22

Strength Training and Endurance Performance in Trained Individuals

In the case of endurance sports, significant hypertrophy is not desirable due to the

accompanied increase in body mass and therefore oxygen consumption. Greater body

mass, lean or fat, is detrimental to endurance performance due to associated decreases in

relative VO2max (Maciejczyk, Wiecek, Szymura, Szygula, & Brown, 2015). Minimizing

hypertrophy means minimizing metabolic stress and muscle damage while still

generating enough stimuli to yield strength adaptations.

A large majority of scientific literature supports the use of heavy and explosive

strength training to improve endurance sports performance. The performance gains

resulting from strength training are linked to improvements primarily in exercise

economy, not energy metabolism (Beattie, Kenny, Lyons, & Carson, 2014; Rønnestad &

Mujika, 2014). To improve exercise economy, it is crucial for the athlete to lift near-

maximal loads to create improvements in endurance performance; high-repetition low-

load weight lifting is much less effective in trained individuals (Ebben et al., 2004).

Strength training does not improve VO2max nor does it improve lactate threshold

(LT) as a percent of VO2max (O2 consumption at LT divided by VO2max). However,

exercise economy, maximal velocity (Vmax, maximal velocity at the end of an incremental

treadmill test) and peak power output (Wmax, maximal power output at the end of an

incremental cycle test) do improve (Taipale et al., 2010). Because exercise economy

increases (O consumption at a given velocity or power output decreases), velocity and

2

power output at lactate threshold also increase. Higher Vmax and Wmax values are

indicative of improved anaerobic capacity and neuromuscular characteristics and

 23

contribute to improved endurance performance (Baumann, Rupp, Ingalls, & Doyle,

2012).

Exercise economy is improved through various mechanisms. First, heavy strength

training increases the force production of type I muscle fibers. An exercise at an intensity

previously requiring activation of type II muscle fibers, due to force production demands,

can subsequently be performed with a greater proportion of type I fiber activation,

because the maximal-strength-trained type I fibers have been trained to produce more

force (Rønnestad, Hansen, & Raastad, 2011).

Second, heavy strength training yields neuromuscular adaptations improving

coordination and motor recruitment patterns. Through this process, the nervous system

becomes more efficient by minimizing recruitment of fibers that do not contribute

directly toward force production. This is hypothesized to improve endurance performance

by reducing the number of muscle fibers required to achieve a given force output. Less

active muscle fiber recruitment leads to a reduction in overall muscle fatigue in a given

time. This has been demonstrated in a study of cyclists, where MRI and EMG analysis

showed that increased maximum strength reduced the amount of activated muscle mass

to produce the same absolute submaximal power (Bieuzen, Lepers, Vercruyssen,

Hausswirth, & Brisswalter, 2007).

Heavy strength training and explosive strength training increase stiffness of the

muscle-tendon system. Increased muscle and tendon stiffness increases elastic energy

return during the stretch-shortening cycle of muscle while running. Runners with stiffer

muscles and tendons, and therefore greater elastic energy return, have better running

economy (Trehearn & Buresh, 2009). This mechanism does not provide benefits during
 24

cycling, however, as the stretch-shortening cycle relies on the eccentric loading of

muscle. Cycling is dominated by concentric contractions (Rønnestad & Mujika, 2014).

Similar mechanisms seem to benefit swimmers as well. Improved maximal force,

rate of force production, and neuromuscular efficiency have been shown to improve

distance swimming performance. Core strength plays a significant role in generating

forward-propulsion during swimming too (Crowley, Harrison, & Lyons, 2017).

Injury Rehabilitation and Prevention

Strength training plays important roles in preventing and rehabilitating training-

related overuse injuries. Athletes who have recurring tendon injuries will benefit from

regular strength training, as resistance exercise increases the number and packing density

of collagen fibrils in tendons. Resistance exercise also facilitates the restructuring of a

healing tendon by encouraging the fibers to align themselves parallel to the direction of

force (Brumitt & Cuddeford, 2015). Rehabilitation of some specific tendon injuries is

most effective with loaded eccentric movements. Though the mechanisms behind

eccentric rehabilitation are relatively unknown, collagen synthesis increases significantly

following eccentric training (Langberg et al., 2007). Examples of eccentric exercises

include calf raises applying both legs in a quick (1s) concentric phase and one leg in a

slow controlled (4s) eccentric phase; and squats using the same technique of two-leg

concentric, one-leg eccentric technique, similar to the calf raise.

 25

General Health: Aging, Sarcopenia, and Bone Health

The strength training debate changes when considering older athletes and

individuals with low bone density, particularly since general health is more important

than endurance sport performance. Sarcopenia, the age-related decline in muscle mass,

will eventually lead to strength limitations, and strength training helps maintain both

muscle mass and bone density (American College of Sports Medicine et al., 2009). Truly-

limited muscular strength does impair endurance sport performance, and it eventually

affects the individual’s ability to carry out everyday tasks. Maintaining muscle mass with

strength training reduces the risk of osteoporosis and the signs and symptoms of multiple

chronic diseases. In general, strength training combats weakness and frailty and their

debilitating consequences (Seguin & Nelson, 2003). An athlete in their forties or fifties

might not be experiencing strength declines significant enough to cause symptoms but

starting a strength training routine at their present age may set a foundation for improved

health during older age.

Bone mineral density (BMD) is a concern for swimmers and cyclists. Athletes

who spend a large amount of time swimming or cycling are effectively spending time

with relatively unloaded bones. BMD decline is accelerated in these individuals and

creates an increased risk for osteoporosis (Abrahin et al., 2016). Because strength

training has positive effects on BMD, strength training should be a consideration in any

swimmer or cyclist’s training program. Runners have higher site-specific BMD (lower

limb bones) due to impact forces and the weight-bearing nature of the sport (Duncan et

al., 2002), provided they have adequate nutrition. However, distance runners are still at

risk for low BMD in the spine (Bilanin, Blanchard, & Russek-Cohen, 1989; Hind,
 26

Truscott, & Evans, 2006). More research is needed to determine if distance running is a

cause of low spinal BMD, as there are potentially-confounding implications of low body

mass, inadequate nutrition, and lifestyle that are common among distance runners,

especially females (Burrows, Nevill, Bird, & Simpson, 2003; Hind et al., 2006). To

summarize, strength training plays an important role in maintaining general health and

wellness and in contributing to BMD.

Art: A Balancing Act

Empirical evidence clearly suggests that heavy strength training improves

endurance performance via increased movement economy. The question can be asked

then, shouldn’t all triathletes lift heavy weights? The answer lies within the strengths,

weaknesses, and non-sporting life of the athlete. Most triathletes are already time-

constrained to the point they cannot accumulate optimal volume in each of the three

sports. Trying to fit in two strength training sessions or replacing swim/bike/run workouts

with strength training could possibly reduce performance, because the athlete is not

training enough in the three sports that make up triathlon. Heavy strength training also

comes with the cost and time requirement of going to the gym, both of which contribute

to overall stress and spend part of one’s stress budget.

Furthermore, heavy strength training is hard. The athlete must consider if the

benefit of strength training outweighs the negative impacts of its associated fatigue on

swim/bike/run sessions. Fatigue from strength training, even if no delayed-onset muscle

soreness is present, reduces endurance exercise performance and adaptations for up to 72

hours due to reduced neuromuscular drive. Furthermore, if the athlete has some level of
 27

chronic fatigue due to strength training, even if at levels so low it becomes hard to

distinguish from swim/bike/run-induced fatigue, endurance development is likely

hindered (Doma, Deakin, & Bentley, 2017). A study with rowers showed athletes who

completed a modest amount of strength training (never lifting to failure) performed better

than athletes who performed a greater amount of strength training (lifting to failure)

(Izquierdo-Gabarren et al., 2010).

This makes strength training program design, or a lack thereof, a subjective and

abstract decision-making process. If high force production is a major limiter for an

athlete, then replacing endurance workouts with strength training could result in

improved performance. If an athlete has enough muscle mass and force production for

triathlon purposes, then adding strength training may be excessively fatiguing and

negatively impact more important endurance-focused workouts. Therefore, the debate

exists in regard to how much strength training constitutes enough in the sport of triathlon.

Elite coach Jesse Kropelnicki applies the concept of lean body mass index (BMI),

which is the BMI of an individual calculated using calculated body weight based on ideal

body composition for racing. Lean BMI is a representation of how much muscle an

individual has. A high lean BMI value means the athlete likely does not have a strength

limitation and vice versa for low lean BMI. His anecdotal experience suggests female

athletes perform best at lean BMI of 20, and males at 21. To find lean BMI, the athlete

first undergoes a body composition test to estimate body fat percentage (BF%). BF% is

used to calculate existing fat mass and subsequently how much fat mass must be lost to

reach ideal body composition. The value for target fat mass loss is subtracted from total

body weight to yield lean body weight, and lean body weight is used to calculate lean
 28

BMI with the same equation that would be used for normal BMI (Jesse Kropelnicki,

2011).

In the context of single-sport athletes who might not carry as much fatigue due to

lower overall training volume compared to triathletes, adding strength training might

often be more feasible and appropriate. It may also be easier for single-sport athletes to

reach adequate volumes of training in their respective sports, whereas time-constrained

triathletes must juggle training for three sports. One must also consider if the athlete

enjoys strength training. If the athlete has no desire to lift weights and is not significantly

limited by their strength, then they are probably better off spending the time on

swim/bike/run. If the athlete perceives benefit and enjoys strength training, then it may be

worth considering.

If Strength Training Is Desired: How-To

Many training resources portray strength training as an all-or-nothing approach,

but this is unhelpful for athletes who have only twenty minutes a week for strength

training. The top result of a “triathlon strength training” Google search reveals Mark

Allen’s (six time Ironman World Champion) recommended weight lifting program of

twelve exercises performed twice a week throughout the entire year (Allen, n.d.). Joe

Friel’s popular book, The Triathletes Training Bible, outlines a periodized weight lifting

program consisting of two to three sessions in the gym per week (Friel, 2016) It is

presented in a very structured format without any suggestions for alternatives. Both

Allen’s and Friel’s programs consist of periodized year-long cycles with significant

progressions every several weeks.

 29

Athletes with little time to lift weights may benefit from rethinking the traditional

strength training periodization reported in both popular training resources and scientific

literature. Good training involves dynamic year-to-year consistency in addition to within-

year consistency. There are peaks and nadirs with adjustments being made along the way

due to unforeseen life occurrences. However, the general trajectory is steady progress.

Athletes should think about strength training with a similar mindset and utilize a

conservative long-term approach based on consistency, gradual progression, and

flexibility.

Traditional strength periodization principles that are often found in endurance-

focused strength training books are similar to the following:

1. Adaptation Phase: low weights and a high number of repetitions (15-20) are

used for four to six weeks to build general strength in preparation for heavier

loads.

2. Transition Phase: the weight is increased significantly over 2-4 weeks while

the number of repetitions is decreased (6-12) to transition from light loads

used in the adaptation phase to the heavy loads of the maximum strength

phase.

3. Maximum Strength Phase: the weight approaches near 1-repetition

maximums and repetitions are low (3-5). A large amount of rest (3+ minutes)

provides full recovery in order to lift heavy loads with quality. The maximum

strength phase lasts until competition season demands increased emphasis on

freshness and race-day performance.

 30

4. Power or Maintenance: after the maximum strength phase, some sources will

instruct athletes to move to a power phase in which loads are decreased and

emphasis is placed on the speed of contraction to maximize power. Plyometric

exercises are the classic example of power training. Other sources suggest

moving straight from maximum strength to in-season maintenance in which

the athlete will still lift heavy loads but in significantly reduced volumes (i.e.

fewer sets) to maintain strength while minimizing fatigue.

These traditional principles fall under a linear periodization format, which makes logical

sense on paper. Consider, however, the following questions: what if an athlete misses two

weeks of strength training due to other life commitments? Does this periodization

structure need to be followed every year in this order? What other options exist?

First, general foundational strength is necessary before performing any sort of

heavily-loaded or advanced movement. Not only is this important for injury prevention,

but building stability first actually increases subsequent lifting performance (Hammami,

Granacher, Makhlouf, Behm, & Chaouachi, 2016). In other words, an adaptation phase

should be a part of any strength training program if the athlete has not been regularly

weightlifting prior to beginning the program.

After foundational strength has developed, athletes have much more flexibility

than generally described in popular triathlon training books (explained later). The goals

of strength training remain similar—increase maximum force production and/or rate of

force production while minimizing muscle hypertrophy. This means the athlete should

still aim to perform few repetitions at high weight in compound movements or power-

focused explosive exercises. However, the athlete does not have to be fixed in a rigid
 31

linear periodization plan; the plan can be constantly evolving to fit the athlete’s life and

schedule.

This type of “evolving” strength training program is essentially undulating

periodization. Instead of having training phases with distinct repetitions and weights, the

athlete constantly switches between adaptation-, transition-, maximum-strength-, and

power-type exercises depending on what is most appropriate at that time. For example:

• If the athlete is emerging from a period of time with minimal weightlifting and

lacks foundational strength and stability, adaptation is necessary.

• If the athlete has been in a maximum strength phase but encounters two weeks

with no lifting, they could return to a couple of weeks of transition-type

repetitions and weights to ease back into near-maximum weights.

• If the athlete has two busy upcoming weeks at work and can lift only once per

week, maximum strength and power can be maintained by doing a couple of

specific exercises for each of those two workouts After those two weeks, the

athlete can resume lifting two or three times per week.

• If the athlete has a few races spaced one month apart and wants to minimize

weightlifting-induced fatigue while maintaining strength and power, the weeks

can be structured in the following cycle: race, maximum strength, power,

maintenance.

A flexible or undulating weightlifting program is not inferior to a linear program. An

undulating program may actually yield better results due to the ability to allocate

different types of sessions where they are most appropriate (Harries, Lubans, & Callister,

2016). This flexibility allows the athlete to optimize adaptation and to minimize fatigue
 32

when needed, and there are few to no downsides of alternating between types of

weightlifting (i.e. switching between heavy lifting and explosive training within a season

(Hartmann et al., 2015).

If strength training sessions are skipped for several weeks for various reasons, it

may be risky to resume strength training with the same weight load, as some stability or

technical skill may have been lost. If this is the case, the athlete can resume strength

training with lighter loads (similar to adaptation weight) to re-establish stability before

progressing back to heavier loads to minimize injury risk. Missing a few weeks of

strength training is a not significant hindrance if long-term consistency is maintained. An

inactivity period of up to three weeks does not significantly decrease muscle strength or

impair subsequent adaptation to resumed strength training (Gentil et al., 2015;

Ogasawara, Yasuda, Sakamaki, Ozaki, & Abe, 2011). Missing more than three weeks

will result in a detraining effect. However, previous strength training facilitates retraining

following a period of retraining, and any strength losses can be regained much more

quickly (Lee, Hong, & Kim, 2016). It is hypothesized the rapid retraining is a result of

“muscle memory” is a result of the fact that the number of nuclei in muscle cells

(myonuclei) increase with strength training. During disuse and atrophy, these myonuclei

are not lost and may contribute to subsequent adaptation (Bruusgaard, Johansen, Egner,

Rana, & Gundersen, 2010). Thus, the benefits of strength training can be improved on or

maintained year to year even if there are periodic breaks from strength training. There is,

of course, a line that must be drawn for how much strength training is enough to yield

desired results, as there is a minimum threshold of training volume and intensity that

must be crossed to cause adaptation (Schoenfeld, 2013).

 33

Summary

There is no single correct or perfect training program. It is up to the athlete or

coach to analyze the pros and cons of adding strength training and, if strength training is

performed, to create a strength training program that fits the athlete’s life. The following

sections provide a summary of approaching strength training for triathletes, with the

caveat that there are clearly endless modifications for any suggestions. It is ultimately a

summary of my personal views on strength training for triathletes that integrates science,

art, and anecdote to try to answer the following question: what should I do right now to

maximize performance on race day?

Questions to ask:

• Does the athlete want to strength train?

• Is the athlete doing adequate swim/bike/run volume?

• Is the athlete strength-limited or experiencing age-related bone or muscle

degeneration?

• Does the athlete have enough time to add in strength training?

See the flow chart for a visual reference on the decision-making process.
34
 35

Guidelines for Levels of Focus

High focus

• Dedicate an adequate portion of available stress and energy to strength training in

order to perform high quality strength workouts

o Reduce swim/bike/run volume and intensity to avoid being fatigued going

into strength workouts

o Maintain high consistency (2-3 times per week) by prioritizing strength

workouts over swim/bike/run workouts when overall training time needs

to be reduced

• Build stability before hypertrophy, maximum strength, and power

o Adaptation (many repetitions, low weights) before maximum strength

(few repetitions, heavy loads)

o Resume with adaptation-type lifting following any breaks

▪ Develop good technique before high effort and heavy weights

• Aim for muscle hypertrophy until lean BMI increases to ~21

o During strength workouts, lift until near-failure without compromising

form

o Focus on compound movements that apply to swim/bike/run

▪ Squat, deadlift, lunge, bench press, pull up/lat pull down, seated

row

• Eat a large amount of protein (2.0 grams per kilogram of bodyweight per day)

while maintaining a mild caloric surplus (300-500 calories per day) to maximize

muscle hypertrophy (Stark, Lukaszuk, Prawitz, & Salacinski, 2012)

 36

• Move to maximal strength and power after target lean BMI is reached

Moderate focus

• Strength training has a similar priority to swim/bike/run workouts

o During times of high stress or low time availability, reduce both strength

and swim/bike/run workouts

• Build stability before hypertrophy, maximum strength, and power

o Adaptation (many repetitions, low weights) before maximum strength

(few repetitions, heavy loads)

o Resume with adaptation-type lifting following any breaks

▪ Develop good technique before high effort and heavy weights

• Lift to maximize strength while keeping hypertrophy minimal

o Lift at a perceived effort of moderate challenge/fatigue during workouts

o Lift heavy weights close to 1-repetition-maximums with plenty of rest (i.e.

5x3 squats with 3-5 minutes rest)

• Balance swim/bike/run-induced and strength-training-induced fatigue

• Eat a moderate amount of protein

Low focus

• Train mindfully and be ready to make adjustments

o The subsequent days of training are just as important as the present day
 37

▪ If significant heavy lifting today feels like it will compromise

future training with excess fatigue, reduce the volume and intensity

of the workout

▪ Skip strength workouts during times of high stress or low time

availability

• Build stability before hypertrophy, maximum strength, and power

o Adaptation (many repetitions, low weights) before maximum strength

(few repetitions, heavy loads)

o Resume with adaptation-type lifting following any breaks

▪ Develop good technique before high effort and heavy weights

• Minimize hypertrophy and fatigue

o Stop sets significantly before the point of failure

o Lift to a perceived effort of low to moderate challenge

o Low overall lifting volume and physical stress

▪ Finish feeling strong and invigorated, not sore and tired

o Lift moderately heavy weights close to 3-repetition-maximums with

plenty of rest (i.e. 5x3 squats with 3-5 minutes rest)

• Eat a moderate amount of protein

 38

References

Abrahin, O., Rodrigues, R. P., Marçal, A. C., Alves, E. A. C., Figueiredo, R. C., Sousa,

E. C. de, … Sousa, E. C. de. (2016). Swimming and cycling do not cause positive

effects on bone mineral density: a systematic review. Revista Brasileira de

Reumatologia, 56(4), 345–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbre.2016.02.013

Allen, M. (n.d.). Mark Allen’s 12 Best Strength Exercises | ACTIVE. Retrieved February

23, 2018, from https://www.active.com/triathlon/articles/mark-allen-s-12-best-

strength-exercises

American College of Sports Medicine, Chodzko-Zajko, W. J., Proctor, D. N., Fiatarone

Singh, M. A., Minson, C. T., Nigg, C. R., … Skinner, J. S. (2009). American

College of Sports Medicine position stand. Exercise and physical activity for

older adults. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 41(7), 1510–1530.

https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181a0c95c

Bassett, D. R., & Howley, E. T. (2000). Limiting factors for maximum oxygen uptake

and determinants of endurance performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and

Exercise, 32(1), 70–84.

Baumann, C. W., Rupp, J. C., Ingalls, C. P., & Doyle, J. A. (2012). Anaerobic Work

Capacity’s Contribution to 5-km-Race Performance in Female Runners.

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 7(2), 170–174.

https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.7.2.170

Beattie, K., Kenny, I. C., Lyons, M., & Carson, B. P. (2014). The Effect of Strength

Training on Performance in Endurance Athletes. Sports Medicine, 44(6), 845–

865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0157-y
 39

Bieuzen, F., Lepers, R., Vercruyssen, F., Hausswirth, C., & Brisswalter, J. (2007).

Muscle activation during cycling at different cadences: Effect of maximal strength

capacity. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 17(6), 731–738.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.07.007

Bilanin, J. E., Blanchard, M. S., & Russek-Cohen, E. (1989). Lower vertebral bone

density in male long distance runners. Medicine and Science in Sports and

Exercise, 21(1), 66–70.

Brumitt, J., & Cuddeford, T. (2015). Current concepts of muscle and tendon adaptation to

strength and conditioning. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy,

10(6), 748–759.

Bruusgaard, J. C., Johansen, I. B., Egner, I. M., Rana, Z. A., & Gundersen, K. (2010).

Myonuclei acquired by overload exercise precede hypertrophy and are not lost on

detraining. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States

of America, 107(34), 15111–15116. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0913935107

Burrows, M., Nevill, A. M., Bird, S., & Simpson, D. (2003). Physiological factors

associated with low bone mineral density in female endurance runners. British

Journal of Sports Medicine, 37(1), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.37.1.67

Coyle, E. F. (1995). Integration of the physiological factors determining endurance

performance ability. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 23, 25–63.

Crowley, E., Harrison, A. J., & Lyons, M. (2017). The impact of resistance training on

swimming performance: a systematic review. Sports Medicine, 47(11), 2285–

2307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0730-2
 40

Doma, K., Deakin, G. B., & Bentley, D. J. (2017). Implications of Impaired Endurance

Performance following Single Bouts of Resistance Training: An Alternate

Concurrent Training Perspective. Sports Medicine, 47(11), 2187–2200.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0758-3

Duncan, C., Blimkie, C., Cowell, C., Burke, S., Briody, J., & Giles-Howman, R. (2002).

Bone mineral density in adolescent female athletes: relationship to exercise type

and muscle strength. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 286–294.

Ebben, W. P., Kindler, A. G., Chirdon, K. A., Jenkins, N. C., Polichnowski, A. J., & Ng,

A. V. (2004). The effect of high-load vs. high-repetition training on endurance

performance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 18(3), 513–517.

https://doi.org/10.1519/R-12722.1

Fernandez, J. M., Acero, R. M., Lopez, R. M., & Pereiro, S. G. (n.d.). Training load in

actual high performance triathlon.

Friel, J. (2016). The Triathlete’s Training Bible (4th ed.). Boulder, CO: VeloPress.

Gentil, P., Ferreira-Junior, J. B., Soares, S. R. S., Martorelli, A. S., Bottaro, M., Cadore,

E. L., & Loenneke, J. P. (2015). Effects of periodic and continuous resistance

training on muscle strength in detrained women. Perceptual and Motor Skills,

121(3), 810–821. https://doi.org/10.2466/29.30.PMS.121c23x3

Gibala, M. J., Little, J. P., Van Essen, M., Wilkin, G. P., Burgomaster, K. A., Safdar, A.,

… Tarnopolsky, M. A. (2006). Short-term sprint interval versus traditional

endurance training: similar initial adaptations in human skeletal muscle and

exercise performance. The Journal of Physiology, 575(3), 901–911.

https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2006.112094
 41

Gollnick, P. D., Armstrong, R. B., Saubert, C. W., Piehl, K., & Saltin, B. (1972). Enzyme

activity and fiber composition in skeletal muscle of untrained and trained men.

Journal of Applied Physiology, 33(3), 312–319.

https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1972.33.3.312

Hammami, R., Granacher, U., Makhlouf, I., Behm, D. G., & Chaouachi, A. (2016).

Sequencing effects of balance and plyometric training on physical performance in

youth soccer athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 30(12),

3278–3289. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001425

Harries, S. K., Lubans, D. R., & Callister, R. (2016). Comparison of resistance training

progression models on maximal strength in sub-elite adolescent rugby union

players. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 19(2), 163–169.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2015.01.007

Hartmann, H., Wirth, K., Keiner, M., Mickel, C., Sander, A., & Szilvas, E. (2015). Short-

term periodization models: effects on strength and speed-strength performance.

Sports Medicine, 45(10), 1373–1386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0355-2

Haun Cody T., Mumford Petey W., Roberson Paul A., Romero Matthew A., Mobley

Christopher B., Kephart Wesley C., … Roberts Michael D. (2017). Molecular,

neuromuscular, and recovery responses to light versus heavy resistance exercise

in young men. Physiological Reports, 5(18), e13457.

https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13457

Hawley, J. A., & Stepto, N. K. (2001). Adaptations to Training in Endurance Cyclists.

Sports Medicine, 31(7), 511–520. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200131070-

00006
 42

Hind, K., Truscott, J. G., & Evans, J. A. (2006). Low lumbar spine bone mineral density

in both male and female endurance runners. Bone, 39(4), 880–885.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2006.03.012

Inbar, O., Kaiser, P., & Tesch, P. (1981). Relationships between Leg Muscle Fiber Type

Distribution and Leg Exercise Performance. International Journal of Sports

Medicine, 02(3), 154–159. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1034603

Izquierdo-Gabarren, M., González De Txabarri Expósito, R., García-pallarés, J.,

Sánchez-medina, L., De Villarreal, E. S. S., & Izquierdo, M. (2010). Concurrent

endurance and strength training not to failure optimizes performance gains.

Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 42(6), 1191–1199.

https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181c67eec

Kropelnicki, J. (2017, November). The stress budget. Presented at the USA Triathlon

level 1 coaching certification clinic, St. Louis, Missouri.

Kropelnicki, Jesse. (2011, January 29). Body Composition Metrics & Sport Limiters.

Retrieved April 12, 2018, from https://www.thecorediet.com/blog/body-

composition-metrics-sport-limiters/

Langberg, H., Ellingsgaard, H., Madsen, T., Jansson, J., Magnusson, S. P., Aagaard, P.,

& Kjaer, M. (2007). Eccentric rehabilitation exercise increases peritendinous type

I collagen synthesis in humans with Achilles tendinosis. Scandinavian Journal of

Medicine & Science in Sports, 17(1), 61–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-

0838.2006.00522.x

Lee, S., Hong, K.-S., & Kim, K. (2016). Effect of previous strength training episode and

retraining on facilitation of skeletal muscle hypertrophy and contractile properties

 43

after long-term detraining in rats. Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation, 12(2), 79–

82. https://doi.org/10.12965/jer.1632608.304

Maciejczyk, E., Wiecek, E., Szymura, E., Szygula, E., & Brown, E. (2015). Influence of

Increased Body Mass and Body Composition on Cycling Anaerobic Power.

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 29(1), 58–65.

https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000000727

Milanović, Z., Sporiš, G., & Weston, M. (2015). Effectiveness of High-Intensity Interval

Training (HIT) and Continuous Endurance Training for

VO<Subscript>2max</Subscript> Improvements: A Systematic Review and

Meta-Analysis of Controlled Trials. Sports Medicine, 45(10), 1469–1481.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0365-0

Ogasawara, R., Yasuda, T., Sakamaki, M., Ozaki, H., & Abe, T. (2011). Effects of

periodic and continued resistance training on muscle CSA and strength in

previously untrained men. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging, 31(5),

399–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-097X.2011.01031.x

Rønnestad, B. R., Hansen, E. A., & Raastad, T. (2011). Strength training improves 5-min

all-out performance following 185 min of cycling. Scandinavian Journal of

Medicine & Science in Sports, 21(2), 250–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-

0838.2009.01035.x

Rønnestad, B. R., & Mujika, I. (2014). Optimizing strength training for running and

cycling endurance performance: A review. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine &

Science in Sports, 24(4), 603–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12104

 44

Schoenfeld, B. J. (2010). The Mechanisms of Muscle Hypertrophy and Their Application

to Resistance Training: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(10),

2857–2872. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181e840f3

Schoenfeld, B. J. (2013). Is There a Minimum Intensity Threshold for Resistance

Training-Induced Hypertrophic Adaptations? Sports Medicine, 43(12), 1279–

1288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-013-0088-z

Schoenfeld, B. J., Peterson, M. D., Ogborn, D., Contreras, B., & Sonmez, G. T. (2015).

Effects of Low- vs. High-Load Resistance Training on Muscle Strength and

Hypertrophy in Well-Trained Men: Journal of Strength and Conditioning

Research, 29(10), 2954–2963. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000000958

Seguin, R., & Nelson, M. E. (2003). The benefits of strength training for older adults.

American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 25(3 Suppl 2), 141–149.

Seiler, S. (2010). What is Best Practice for Training Intensity and Duration Distribution

in Endurance Athletes? International Journal of Sports Physiology and

Performance, 5(3), 276–291. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.5.3.276

Sleivert, G. G., & Rowlands, D. S. (1996). Physical and Physiological Factors Associated

with Success in the Triathlon. Sports Medicine, 22(1), 8–18.

https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-199622010-00002

Stark, M., Lukaszuk, J., Prawitz, A., & Salacinski, A. (2012). Protein timing and its

effects on muscular hypertrophy and strength in individuals engaged in weight-

training. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 9, 54.

https://doi.org/10.1186/1550-2783-9-54
 45

Stöggl, T. L., & Sperlich, B. (2015). The training intensity distribution among well-

trained and elite endurance athletes. Frontiers in Physiology, 6(295).

https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2015.00295

Taipale, R. S., Mikkola, J., Nummela, A., Vesterinen, V., Capostagno, B., Walker, S., …

Häkkinen, K. (2010). Strength Training in Endurance Runners. International

Journal of Sports Medicine, 31(07), 468–476. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-

1243639

Trehearn, T. L., & Buresh, R. J. (2009). Sit-and-reach Flexibility and Running Economy

of Men and Women Collegiate Distance Runners. Journal of Strength and

Conditioning Research, 23(1), 158–162.

https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e31818eaf49

Wilson, J. M., Loenneke, J. P., Jo, E., Wilson, G. J., Zourdos, M. C., & Kim, J.-S. (2012).

The Effects of Endurance, Strength, and Power Training on Muscle Fiber Type

Shifting: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 26(6), 1724–1729.

https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e318234eb6f

Woolley, K., & Fishbach, A. (2017). Immediate Rewards Predict Adherence to Long-

Term Goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(2), 151–162.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216676480
46