More Weight Training = Better Results?

It is much more likely that your legs simply needed a break. Once they were able to repair (and rebuild bigger and stronger!) that tendinitis and whatever other cumulative training stress you have amassed, you were more fit than ever.

Swimming will only marginally improve your run fitness, and kettlebells...not at all. This is almost certainly a case where correlation is not causation.

I'm curious...could you link to the less cardio for increased endurance articles?

you mainly reduced your training load by running less..... ''you were rested and improved'' Mostly all athlete will react in a similar way to a reduce training load. you improved your 5km because of the work you put in before ''tapering your running''

In endurance sport like swim/bike/run, your are not strength limited but your aerobic fitness is the main components that need to be optimized.

putting energy into strength training the way you describe it as very small return on investment compare to more...swim/bike/run training.

Could be that maybe this approach works for some and not all?

I found that my form also improved due to the strength training.

This was not a taper, I had to stop running 6 weeks out and rest until 3 weeks out then I was able to do 1 30 min session per week.

If we attribute this to rest arent we saying over training is a bigger concern for triathletes then strength training?

I think we can safely say: one person who took time off running doing strength training came back and ran a faster 5k.
That is all.

If you want to make a generalized argument that strength training makes recreational runners faster, then you design and perform a rigorous study. (Or just look one up on http://scholar.google.com/

If you want to discover whether some recreational runners may respond more to strength training (while the rest don't), then you'd need a much bigger sample size to tease out other variables to bin the ST responders by shared traits...or again, look it up at http://scholar.google.com/

The reason why everyone (including me, I'm not innocent) is so quick to spout the default line: "correlation, not necessarily causation" is because you are linking two variables with no really great reason to do so. If you journaled every facet of your life, I'm sure you would find a dozen equally "obvious" correlations that would be be ridiculous to assume as causal (i.e. I ate 3 kiwis a week leading up to my previous PR, but only 2 when I hit the 24...therefore, less green hairy fruit made me run faster).

There is some logical fallacy in this thread that I can't quite put a finger on, but...

Strength training can be a benefit from some people, yes. The majority of evidence says that it does not help, but some studies suggest that it can help (help what depends on what was being studied).

Plyometrics generally improve running economy.

Overtraining IS a big concern for triathletes. As a coach most of my time is spent holding people back in order to make them faster.

If the strength training seemed to help you then keep doing it. no study will tell you waht you should do with your own body.

Has anybody tried this approach directly?

I appreciate all the responses and theories. I understand that you improve at each sport by putting in the work in the specific sport.

However at this point I wiil continue to work on my own theory or logic/training program and see how it goes.

Mind you weight training is still done with 2x week of each sport with the longest session being an hour long (I only do sprint distance for now). Again thanks.

There are enough PROS that incorporate a large amount of strength training into their regimes for me to find it worth while. Plus, I enjoy it. As I've started on this adventure, the first coach/trainer I've turned to is a STRENGTH trainer. I feel that I need to build the muscle to be able to sustain a long swim/bike/run. We've focused on the basics of how strength affects form. Lots of squats/lunges, RDLs and single leg stability. I to have seen run and bike times decrease as my ability to generate power has increased. I will continue to keep strength training a part of my weekly routine.

There's so much wrong here I just don't know what to say.

Enjoying strength training is an excellent reason to do it. Overall health is as well. Getting faster at triathlon is, sadly, not.

If you enjoy it and it helps keep you active, then that's a great reason to approach tri training in this manner. Since you've had some success with this approach, it is likely that you have significant room for improvement so any training is likely to be beneficial. Further, if you have been doing lots of easy workouts and little intensity, this may have led to improvement simple because it helped you become used to the discomfort that comes with higher intensity.

Having said that, while you may see some continued improvement, if your goal is to be as fast as you can at triathlon, this approach is almost surely going to be sub-optimal and focusing your available time on SBR would be the way to go.

Shane

One thing I find very interesting about this thread is the negative response towards weight training in tri training.

Hey I get it. You want to improve at SBR you should do SBR. However weight training will have its benefits as will yoga to overall fitness.

I would like to hear from someone who tried this approach and saw negative results.

Mind you I am not saying to do less sessions of SBR, maybe less yards/time and incorporate weights into the mix. Example 45 min bike ride followed by 15min work out of compound movements.

Of course this would depend on your goals - this could be a great general fitness workout (or done in the other order depending on what you want to accomplish). However, if you're trying to be a faster triathlon cyclist, then probably better to ride (hard) for that extra 15 minutes.

Shane

Jajaja yeah ok crossfit. Love the feedback based on actually trying this approach.

Training with weights to some degree can help depending on your situation. I personally do some weight training, but it is not to get faster in triathlon per say. I do it to help with muscle imbalance, strengthen my core(blew out a disc5 years ago), and strengthen my shoulder(something to do with the need for speed on a ski slope). Will this make me faster? yes because I will actually be able to compete vs being injured.

What your talking about doing 45 minutes of riding(focus on the muscles that you need to ride) and then 15 mins of weights (focuses on what?) will not be as effective as just riding 60 mins.

15min of specific excercises geared to the sport. If you are riding for 45min , 15 min of squats, leg presses, squats for example.

There really is nothing wrong with strength training if that's what you want to do. It's you're theory and logic that is a bit cloudy. You are basically picking one aspect of change that you experienced recently and deeming that as the sole cause of your improvements...and ignoring all the other changes that could have (or more likely) played a factor as well.In scientific experiments, you need to isolate the variables you are trying to test. That's what you're missing in this "experiment" you are trying.

To what end?

Shane

Improved power, muscle endurance, correct muscular imbalances

If your high level rider stuck at a plateau I could see the merit in it. However think about this for a second. Are your squats going to focus on the same exact muscles and intensity rate as you pushing on your pedals? ---No Will the squats overload your muscles faster than pedaling on your bike?--yes

So if you don't have enough muscle to pedal your bike doing squats will be effective until you have the muscle to turn the pedals over- however it generally takes less strength to turn you pedals over than it does to do a body weight squat. Then the most effective way to strengthen the muscles for cycling is to ride your bike more.