Skip to content
Strength & Conditioning10 min read

STRENGTH TRAINING FOR CYCLISTS: WHAT WORKS AND HOW OFTEN

By Anthony WalshUpdated

WHAT THE EVIDENCE CAN SUPPORT

Results are from group-level research. They are not a guarantee of an individual rider's response or a substitute for qualified coaching or clinical care.

  1. 01Heavy strength training can improve endurance-cycling performance.

    Roadman Position
    This is a useful performance tool, not a guaranteed watt gain. The pooled result favoured heavy strength training, while the certainty rating requires measured language.
    Evidence Source
    Llanos-Lagos, Ramirez-Campillo & Sáez de Villarreal; European Journal of Applied Physiology; online 2025, issue 2026; PMID 40632222
    Practical Implication
    Use a progressive block and measure your own strength, fatigue and cycling outcomes rather than assuming transfer.
  2. 02The pooled benefits were clearest for efficiency, anaerobic power and cycling performance.

    Roadman Position
    Do not translate this into a claim that lifting automatically raises FTP or VO2max. Those outcomes were not significantly improved in the pooled analysis.
    Evidence Source
    17 controlled studies, 262 participants, including 60 women; PMID 40632222
    Practical Implication
    Track more than FTP: use repeatable time-trial, short-power and submaximal-effort markers where appropriate.
  3. 03There is no research-proven universal weekly dose for cyclists.

    Roadman Position
    Two sessions is a workable coaching default for many riders, but it is not a minimum established by the meta-analysis.
    Evidence Source
    Included interventions ran 1–3 sessions per week for 5–25 weeks; no significant frequency moderator; PMID 40632222
    Practical Implication
    Start with the smallest dose you can recover from and progress only while key riding remains productive.
  4. 04Road cycling alone is not a reliable bone-loading strategy.

    Moderate
    Roadman Position
    Masters cyclists should include appropriate weight-bearing and resistance activity, but should not promise themselves a bone-density result from one gym template.
    Evidence Source
    Cycling and bone-health systematic review; BMC Medicine 2012; PMID 23256921, plus WHO 2020 activity guidance
    Practical Implication
    Treat bone health as a broader health question and seek clinical advice when risk factors or a diagnosis are present.

WHO THIS IS FOR

IS THIS YOU?

  • Cyclists deciding whether gym work deserves time in an endurance programme
  • Riders who want a usable starting structure without mistaking one template for settled science
  • Masters cyclists separating performance evidence from broader muscle and bone-health guidance
  • Coaches and self-coached riders who need explicit evidence limits and measurable decision rules

THE ROADMAN VIEW

The Roadman View

  • Strength work has to earn its place by improving the whole programme, not by producing impressive gym numbers while the key rides collapse.
  • Two sessions per week is a sensible starting hypothesis for many riders. It is not a law, and the latest review does not prove it is the minimum effective dose.
  • A movement pattern is more useful than a sacred exercise list: choose a version the rider can execute, load and recover from consistently.

Strength training can make a cyclist faster, but the honest answer is more useful than the internet slogan. The latest cyclist-only systematic review and meta-analysis found improvements in cycling performance, cycling efficiency and anaerobic power. It did not find significant pooled changes in VO2max, power at VO2max, maximal metabolic steady state or anaerobic capacity, and the authors graded the evidence as low certainty (Llanos-Lagos and colleagues, published online in 2025).

That supports putting strength work in the plan. It does not support declaring one exercise list, rep range or weekly frequency compulsory for every cyclist.

The answer in 30 seconds

QuestionEvidence-bounded answer
Does strength training help cyclists?Heavy strength training can improve performance, efficiency and anaerobic power at group level. Individual response is not guaranteed.
Does it raise VO2max or FTP?The latest pooled analysis did not find a significant VO2max, power-at-VO2max or maximal-steady-state effect. Do not sell it as an automatic FTP gain.
How often?The reviewed programmes used 1–3 sessions per week. The analysis did not establish an optimal frequency.
How long?Included interventions lasted 5–25 weeks. A short introduction may teach technique without being long enough to judge cycling transfer.
How heavy?The review defined heavy strength training as at least 80% of one-repetition maximum. Beginners should first earn the ability to load safely.
Best exercises?No universal ranked list was established. Cover useful movement patterns with variants suited to the rider.
What about masters?General strength and bone-health reasons matter, but the review did not report the “masters subset” sometimes claimed online.

What the 17-study meta-analysis actually found

The review pooled 17 controlled studies with 262 adult endurance cyclists, 60 of whom were women. Programmes lasted 5–25 weeks and used 1–3 strength sessions per week. Compared with cycling-only controls, heavy strength training produced statistically significant pooled effects for:

  • cycling efficiency: effect size 0.353, p=0.012;
  • anaerobic power: effect size 0.560, p=0.024; and
  • cycling performance, combining time-trial and time-to-exhaustion outcomes: effect size 0.463, p=0.016.

It did not produce significant pooled effects for VO2max, power at VO2max, maximal metabolic steady state or anaerobic capacity. Participant sex, body mass, performance level and previous strength experience did not significantly moderate the outcomes; nor did programme duration, training frequency or total sessions.

The most important line is the review's conclusion: low certainty of evidence prevents robust recommendations about optimal implementation. Seventeen studies is valuable, but 262 riders split across several outcomes, protocols and ability levels is not enough to turn a group result into one universal prescription.

An earlier controlled study illustrates both the promise and the limits. Nine elite cyclists combined endurance and heavy strength work for 25 weeks, while seven continued endurance training alone. The combined group improved several power and performance measures, but also increased lower-body lean mass; neither group changed VO2max or cycling economy (Rønnestad and colleagues, 2015). That is a small study, not a guarantee—but it is stronger evidence than saying a cyclist can never add mass.

A practical starting plan—not “the proven protocol”

This is Roadman's adaptable starting framework. It is not the exercise prescription tested as one package by the meta-analysis.

Step 1: earn the movement

For the first 2–4 weeks, select loads that allow controlled repetitions and leave several good reps available. Learn how to brace, use the intended range, and finish without joint pain or form breakdown. A new lifter does not need an 80% one-repetition-maximum test on day one.

Choose one safe variant from each useful pattern:

PatternPossible choicesWhy it is in the programme
Knee-dominantGoblet squat, split squat, leg press, step-upDevelop lower-body force through a controllable range
Hip-dominantRomanian deadlift, trap-bar deadlift, hip thrustTrain hip extension and posterior-chain strength
Single-legSplit squat, step-up, supported single-leg hingeExpose side-to-side control and capacity
Calf/ankleStanding or seated calf raiseBuild lower-leg capacity where relevant to the rider
Upper bodyRow, press, pull-down or push-upSupport whole-body strength and riding-position demands
TrunkCarry, side plank, Pallof press or dead bugTrain bracing and control without claiming a direct watt gain

There is nothing magical about a Bulgarian split squat or deadlift. A machine can be the better choice when it lets a rider train hard with less technical or balance demand. “Looks like pedalling” is not proof of transfer.

Step 2: build progressively

For many cyclists, two non-consecutive full-body sessions per week is a manageable place to start. Use two or three work sets per pattern, then add load, repetitions or a set gradually—not all three at once. Riders with sound lifting experience can progress toward the heavy loads represented in the research. Riders without it should progress under qualified supervision where possible.

Record four things:

  1. the exercise, load, repetitions and sets;
  2. repetitions left in reserve or session effort;
  3. soreness and readiness over the next 48 hours; and
  4. whether the next priority bike session held its planned power and quality.

If strength numbers rise while priority rides repeatedly fail, the combined programme is not working yet. Reduce strength volume, change its position in the week, or revisit the total bike load.

Step 3: maintain with less volume when cycling load rises

Do not assume maintenance always means exactly one session or two sets. A practical first experiment is to keep familiar movements and meaningful load while removing some accessory exercises or sets. The smallest recoverable dose differs between a novice, an experienced lifter, a time-crunched masters rider and an athlete in a dense race block.

Our minimum-effective-dose guide explores that narrower question. Keep the broad query owned here; use the supporting guide for dose adjustments rather than treating its template as universal.

Where strength sessions fit around riding

Protect races and the bike sessions most connected to your goal. Do not place a fatiguing gym session immediately before a priority interval session, long ride or event.

There are two defensible patterns:

  • Separate the sessions. This is useful when strength development is a priority or same-day work harms quality. A meta-analysis found that trained participants lost more lower-body strength development when endurance and resistance work occurred in the same session than when the sessions were separated (Petré and colleagues, 2021). It compared strength outcomes with resistance-only training; it was not a cyclist-performance trial.
  • Concentrate demanding work. A rider may put the priority bike session first and lift later, leaving the next day easy. This can protect genuinely easy days, but it only works if both sessions remain productive and the rider recovers.

The right order follows the priority. If the interval session is the key stimulus, ride first. If developing maximal strength is the block's primary goal, lift fresh or separate the sessions. A review of same-session sequence found a small lower-body strength advantage when strength came first, with no sequence effect on aerobic capacity (Murlasits, Kneffel and Thalib, 2018).

Strength training for cyclists over 40, 50 and 60

The newest cycling meta-analysis included adults across performance levels, but it did not publish the special “masters subset” claimed by Roadman's retired duplicate article. We should not invent one.

The masters case still matters for two separate reasons:

  1. General health. WHO recommends adults—including older adults—perform muscle-strengthening activity involving major muscle groups on two or more days per week. Older adults should also include multicomponent activity emphasising balance and strength where appropriate (WHO physical-activity guidelines). This is a public-health recommendation, not a cycling-performance dose-response study.
  2. Cycling does not replace bone-loading activity. A systematic review concluded that road cycling does not appear to provide a meaningful osteogenic benefit and reported concern about lower bone mineral density in some adult road-cyclist groups (Olmedillas and colleagues, 2012). A 2025 scoping review found resistance and impact-based interventions promising, but only five eligible studies in cyclists and swimmers, so certainty remains limited (Florvåg and colleagues, 2025).

For a healthy masters rider who is new to resistance training, progress more patiently rather than assuming age requires an aggressive 4–6-repetition prescription. Health conditions, osteoporosis risk, previous injury and unexplained pain belong with an appropriately qualified clinician or strength professional, not an online calculator.

Read the strength training for cyclists over 50 guide for masters-specific programming considerations, and use the masters cycling hub for the broader training and recovery framework.

Common claims to stop repeating

“Strength training always increases FTP.” The latest pooled analysis found no significant maximal-steady-state or VO2max effect. Some riders may improve FTP; the review does not promise it.

“Two sessions is the proven minimum.” The studies used 1–3 sessions and frequency was not a significant moderator. Two is a practical starting choice.

“High repetitions only build bulk; 6–10 repetitions cannot.” Adaptations overlap. Load, volume, proximity to failure, nutrition and training history all matter. The elite-cyclist trial reported increased lower-body lean mass with heavy training.

“Single-leg lifts transfer directly because cycling is single-leg.” Biomechanical resemblance is not outcome evidence. Use unilateral exercises when they serve the rider; do not claim direct transfer from appearance alone.

“Strength training prevents cycling injuries.” The 2025 cycling-performance review did not test injury prevention. Strength work may be part of a wider capacity programme, but a page should not guarantee protection from pain or injury.

“Every cyclist over 40 needs the same heavy protocol.” Older adults should strength train for health when able, but individual health, lifting history, goals and recovery still govern the programme.

How to judge whether it is working

Set a baseline before the block:

  • one or two repeatable strength measures;
  • a cycling performance measure matched to your goal;
  • body mass if power-to-weight matters;
  • the completion and quality of priority sessions; and
  • fatigue, soreness and any pain response.

Reassess after a meaningful block—not after three gym visits. A stronger lift is evidence that the gym programme improved that lift. Transfer requires a cycling outcome too.

If you want the bike and gym loads programmed together, Roadman online cycling coaching integrates both around the rider's goal and recovery. If you are starting alone, use the 12-week beginner strength plan as a progression framework and scale it to your current competence.

Sources and editorial limits

This article distinguishes pooled research results from Roadman's practical starting framework. It was last checked on 26 August 2026. It does not diagnose injury, prescribe rehabilitation or replace individual medical or coaching advice.

FAQ

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Should cyclists lift weights?
It can be worthwhile. A cyclist-only meta-analysis found significant pooled benefits for cycling performance, efficiency and anaerobic power. The certainty of evidence was low, so strength work should be treated as a tool to test and individualise rather than a guaranteed route to more watts.
How often should cyclists do strength training?
The latest review included programmes using 1–3 sessions per week and did not find frequency to be a significant moderator. Two non-consecutive sessions per week is a practical starting point for many riders, not a research-proven minimum. Reduce volume or frequency when recovery or key bike sessions deteriorate.
What are the best strength exercises for cyclists?
There is no universal research-ranked list. A practical programme usually covers a knee-dominant pattern, a hip hinge, single-leg work, calf work where appropriate, and enough upper-body and trunk work for the rider's wider needs. Choose variants you can perform and progress safely.
Will lifting weights make a cyclist bulky or slower?
Not necessarily, but it is inaccurate to promise no mass gain. One controlled study in elite cyclists reported an increase in lower-body lean mass alongside performance gains. Changes depend on training volume, nutrition, experience and the individual. Monitor body mass and cycling performance if power-to-weight is important.
Should cyclists lift before or after riding?
Protect the session that matters most. Avoid fatiguing strength work before a priority interval, long ride or race. Trained athletes focused on maximal strength may benefit from separating endurance and resistance sessions; when they must share a day, the order should follow the primary goal and the rider's response.
Is strength training different for cyclists over 40 or 50?
Older adults have strong general-health reasons to strength train, and WHO recommends muscle-strengthening activity on two or more days per week. That is a public-health recommendation, not proof of the best cycling-performance dose. Start progressively and adapt around health, training history and recovery.

KEEP READING — THE SATURDAY SPIN

The week's training takeaways, pro insights, and what to do about them. 30,000+ serious cyclists open it every Saturday.

STRENGTH FOR CYCLISTS

GET THE 2-DAY CYCLIST GYM PLAN

Two sessions a week. Built around big riding loads, not gym-bro hypertrophy. The same template our coached riders use through base and build.

AW

ANTHONY WALSH

Host of the Roadman Cycling Podcast

RELATED PODCAST EPISODES

Hear the conversations behind this article.