Most cyclists who go to the gym follow a programme written for someone else. They pick exercises from a generic template, add some leg press because it "feels like cycling," and wonder why none of it translates to watts. The problem is not that strength training does not work for cyclists — the evidence is clear that it does. The problem is exercise selection and programming intent.
Derek Teel is a strength and conditioning coach who specialises in endurance athletes. On The Best Exercises for Cyclists (Strength Training) on the Roadman Cycling Podcast, he was direct about what separates gym work that transfers to the bike from gym work that just makes you tired. The framework is simpler than most cyclists expect, and it starts with understanding why the usual approach fails.
Why most gym programmes fail cyclists
Generic gym programmes are built around aesthetics or general fitness. They include a lot of volume, moderate loads, and exercises chosen to balance muscle groups for someone who sits at a desk. For a cyclist, that means too many reps, weights that are too light, and movements that do not match the demand of the pedal stroke.
The pedal stroke is a hip-dominant, unilateral, cyclical movement. The power phase — from roughly 12 o'clock to 5 o'clock — is driven primarily by the glutes and quads. If a gym programme does not load those patterns under meaningful tension, it does not transfer. Doing three sets of 15 with a moderate squat weight trains a different energy system at a different neuromuscular intensity than riding your bike. You already have plenty of that from actual cycling.
Teel's point on this was unambiguous: high-rep, low-load gym work does not add anything the bike has not already given you. It just adds fatigue. The gym is where you apply stress the bike cannot — heavy, low-rep, compound loading that builds peak force and rate of force development. If you are not doing that, you are not using the gym correctly as a cyclist.
The other common failure is neglecting single-leg work entirely, which leaves the left-right asymmetries that develop from years of bilateral training completely unaddressed. More on that shortly. For now, the principle is simple: a cycling strength S&C plan should be built around transfer, not tradition.
The big three for cycling
Teel anchors his cyclist programmes around three exercises: the back squat, the Romanian deadlift, and the Bulgarian split squat. These are not chosen for novelty — they are chosen because they load the movement patterns and muscle groups that produce power on the bike.
The back squat builds quad and glute strength through a full range of motion, with significant hip extension demand at the bottom. Three to five sets of three to six reps at 75–85% of one-rep max is a standard prescription. That loading range develops maximal strength and neuromuscular efficiency — the ability of the nervous system to recruit more motor units simultaneously. That efficiency transfers directly to force production on the pedal.
The Romanian deadlift targets the posterior chain: hamstrings, glutes, and lower back. Cyclists tend to underdevelop this chain relative to the quads because the quad-dominant push phase of the pedal stroke gets far more repetition. A weak posterior chain is also a common contributor to knee and lower back injuries. Teel programmes RDLs as a primary movement, not an accessory, because the posterior chain is not secondary to cycling performance — it is central to it.
The Bulgarian split squat brings in the single-leg element while adding a frontal-plane stability demand that neither the squat nor the deadlift fully addresses. It is also excellent for identifying and correcting strength asymmetries between legs. Load it with dumbbells or a barbell, three to four sets of four to six reps per side, and it will expose weaknesses that bilateral lifts allow the stronger leg to compensate for.
Roadman take: That is Teel's prescription, and it works in supervised settings with athletes already competent under load. For our 35-55 amateur audience — most lifting unsupervised, most with the hip-flexor and pelvic-tilt limitations years of riding produce — we substitute the heavy bilateral lifts (back squat, conventional deadlift) with single-leg and front-loaded variants that deliver the same posterior-chain and quad stimulus at a fraction of the spinal compression and injury risk. The Should Cyclists Deadlift? post lays out the exact substitutions we use.
These three exercises form the foundation. For cyclists looking to build their programme around this logic, the strength guide covers how to sequence and load them across a training block, and the best gym exercises for cyclists breakdown adds the supporting movements (hip thrust, single-leg variations, anti-rotation core) Teel programmes alongside the big three.
Single-leg work and why it matters
Cycling is entirely unilateral in practice. Each leg produces force independently through its own pedal stroke, and any significant difference in strength or coordination between legs shows up as inefficiency — wasted motion, compensatory patterns, and eventually injury. Yet most cyclists who do lift spend the majority of their gym time on bilateral movements.
Teel is clear on this: single-leg work is not optional for cyclists, it is a priority. The Bulgarian split squat, mentioned above, is the primary tool. But he also programmes step-ups, single-leg Romanian deadlifts, and reverse lunges depending on the athlete's capacity and what deficits testing has revealed.
The single-leg RDL deserves particular attention. It loads the hamstring and glute unilaterally while demanding significant balance and hip stability — both of which are directly relevant to holding a powerful, stable position on the bike. Athletes who have never done it are often surprised how weak their non-dominant leg is. That asymmetry does not disappear on the bike; it just gets hidden by the bilateral rhythm of pedalling.
A practical starting point is to dedicate at least 50% of lower-body gym volume to unilateral exercises. If you are doing four lower-body sets in a session, at least two of them should be single-leg. As you progress, that proportion can increase. The bilateral lifts are still there for their ability to move heavy loads, but they are not doing the full job alone.
Addressing these imbalances early in a structured programme is one of the highest-return interventions available to club-level cyclists. Most have never systematically trained each leg independently, and the gains from correcting a 10–15% asymmetry can be significant in terms of both power output and injury resilience.
Core training that transfers
The cycling-specific core conversation gets muddled quickly because "core training" means different things to different people. If your mental image is crunches and sit-ups, that is not what transfers to the bike. The core's job on the bike is not to flex the spine — it is to resist movement, stabilise the pelvis, and provide a rigid platform against which the legs can produce force.
Teel's approach is built around anti-movement patterns: anti-extension, anti-rotation, and anti-lateral-flexion. The dead bug trains anti-extension. The Pallof press trains anti-rotation. The side plank trains anti-lateral-flexion. These movements reflect what the core actually does during sustained hard efforts on the bike — resist the forces trying to collapse or rotate the body.
A stable pelvis is where this matters most. When the pelvis rocks side to side under fatigue — a common sight on long climbs or late in a race — energy leaks. The legs are still producing force, but some of it is going into unwanted movement rather than forward propulsion. Targeted anti-rotation and anti-extension work reduces that leak. Heavy strength training in cyclists has been shown to improve cycling economy and time-trial performance (Sunde et al., 2010; Rønnestad & Mujika, 2014), and a strong, stable trunk is a plausible contributor alongside neuromuscular adaptations in the legs.
Ten to fifteen minutes of core work, two to three times per week, is sufficient. This does not need to be a separate session — it fits at the end of a gym session or on an easy recovery day. The key is that it is targeted and progressive, not random. Add load or complexity over time, just as you would with any other strength exercise.
In-season vs off-season programming
The off-season is the time to build. Teel programmes three gym sessions per week during base phases, when riding volume is lower and the body can absorb more total training stress. This is where new movement patterns are learned, loads are progressed, and structural weaknesses are addressed. An athlete who uses the off-season properly arrives at race season with a higher strength ceiling, better neuromuscular efficiency, and reduced injury risk.
In-season, the goal shifts from building to maintaining. Two sessions per week is typically enough to preserve the strength built over winter. The sessions get shorter and the intensity stays high — dropping volume while keeping load is the standard approach for in-season maintenance. What changes is total volume, not intensity. Reducing to one set of three reps at near-maximal load maintains strength far longer than doing three sets of ten at moderate load.
The timing of gym sessions relative to rides matters too. Heavy strength work on the same day as a key interval session is poor programming — both sessions compete for adaptation resources. Teel recommends separating heavy gym sessions from high-intensity ride sessions by at least six hours, or scheduling them on different days altogether. Easy ride days or rest days are the logical slot for strength work during a busy race schedule.
The transition between off-season and in-season programming should be gradual. Dropping abruptly from three sessions to zero in early spring — which many cyclists do when racing begins — means losing the strength gains almost entirely by mid-summer. Two sessions per week, maintained consistently, is enough to hold what you built.
The minimum effective dose
The concept Teel returns to throughout the conversation is minimum effective dose: the least amount of gym work required to produce and maintain measurable adaptation. For most cyclists, that number is lower than they expect, and getting it right matters more than adding volume.
Two sessions per week, each lasting 45–60 minutes, is the floor. Within those sessions, three to four compound exercises, each done for three to five sets of three to six reps, covers the primary stimulus. Add ten minutes of targeted core work and you have a complete session that does not compete meaningfully with riding load.
Progressive overload applies the same logic as cycling training — the stimulus has to increase over time or adaptation stalls. Add weight when you can complete all reps with good form. Track your lifts. A cyclist who adds 20kg to their squat over a 12-week block has made a meaningful change to the neuromuscular system. That does not happen by accident or by keeping loads comfortable.
The athletes Teel works with who make the most consistent progress are the ones who treat gym sessions with the same discipline they apply to interval sessions. They show up, they lift heavy, they record the numbers, and they progress. The ones who struggle are typically doing too much variety, too little load, or skipping sessions when riding feels good. Consistency and load are the variables that drive results.
If you want a structured approach rather than building from scratch, the coaching programme can integrate strength work with your riding schedule from the start, rather than trying to bolt it on later. If your question is narrower — what to swap, when to lift relative to a key session, how to handle race week — drop it into the Roadman AI coach and you'll get a direct answer.
The next step is simple: take the back squat, the Romanian deadlift, and the Bulgarian split squat, establish your starting loads this week, and run those three movements for eight weeks with progressive overload. That single decision, made consistently, will do more for your cycling than any amount of accessory work or equipment change.
