Heavy resistance training outperforms plyometric training for improving running economy and time-trial performance — though plyometrics shows a distinct, separate benefit for cycle-to-run neuromotor control
Interpretation
Eihara et al.'s 22-study meta-analysis found heavy resistance training produced a meaningfully larger running-economy and time-trial effect than plyometric training (trivial effect). But Bonacci et al.'s triathlon-specific preliminary RCT found plyometric training specifically corrected altered neuromotor control during the run-after-cycling phase, without changing running economy itself — these are two different outcomes, not competing claims about the same thing.
Practical implication
Don't position plyometric training as a running-economy intervention for triathletes — the better-supported use case is correcting post-cycling run mechanics, a narrower and more triathlon-specific benefit than the general running-economy literature on heavy resistance training would suggest.
Sources
2 sources, independently verified.
Heavy resistance training produced a greater effect on running economy (g=-0.32) and time-trial performance than plyometric training (g=-0.13, trivial effect). Near-maximal loads (≥90% 1RM) and longer interventions (≥10 weeks resistance / ≥8 weeks plyometric) produced larger gains.
8 weeks of added plyometric training improved neuromotor control during the run-after-cycling phase versus endurance training alone, but running economy itself was not different between groups at follow-up — the benefit shown is motor-control quality, not an economy or speed gain directly.