Case Study: How Much Does 7 Weeks of Focused Dryland Ski Training Impact Running Endurance and 3RM Bench Press and Dead Lift Strength?

By Emmett Shaul, MTI Coach

BLUF

Two MTI Lab Rats immediately followed a 4-week, multi-modal Base Fitness cycle which included heavy strength and running by 7 weeks of MTI’s Dryland Ski programming.

How much did the sport-specific cycle impact their strength and running?

One athlete maintained his bench press 3RM and slightly improved his Hinge Lift 3RM. The other lost strength in both. Both athletes also ran slower 6-mile run times following the Dryland Ski Cycle.

BACKGROUND

MTI programs two types of fitness:

1. Base Fitness – this programming is multi-modal and trains at least 4 attributes concurrently, strength, work capacity, chassis integrity and endurance. It is day-to-day programming for athletes not specifically preparing for an event, and in it’s tactical and mountain applications, built to address 90% of their mission-direct fitness demands.
2. Event or Sport-Specific Fitness – this programming is narrow and focused on preparing athletes for a specific event (PFT, Selection, Climb) or sport season (skiing, hunting, kayaking, Wildland Fire …). The programming may or may not be multi-modal depending upon the sport or event and is best deployed directly before the event or sport season.

Within MTI’s programming approach, Dryland Ski Training falls under Event or Sport-Specific Fitness. MTI’s Dryland Ski Training is designed specifically to prepare athletes for the upcoming ski season, not to maintain all around fitness across every modality.

MTI’s Dryland Ski training utilized Leg Blasters and Touch Jump Touch to Box (TJT) as the primary training tools for dryland ski preparation. Leg Blasters provide the eccentric leg strength and strength endurance necessary to resist gravity, absorb impact, and handle repeated turns. TJT targets leg strength endurance and lactate tolerance under high heart rates, mirroring the demands of hard, long ski runs.

In a previous MTI mini-study (Leg Blasters Match Front Squat in Building Lower Body Strength), an intense Leg Blaster progression improved Front Squat 1RM as effectively as a heavy barbell Front Squat progression over a short cycle.

This case-study extended that question in three directions:

1. Does this transfer carry over to the posterior chain as measured by the Hinge Lift?
2. What happens to upper-body max strength (Bench Press) when lower body strength and strength endurance are emphasized?
3. How does intense work capacity intervals (Touch/Jump/Touch) impact 6 mile run times?

STUDY DESIGN

Subjects

Two in-house MTI Lab Rats (Michael and Emmett) completed the training as prescribed.

First – The September 2025 Militaary Operator Sessions which included.

• 3RM Bench Press Assessment and Big 24 Bench Press Progression – 2x/week
• 3RM Hing Lift Assessment and Big 24 Hinge Lift Progression – 2x/week
• 6 mile run assessment and 2-mile threshold intervals – 1x/week

At the end of September, the athletes resassesed the 3RM Bench Press, 3RM Hinge Lift and 6-Mile Run.

Second – Immediately following the September cycle, athletes began the 7-week Dryland Ski Training Plan this plan included:

• Leg Blaster Progression (eccentric leg strength, strength endurance) – 2x/week.
• 20-minute TJT to Box interval training (leg strength endurance and lactate tolerance at high heart rates) – 2x/week
• Upper Body – Limited loading via dumbbell complexes (e.g., Scotty Bobs, Renegade Man Makers, Mr. Spectacular), sandbag clean and press variations, and pull-ups/chin-ups following Leg Blasters
• MTI chassis integrity circuits targeting trunk and low back strength and durability following Touch/Jump/Touches
• 3–4 mile easy recovery runs on Saturdays (1x week)

Post Cycle Assessment

At the conclusion of the 7-week Dryland cycle, athletes re-assessed their lifts and run from the September Operator Sessions cycle:

• 3RM Bench Press
• 3RM Hinge Lift
• 6 mile run for time

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Table 1. Pre- vs Post-Dryland Performance

Measure	Athlete	Pre-Dryland (Post-September)	Post-Dryland	Change
3RM Bench	Michael	225 lbs	225 lbs	0 lbs
	Emmett	265 lbs	245 lbs	-20 lbs
3RM Hinge	Michael	325 lbs	330 lbs	+5 lbs
	Emmett	315 lbs	300 lbs	-15 lbs
6-Mile Run	Michael	59:35	63:15	+3:40 (slower)
	Emmett	55:03	57:02	+1:59 (slower)

The Hinge Lift results were mixed. The hinge is a posterior-chain–dominant pattern, and during the Dryland cycle the posterior chaing was never isolated and trained directly. Instead, the posterior chain was hit indirectly through Leg Blasters, TJT, chassis integrity work, and the overall density of the sessions.

Despite this, Michael’s 3RM Hinge increased slightly (+5 lbs), while Emmett’s dropped (-15 lbs). Given the absence of heavy hinging and the small size of the change, we’re cautious about reading too much into Michael’s improvement—normal day to day variation could explain it. Emmett’s drop, by contrast was preditible.

Previous MTI work shows Leg Blasters improve Front Squat strength. This mini study suggests that transfer is less consistent for a more posterior-chain–dominant pattern like the Hinge. The indirect posterior-chain stimulus in this Dryland progression appears enough for some athletes to hold, or slightly improve, hinge-pattern strength, but not reliably across the board.

Bench Press changes followed a similar pattern of individual response. Upper body work in the Dryland plan was limited to dumbbell complexes, sandbag clean and press variations, and pull-ups/chin-ups, with no heavy pressing.

Michael held his Bench 3RM at 225 lbs, while Emmett, starting at 265 lbs, dropped 20 lbs. For an athlete with moderate pressing strength, residual strength plus indirect loading can sometimes be enough to hold numbers through a short, hard cycle. For a stronger presser, the same program may not provide enough direct stimulus to prevent some detraining.

Both Lab Rats came into this study with relatively slow 6 mile run times. Even so, their 6 mile performances slipped further once the training focus shifted from running development to ski preparation. During Dryland, running volume was low and easy, and there was no threshold or interval work aimed at 6 mile performance. The result—slower 6 mile times—is consistent with what you’d expect when the hardest efforts in the week are dedicated to eccentric leg strength, leg strength endurance, and lactate tolerance, not to sustained running pace.

Conclusions?

Sport-specific pre-season training should be and is narrow and focused on the specific fitness demands of that sport. Thus, it’s not surprising that Emmett’s 3RM Hinge Lift and Bench Pressed declined, or that both athletes 6-mile run time declined.

What is surprising is that Michael’s strength didn’t decline. We really don’t have a great explanation for this other than training age. It’s possible Michael’s relatively low training age means that he has not come close yet to reaching his genetic potential on these exercises and thus his end of September assessment number low for what he is capable of and he could hit them easily again, after 7 weeks away from the barbell.

Questions, Comments, Feedback? 
Email emmett@mtntactical.com