Is Pilates Strength Training? What the Research Actually Says

A man demonstrates strength and balance as he lifts a Pilates reformer overhead in a bright studio setting.

I keep hearing the statement that Pilates is strength training, and every time I hear it I think we need to be a little more careful with the language we are using. Can Pilates make you stronger? Absolutely. Can Pilates include strength training? Certainly. But does that mean every Pilates class should automatically be described as strength training? I am not convinced it does. The problem is that we often use the word strength very loosely, and once a phrase becomes popular, it tends to get repeated until it starts sounding like a fact. Pilates deserves a more thoughtful explanation than that.

If somebody starts exercising after doing very little physical activity, almost any new movement challenge may make them stronger. Walking more regularly might make their legs stronger. Climbing stairs may improve their ability to produce force. Even carrying shopping bags regularly could make a previously inactive person stronger. But we would not automatically describe walking, stair climbing or carrying shopping as a structured strength training programme. There is a difference between becoming stronger as a result of an activity and following a programme that has specifically been designed to develop strength. I think we need to apply exactly the same distinction to Pilates.

Strength is essentially our ability to produce force. If we want to improve that ability, muscles need to work against enough resistance to create a reason for the body to adapt. As someone becomes stronger, the challenge generally needs to increase if we want that improvement to continue. The resistance does not have to come from a dumbbell or a barbell. Body weight can provide resistance, elastic bands can provide resistance, machines can provide resistance, and, very obviously within Pilates, springs can provide resistance. Current guidance from the American College of Sports Medicine recognises that several forms of resistance can be effective. The important question is not simply what equipment we are using, but whether the way we are using it creates the training effect we are claiming.

That means reformer springs can certainly be used for strength training. But simply attaching a spring to an exercise does not magically turn the exercise into strength training. We still need to look at how much resistance the person is working against, how many repetitions they are completing, the range of movement being used, the leverage involved, the level of effort and the amount of recovery between efforts. We also have to think about what happens when the exercise becomes easier. If someone continues doing the same movement with the same spring, the same range and the same number of repetitions month after month, we cannot simply assume that strength will continue to increase. At some point the body has adapted to that challenge, and if strength is still the goal then something has to progress.

This is one of the reasons why I think we need to separate Pilates the method from the individual programme being taught. Pilates gives us a very broad toolbox. We have springs, body weight, changes of leverage, changes of position, changes of range, tempo, stability, instability and different relationships to gravity. Any of those variables can increase or decrease the challenge. But the Pilates Method itself does not dictate that every exercise has to be programmed for maximum strength. In fact, much of the value of Pilates comes from being able to change the purpose of an exercise depending on the individual standing or lying in front of us.

There is research showing that Pilates can improve strength. A 2025 randomised controlled trial looked at overweight and obese women aged between 30 and 60 who completed Reformer Pilates three times a week for eight weeks. The researchers found improvements in measures that included upper extremity strength and muscular endurance. That is useful evidence and it supports something Pilates teachers often see in practice. People begin Pilates and, over time, they often become stronger. They may control their body weight better, tolerate more spring resistance, perform movements they could not previously perform and feel more capable in daily life. Those are meaningful changes.

But we need to be careful with the conclusion we draw from a study like that. It tells us that one particular Reformer programme produced improvements in particular measures within a particular group of people. It does not tell us that every Reformer programme is strength training, nor does it tell us that every person taking a Pilates class will receive the same strength benefit. This is where research often becomes distorted when it moves from the scientific paper into advertising. A study finds that Pilates improved strength in one population and suddenly the headline becomes “Pilates is strength training”. Human beings do seem to enjoy removing all the inconvenient qualifications.

When we look at the wider research, the picture becomes more interesting. A 2022 systematic review examined whether Pilates was better than other forms of exercise for improving muscular strength. The researchers found that Pilates programmes could improve strength, but Pilates was not shown to be superior to other types of exercise for dynamic strength, isometric strength or muscular endurance. That is not a failure of Pilates. It simply means that Pilates does not appear to have some unique strength building property that other properly designed exercise programmes do not possess. Pilates can work, but the outcome depends on what we do with it.

A 2024 systematic review focusing on adults over 60 was even more cautious. The researchers found that the available evidence was not strong enough to recommend Pilates specifically as a method for improving muscular strength, endurance and power in older adults. Again, that does not mean Pilates cannot help older adults become stronger. It means the evidence does not support making a universal claim that Pilates, simply by being Pilates, is an effective strength training programme. That distinction is important, especially when we are teaching people who may need specific improvements in muscle strength as they age.

This brings me to muscular endurance, because I think this is where much of the confusion starts. Many Pilates classes involve repeated movements, sustained muscular work, longer sequences and relatively little recovery. That can be extremely demanding. Muscles fatigue, they shake, they burn and clients finish the class feeling as though they have worked very hard. But feeling tired is not the same thing as demonstrating an increase in strength. Very often, those training conditions are challenging muscular endurance, which is the ability of the muscles to continue producing or controlling force over time.

Muscular endurance is not somehow a lesser outcome. It is enormously valuable. We need endurance for posture, daily activity, repeated movement and maintaining control over longer periods. But it is different from developing the ability to produce greater levels of force. If my primary goal is to improve strength, I need enough resistance to make the effort genuinely challenging and I may need enough recovery to allow the person to produce that force repeatedly. If my primary goal is to keep someone moving continuously for a long sequence with very little recovery, I may have to reduce the resistance. The moment I change those variables, I begin to change the training effect.

This is particularly relevant when we talk about Dynamic Reformer. I am not against Dynamic Reformer. It can be a very effective and enjoyable way of exercising. But I do think we should be accurate about what we are actually training. A class that uses continuous movement, repeated sequences, relatively light springs and limited recovery may improve muscular endurance, coordination, cardiovascular fitness, balance and movement control alongside some strength. That is a perfectly good outcome. We do not need to call everything strength training in order to make it sound worthwhile.

The same issue appears when people talk about the famous burn. Feeling a muscle burn tells us that the muscle is working and becoming fatigued. It does not, on its own, tell us what adaptation is taking place. We need to look at outcomes rather than sensations. Can the person now work against more resistance? Can they control a more challenging lever? Can they perform a movement they could not perform before? Can they produce more force? Those changes give us useful information about whether someone is actually getting stronger.

I also think we have to be careful with the way Pilates is constantly described as core strength training. There is obviously some truth in that because we work extensively with the trunk and with the relationship between the centre and the movement of the limbs. But reducing Pilates to core strength misses much of what makes Pilates a method. The centre is important because it contributes to the organisation and control of the whole body. Pilates is not simply an abdominal workout performed on expensive furniture. We are also working with mobility, balance, breath, coordination, concentration, control, precision and quality of movement. Strength is part of that picture, but it does not have to become the definition of the picture.

This also brings us to general physical activity recommendations. The NHS recommends that adults undertake strengthening activities for all the major muscle groups on at least two days each week. Pilates can certainly contribute towards this. A well designed Pilates programme can challenge the legs, hips, back, abdomen, chest, shoulders and arms. But can we guarantee that every Pilates class provides enough resistance to meet that requirement for every person? I do not think we can. A beginner may find an exercise enormously challenging while an experienced and physically strong client may find exactly the same exercise relatively easy. The exercise has not changed. The person has.

That is why programme design matters so much. As teachers, we need to stop thinking only about exercises and think more about adaptation. What are we actually trying to change in this person? If strength is the goal, then we need to programme for strength. If muscular endurance is the goal, we need to programme for endurance. If mobility is the priority, the programme will look different again. If the purpose is movement control, confidence or coordination, then our choices will reflect that. All of these outcomes can sit comfortably within the Pilates Method.

For me, this is why the question “Is Pilates strength training?” is actually too simplistic. Pilates is a method, and within that method we can create programmes designed to develop different physical qualities. We can use Pilates to build strength. We can use Pilates to develop muscular endurance. We can use it to improve mobility, balance, coordination and movement control. We can change the springs, the leverage, the tempo, the range, the repetitions and the recovery. Those choices affect the response of the body, and understanding those choices is part of what makes us teachers rather than people simply delivering a sequence of exercises.

So rather than trying to prove that Pilates is strength training, I would rather we became much better at explaining exactly what a particular Pilates programme is designed to achieve. If we claim that we are training strength, we should be able to show that the programme provides sufficient resistance, appropriate progression and measurable improvement. If the programme is primarily developing muscular endurance, there is nothing wrong with saying so. If it is improving mobility, balance and movement quality, those are valuable outcomes in their own right.

Pilates does not become more legitimate because we attach the words 'strength training' to it. The Pilates Method already has a much broader value than that. It gives us a framework through which we can teach people to move with greater control, understanding and physical capability, and strength can absolutely be part of that process.

So, is Pilates strength training? Sometimes.

Can Pilates make you stronger? Yes.

Can strength training form part of a Pilates programme? Without question.

But Pilates itself is bigger than strength training, and I think the more accurately we explain what we are doing, the stronger the Pilates Method becomes.

Sources

American College of Sports Medicine. “ACSM Unveils Landmark 2026 Resistance Training Guidelines: First Update in 17 Years.” 17 March 2026. https://acsm.org/resistance-training-guidelines-update-2026/

Gökalp, Ö. and Kirmizigil, B. “Effects of Reformer Pilates on body composition, strength, and psychosomatic factors in overweight and obese women: A randomized controlled trial.” Scientific Reports, 2 July 2025. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-09683-8

Oliveira, L. S. et al. “Effects of Pilates exercises on strength, endurance and muscle power in older adults: Systematic review and meta analysis.” Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38876695/

Pinto, J. R. et al. “Is Pilates better than other exercises at increasing muscle strength? A systematic review.” Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 2022. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9681646/

NHS. “Physical activity guidelines for adults aged 19 to 64.” https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/exercise/physical-activity-guidelines-for-adults-aged-19-to-64/