Perhaps, Mike. But I strongly suspect it does depend both on the specific endurance event, and on the athlete's time spent developing the capacity to apply their gained strength through the energy pathways specific to their sport.
I'm more familiar with rowing ... where a 2k race for well trained but non-elite folks tends to run in the 6.5-7.5 minute range. This is well into the aerobic domain, something like 80% or above of the energy used is through the aerobic pathway ... but the strength demands are substantial throughout.
The research shows that rowing competitiveness correlates not only with a vastly trained aerobic system but also with greater strength, up to a point. That point's relatively low in comparison to the barbell sports (i.e. elite rowers show about 2X bodyweight squats), but relatively high in comparison to, say, cyclists or middle -long distance runners.
The question we're trying to resolve in my house through this year's off-season training is whether it is more productive to gain greater aerobic capacity first, or greater strength. We've tried the first route, through conventional on-the-water training with the rowing club; this Winter, we're trying the second - a primarily strength phase, followed by a primarily aerobic phase. I'll let you know how it's worked out in April.