I am a second year studying math at university, and have taken theoretical linear algebra, group and ring theory, real and complex analysis, and general topology, as well as some miscellaneous technical courses like probability theory, statistical inference, and algorithms. That is to say, I have some basic experience with abstract, proof-based mathematics. I am currently working on two research projects (in applied fields) that require some creativity in problem solving (for example, my computational neuroscience project involves proving certain inequalities to do with statistical inference in the olfactory system), and am finding I am limited in making progress by my problem solving ability. For example, when I take a problem I am stuck on to some friends who are IMO medallists, they can often help me make progress by coming up with creative strategies. I would like to be able to do this myself, and I realize this takes years of work to hone. So I would like to begin now.
I am planning on improving by spending a good amount of time getting familiar with olympiad-style problem solving; I was planning on going through general olympiad books recommended on AoPS, and a lot of past USAMO papers, etc. I am not sure if this is the correct strategy for my goals, so I wanted to hear what others would do in my position. My understanding is that eventually, math olympiads diverge from how helpful they are to research (and can often reduce to knowing the right artificial trick), but the fundamentals of problem solving are useful regardless so it's healthy to be able to do at least basic olympiad problems.
This question is distinct from others like this and this because I am specifically asking for advice taking into account the fact that I already have some mathematical maturity, which may or may not affect how people recommend studying. I have very little experience with contest math. Any advice is appreciated.