Polarized training

3 lurkers | 91 watchers
Dec 2016
11:21pm, 7 Dec 2016
34,982 posts
  •  
  • 0
Velociraptor
Interesting! I'm considering introducing some jumping and hopping, not to benefit my running but because on my last couple of trips to the climbing wall I've felt a drop in my ability to perform dynamic moves with my legs and, being small and weak, maintaining a bit of spring is important if I'm to continue climbing at the same level as before or even make improvements. But if it might be detrimental to my prospects of being able to compete as an 80-year-old runner, I'll stick to wrestling with the pull-up bar.
Dec 2016
7:20am, 8 Dec 2016
10,646 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
My tuppence worth. Seems like a lot of over complexity and over thinking.

There are no silver bullets.

Keep it Simple.

Keep it Specific.
Dec 2016
10:06am, 8 Dec 2016
1,776 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Optimal training requires a degree of specificity, but many recreational runners over-estimate the value of specificity.
Races from 5000 m to marathon are run at a pace in the vicinity of lactate threshold. The principle of specificity suggests that a large proportion of training should be near LT. However studies of elite distance runners indicate that typically elite athletes do only about 10% of their training in the vicinity of LT. Stephen Seilers lecture summarizes the evidence. vimeo.com

Vrap, I would do a modest amount of plyometrics, but build up gradually and avoid it when very tired. I have am sure that hopping and skipping during taper improved my race performances in the past, and I suspect it improved my longevity as a runner at least until my late sixties. I have slowed greatly in the past few years, and wonder if I would have been better off with less hopping and skipping and more hill sprints in earlier years. I am very sparing with the hopping/skipping now, though I do some trampolining.
Dec 2016
10:08am, 8 Dec 2016
10,402 posts
  •  
  • 0
Chrisull
You maybe wrong Fenners :-).

Went to the phys, and I have tendinopathy on my right hamstring. I also have a big imbalance, right medial hamstring is *waaaayyyy* weaker than the left, it just dies massively under any kind of loading. Looks like I have my problem, right there. Apparently it affects "faster" runners, which made me laugh, because we kick our legs up higher. Not piriformis, not back, -hurrah(!) also I have pathetic hip extension on my right handside (as bad as he's seen!) so lots of flexibility stretches there.

So some new exercises (one to do every 2 hours!), to dovetail into my strength on the glutes. Having done all those I now feel more tired than if I'd gone for a run!
Dec 2016
1:10pm, 8 Dec 2016
10,647 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
LOL Canute, that ain't my experience, both from virtual interactions, coaching and seeing other runners.
Dec 2016
1:35pm, 8 Dec 2016
10,648 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
Chris, I'm always wrong ;-)
SPR
Dec 2016
1:36pm, 8 Dec 2016
23,148 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
How many elite runners do you know?
Dec 2016
1:39pm, 8 Dec 2016
10,649 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
Define 'elite'? I don't know Mo but I do know people who run for England. But to be honest I don't see the link between a 4-hr 'recreational' marathoner and 'elite'. Most 'elite' have given up before long before being bald, fat and fifty :) :)
Dec 2016
2:17pm, 8 Dec 2016
13,965 posts
  •  
  • 0
Wriggling Snake
I have been reading this the last few days.

I think plyometrics have their place, but are very tiring. My experience is I took part in cross-fit work for about 18 months, my strength improved and I "felt" faster, posted a few better times at 5k. However it had a detrimental effect over all as I found it tiring and my longer easier runs suffered. I found circuits much better to fit into a training routine.

Lately I have been doing my own strength routines, squats press ups, core work, etc, etc. This also seems to be working for me. I am thinking of including more active exercises such as skipping and hoping but have shied away so far.

As an experiment, I took a group out last night and did short sprint hill work, and we talked about how this felt compared to racing, and what people's running form felt like when training like this compared to a race, and the feedback was that this would help them, in both cases of form and strength (basically we did 3 sets of 4 * 50m (with a 500m very easy jog inbetween), all very anecdotal I know, but I think they could see the benefit of sessions like this and how similar work would help.
Dec 2016
2:18pm, 8 Dec 2016
1,777 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
My ‘rule of thumb’ definition of elite performance is better than 90% WAVA. Ed Whitlock is an example of an elite athlete who is still going strong at 85.

However I actually consider that polarised training is optimal not only for elites, but also for non-elites who want to maintain year on year improvement (or slow the rate of deterioration with age.)

I accept that many recreational runners achieve good performances with training that focussed on tempo running. For a runner who has not previously trained systematically, almost any reasonable systematic program will produce improvement. However, in my experience few of athletes who achieve good performance based largely on tempo running sustain good year on year performance with that type of training.

FR, it is noteworthy that some of your most impressive race times in recent years followed a period of Furman training. The Furman program places greater emphasis on tempo and fast long runs, than is typical of the training of elite athletes. At first sight this appears to support your opinion regarding the value of specificity. Furthermore, I know a substantial number of runners who have achieved very good half-marathon or marathon performances with Furman. However, none have sustained that level of performance for several consecutive years, and several have experienced a marked deterioration in the year following their successful Furman season.

About This Thread

Maintained by Canute
Polarised training is a form of training that places emphasis on the two extremes of intensity. There is a large amount of low intensity training (comfortably below lactate threshold) and an appreciable minority of high intensity training (above LT).

Polarised training does also include some training near lactate threshold, but the amount of threshold training is modest, in contrast to the relatively high proportion of threshold running that is popular among some recreational runners.

Polarised training is not new. It has been used for many years by many elites and some recreational runners. However, it has attracted great interest in recent years for two reasons.

First, detailed reviews of the training of many elite endurance athletes confirms that they employ a polarised approach (typically 80% low intensity, 10% threshold and 10% high intensity. )

Secondly, several scientific studies have demonstrated that for well trained athletes who have reached a plateau of performance, polarised training produces greater gains in fitness and performance, than other forms of training such as threshold training on the one hand, or high volume, low intensity training on the other.

Much of the this evidence was reviewed by Stephen Seiler in a lecture delivered in Paris in 2013 .
vimeo.com

In case you cannot access that lecture by Seiler in 2013, here is a link to his more recent TED talk.

ted.com
This has less technical detail than his 2013 talk, but is nonetheless a very good introduction to the topic. It should be noted that from the historical perspective, Seiler shows a US bias.

Here is another useful video by Stephen Seiler in which he discusses the question of the optimum intensity and duration of low intensity sessions. Although the answer ‘depends on circumstances’ he proposes that a low intensity session should be long enough to reach the point where there are detectable indications of rising stress (either the beginning of upwards drift of HR or increased in perceived effort). If longer than this, there is increasing risk of damaging effects. A session shorter than this might not be enough to produce enough stress to achieve a useful training effect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GXc474Hu5U


The coach who probably deserves the greatest credit for emphasis on the value of low intensity training was Arthur Lydiard, who coached some of the great New Zealanders in the 1960's and Scandinavians in the 1970’s. One of his catch-phrases was 'train, don't strain'. However Lydiard never made it really clear what he meant by ‘quarter effort’. I have discussed Lydiard’s ideas on several occasions on my Wordpress blog. For example: canute1.wordpress.com

Related Threads

  • 8020
  • heart
  • training









Back To Top

Tag A User

To tag a user, start typing their name here:
X

Free training & racing tools for runners, cyclists, swimmers & walkers.

Fetcheveryone lets you analyse your training, find races, plot routes, chat in our forum, get advice, play games - and more! Nothing is behind a paywall, and it'll stay that way thanks to our awesome community!
Get Started
Click here to join 113,793 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here