Polarized training

91 watchers
SPR
Dec 2016
1:10pm, 29 Dec 2016
23,283 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
I don't know much about Maffetone for the record.
Dec 2016
1:24pm, 29 Dec 2016
10,978 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
Ah, science, and sports science at that ;-)
SPR
Dec 2016
1:55pm, 29 Dec 2016
23,284 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
Whereas Maffetone is based on?

There's reasons to say that the current scientific research doesn't give a complete picture for example short term studies probably at best show how to peak.

However that doesn't mean you can just make up anything and say that's the key to training well.
Dec 2016
2:02pm, 29 Dec 2016
10,980 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
It's just in my short running career spanning the last decade, so called 'Science' seems to go and go just like the latest seasons fashion.

Somebody said somewhere that if you're clever enough you can make stats prove anything you want.

However certain running foundations appear (to me) have weathered the fashions and still ring true today as they did ten, twenty, thirty years ago?
Dec 2016
4:36pm, 29 Dec 2016
2,531 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ninky Nonk
I've read Maffetone book several times and am quite a fan. Apart from using heart rate!

I actually think he says the same as Lydiard, hadd, and there are some similarities with polarized training.

Key message for me from Maffetone - build a Base with lots of strong aerobic running, avoid over training, eat well, sleep well, avoid stress. Once you've plateau ed naturally and reach a point where maff pace runs are too fast for day to day training - run the maff pace as cruise interval sets. He also advocates some faster interval training - but not flat out - longer reps at 10k pace ish - similar to the seiler paper. He also mentions use of downhill sprints for leg speed.

I tend to think maff pace is quite similar to canova fundamental pace too, and hadds sub lt pace, and Lydiard best aerobic effort, and Daniels e-pace. I think their all describing the same thing - zone 1!
Dec 2016
4:38pm, 29 Dec 2016
2,532 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ninky Nonk
Sorry 'they're all describing'
Dec 2016
7:07pm, 29 Dec 2016
289 posts
  •  
  • 0
Dillthedog57
I did Maff from August to November and have been feeding in some quicker work around a majority or Maff paced runs since then, which to me is pretty much polarised training. I do Maff because too much speed work leaves me crocked, running slower means that I can build consistency and then do a small amount of speedwork to get back to race fitness. As I approach 51 I am unlikely to be challenging for Olympic medals but can still chug along at a reasonable pace, so long as I avoid niggly injuries!
Dec 2016
7:09pm, 29 Dec 2016
290 posts
  •  
  • 0
Dillthedog57
And to add to NNs list, my Maff pace is about MP + 20%, as specified in P&D for the first three quarters of long runs, and quicker than the pace that they recommend for general runs. It also ties in with Jack Daniels paces.
Dec 2016
7:13pm, 29 Dec 2016
10,982 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
KISS - Keep it Simple Superstar
Dec 2016
7:43pm, 29 Dec 2016
1,786 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
FR,
There have been some ideas about training that have weathered well over the decades, but nonetheless, the best ideas have been given a good polish by science in the past decade.

On the one hand, Woldemar Gerschler’s introduction of interval training in the 1930’s was the foundation for the golden years of European middle distance running spanning from the 1950’s to the mid 1980’s. The science of the past decade, especially the science of HIIT has taught us a huge amount more about interval training, but as SPR implies, this science has not yet seriously addressed the question of how you build it into a long term running career.

On the other hand Arthur Lydiard’s approach to periodized training, with a substantial period of aerobic basing followed by a few months of more intense training and racing, provided the basis for the spectacular middle and long distance performances of New Zealanders in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Lydiard’s ideas has been re-worked, largely for recreational runners, by Hadd and Maffetone. However Lydiard’s recommendation to avoid speed work during base-building was almost certainly poor advice. When his greatest protégé, Peter Snell, was asked a few years ago whether or not he would have changed anything about the way he trained under Lydiard, his reply was: ‘some speed work all year round’ Subsequent science, especially the more recent science of polarised training has provided support for Snell’s opinion.

However despite the substantial advances in our understanding about how to train effectively, based on the ideas of great coaches supported by good science, we still lack some systematic science about how best to structure a running career spanning a period of several years, and also some good science about how to adjust a training program to bring out the best in each individual..

Science does not aim to provide the final answer to any question; it merely seeks to produce better answers.

And, as Einstein remarked, keep it as simple as possible but no simpler.

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 113,796 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here