Polarized training

91 watchers
Dec 2016
5:37pm, 30 Dec 2016
295 posts
  •  
  • 0
Dillthedog57
And I agree with the comments above, particularly when marathon training, that it is best to do as many miles as possible without getting injured. I also subscribe to the idea that the best training plan is the one that keeps you on the road, training consistently!
Dec 2016
5:54pm, 30 Dec 2016
1,788 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
FR,
The effects of cortisol are complex: in general transient rises is response to stress are beneficial but sustained levels cause tissue damage. However the situation is even more complex because the body compensates for the effects of elevated cortisol.

Cortisol illustrates the point of Einstein’s comment that you should keep things as simple as possible but no simpler.

The study by Balsalobre-Fernandez that I described in my word-press blog almost 2 weeks ago canute1.wordpress.com is one of the most detailed. They measured cortisol, neuromuscular coordination, training load and performance over a 10 month period in high level middle and long distance runners. They found that high cortisol averaged over the season was associated with poor neuromuscular coordination, but in the short term high cortisol was associated with improved performance.

When they examined the relationship between performance and training load they found that better performance that lesser amounts of higher intensity training were associated with better performance than higher volume lower intensity (training (though the lower intensity training was nonetheless moderately demanding – with a large proportion near LT.

DTD, I doubt you are too old for intervals. There are studies showing the HIIT is effective for people somewhat older than you. However you have clearly examined your own responses to training with care, and you should apply the lessons that your own experiences have taught you. Keeping on the road consistently is the first priority
Dec 2016
6:35pm, 30 Dec 2016
296 posts
  •  
  • 0
Dillthedog57
Canute - I am very much looking at myself and my own training. I see a lot of people older than myself training much harder and not picking up injuries. I just don't seem to be as robust, and am probably a bit of a minority case, which is why I think I need to look carefully at my own training, and see how my body reacts. I am also hopeful to still be running for many more years, so have a bit of an eye for my long term prospects, perhaps at the expense of short term results
Dec 2016
6:46pm, 30 Dec 2016
10,460 posts
  •  
  • 0
Chrisull
Maffetone maybe a doctor but some of what he says on his web site is pure quackery (like don't eat in restaurants), and my personal experience with Maffetone is that I lose speed when persisting with it for 2 months, and his predictions for my pace are way, way, way out on his Maffetone runs and the Maffetone speed test for me is no predictor of race pace I can do 8.20 pace runs at Maffe pace and only manage 42 min 10ks, or do 8.40 pace runs for the same HR and do 41 min 10k.

He neglects pace, and as soon I as injected pace/strength I got faster. It also runs totally contrary to what I was taught on my CIRF course by coaches with elite clients, and they were actually quite dismissive about the whole principle of 'one paced' training. Polarised makes sense, you don't need much pace at all, but you do need to stimulate the muscles and do neural muscular training. I've not seen any evidence in studies or the books in my library on my book shelf that a little bit of cortisol destroys all the base work.
Dec 2016
8:03pm, 30 Dec 2016
2,537 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ninky Nonk
If I remember right maffetone is a podiatrist.
Dec 2016
4:34pm, 31 Dec 2016
2,540 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ninky Nonk
Haven't read but this may be of interest...

jyx.jyu.fi
Dec 2016
4:54pm, 31 Dec 2016
11,003 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
Just saying, all month I've run in zone 1 (probably slower than Maffetone suggests) and then pull my fastest parkrun for about six months, at between 68 & 69% WAVA.
Dec 2016
4:55pm, 31 Dec 2016
11,004 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
Chris, we are all different, you've tried it and it didn't work, move on. :)
SPR
Dec 2016
5:10pm, 31 Dec 2016
23,304 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
FR - If praise of a method is valid so is criticism and one paced running is not the best training method long term (although it might be for short period of time) even if you can improve just doing that (don't know if that's what Maffetone advocates). Even Hadd doesn't advocate that.

Congrats on the 5k though, think you have faster times in you if you want them.
Dec 2016
5:12pm, 31 Dec 2016
11,005 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenland (Fenners) Runner
Is that not what I said? One man's meat is another man's poison.

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