Polarized training
91 watchers
Jan 2017
11:08pm, 1 Jan 2017
2,547 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Spr you might be interested in these too if you haven't seen before. britishmilersclub.com |
Jan 2017
11:17pm, 1 Jan 2017
23,314 posts
|
SPR
I have a few of those saved but there's a lot in there so if you come across anything noteworthy, let me know.
|
Jan 2017
11:57pm, 1 Jan 2017
23,315 posts
|
SPR
I have the 2002 ones on my phone. Might have more on my computer.
|
Jan 2017
8:19pm, 24 Jan 2017
327 posts
|
J2R
Just dipping into this thread after a long absence and find there's a lot of meaty new stuff being discussed. The hill sprints business is of real interest to me - I followed the letsrun.com link and was fascinated to read about 'post-activation potentiation'. This rang a loud bell with me, because of my experience from the weekend, when I did a hill sprint session at my favourite local little hill, doing 10 reps each of 20 seconds flat out, followed by an easy walk back to the bottom. Unusually, I followed it five minutes later with another of my regular speedwork sessions, reps of 40-41 seconds along a particular section of path in my local park followed by equal time slow jogging recoveries (my take on the classic Billat 30-30 workout). Because I do this workout regularly it tells me a lot about my current level of fitness, or at least how I am on the day. As mentioned, I normally do this stretch in 40-41s, but on good days I find myself running it in 39s with the same perceived effort. On Saturday, having just done the hill sprints, I did my reps in the park in 36-38s each, the fastest I've ever done them (and I would say that at the moment I'm not a my peak fitness). I was most surprised. I had assumed the hill sprints would affect me adversely, but it seems they were actually beneficial, which is an extraordinary idea. |
Jan 2017
9:48am, 27 Jan 2017
4,927 posts
|
Ceratonia
Hadn't heard of the Billat 30-30 so googled it, seem to be some impressive results for "moderately trained" runners. My most recent mile time is 6:20, so if I understand it correctly, I'd need to do 127 metres in 30s, followed by a 30s jog recovery, stopping when can't complete in the time, but aiming for 18-24 reps. That sounds like a pretty tough workout. Doing 127m on the track is probably fairly equivalent to running the length of our village football pitch on grass, so logistics are quite easy. I will be giving this a go once a week for a few weeks. On the post activation potentiation thing, I know of two athletes who train together who swear by a weighted vest warm-up - they do a series of hill sprints while wearing a 10kg vest shortly before a race. Not sure whether there is any science to back it up, but at the very least, the placebo effect seems to be working. |
Jan 2017
12:12pm, 27 Jan 2017
328 posts
|
J2R
Ceratonia, yes 127m is what you'd need to cover in 30s, assuming the 6:20 mile you did was a decent representation of the maximum pace you're currently capable of. The distance I cover is actually 205m, chosen simply because it's the shorter side of a rectangle in my local park and hence easy to get a pretty accurate satellite photo distance measurement, and to define start and end points. The time of 41s is what I'd take if I ran it at what was my vVO2max pace when I started doing it, namely around 5:20. It's close enough to 30s not to matter, as far as I was concerned (besides which, there are Billat variants such as 60-60, so precise duration is not that critical), and it was more important for me to get an accurate measurement of distance. It is a tough workout, particularly if I do some of the reps at the faster end of the spectrum (36s means 4:42 pace), but I find it easy to recover from, which is important for my 56 year old legs*. The session has been the bedrock of my speedwork for the last 3-4 years, when I've done nearly all my PBs, so it seems to work for me. *The rest of me is also 56, by the way. |
Jan 2017
3:35pm, 27 Jan 2017
4,935 posts
|
Ceratonia
Indeed - 4:42 pace for me is a km, not a mile
|
Jan 2017
9:59pm, 30 Jan 2017
2,569 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1747954115624813?utm_campaign=buffer&utm_medium=social&utm_content=bufferd44fa&utm_source=twitter.com& Any thoughts... |
Jan 2017
10:56pm, 30 Jan 2017
1,797 posts
|
Canute
An interesting review. A substantial number of the elite runners who were studied did more threshold training than high intensity training, which is somewhat different from the data emerging from Seiler’s studies that argue in favour of polarised training. It is noteworthy that Seiler based his conclusions on various different endurance sports (including skiing) whereas this review deals specifically runners, which is probably the main interest for most of us. However, it appears that a large part of the review is concerned with data derived from a small number of runners. Of the 8 studies listed in table 1, six were studies of 1, 2 or 3 runners and 5 of these studies were by Leif Tjelta, the author of this review. In the discussion of women, Tjelta places emphasis Waitz and Radcliffe: two runners who notably pushed themselves hard in training. In my view both of them limited their potential by doing so much hard training (as discussed on my blog canute1.wordpress.com ) However, it is undeniable that Paula’s training was very successful, despite the high cost in damage to her body. Despite my concern about the selectivity of the cases reviewed, it should also be noted that the review does include some notable individuals who adopted a high volume, polarised approach (eg Ingrid Kristiansen). There is also some data on Africans who employed a high volume low intensity program, in addition to Africans who used a low volume high intensity approach. So overall, the conclusion is that a wide range of training patterns have been employed by elites. It would be misleading to claim that most elite runners have used a polarised approach. However, it is difficult to draw general conclusions from such a review, and I am skeptical of the usefulness of the conclusions that Tjelta presents in the abstract. |
Feb 2017
4:15pm, 8 Feb 2017
10,609 posts
|
Chrisull
Ok first week of Billat 30-30 done. I over calculated the length needed (will need to go back and borrow the club measuring wheel). Was running more like 160-170m instead of 133m. So consequently super hard session of which I managed 16. The idea of spending half your recovery "actively training" is a nice one, but in reality it means it takes 15 seconds of your 30 second jog until your heart is back in its chest again. Hope it's worth the pain. Same time, same place next week!
|
Related Threads
- 80/20 Jun 2019
- Heart rate Dec 2024
- Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire. Jul 2023
- Low Resting/ High Training Heart Rate Jan 2021
- No limit to the benefits of exercise in reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease Jan 2021
- Resetting Max Heart Rate Dec 2020
- Resting Heart Rate: Is it normal Oct 2020
- Heart rate zones Jul 2020
- Running Heart rate Jun 2020
- Heart Rate monitors Jun 2020