|
Mar 2018
5:46pm, 16 Mar 2018
14,459 posts
|
Fenners
Nice one, J2R.
Don't think I've ever been able to put together such a consistent, solid block of training. And the best part is I don't feel tired after my long run.
|
|
Mar 2018
8:30am, 20 Mar 2018
14,468 posts
|
Fenners
Thanks to polarized training I've achieved unrivalled (for me) pace versus heart rate.
|
|
Mar 2018
8:40am, 20 Mar 2018
12,414 posts
|
Chrisull
Big test for polarised training for me this weekend, can it get me my first pb in 3 years? It's gonna be a toughie, 20 miles, but HR data and training/racing times indicate it should be achievable. (Well Riegel calculator says it's in the bag, but I'm not sure I agree with Riegel on that)
|
|
Mar 2018
9:07am, 20 Mar 2018
2,592 posts
|
jdarun
Is polarised training just what many of us consider to be proper training? Ie mostly gentle miles with a small proportion of hard/fast running? Or is there something else I’m missing?
Good luck with the 20 Chrisull, based on comments elsewhere I would also say it’s in the bag unless something very unexpected happens...
|
|
Mar 2018
9:53am, 20 Mar 2018
1,059 posts
|
J2R
@Chrisull, I'm doing a 20 mile race myself this weekend. It'll be the furthest I've raced since 2012. I have to say I'm a little nervous about it! Unless the wheels come off badly, I should get a PB, though, as my existing PB for this distance is a very weak one from many years ago. If I do get it, it'll be my 3rd PB of the year, which is not something I was expecting any more. I credit polarized training with allowing this to happen, as one of the big benefits of it is that it makes you less likely to get injured (or indeed ill, as you are not keeping your system under stress so much), and thus allows a long, unbroken period of training. There's an American running coach called Tinman whose ideas I've followed a fair bit in the last year or so, and one of his mantras is "keep the ball rolling". That is, the big gains come from training week after week after week, so if necessary back off the intensity or distance or whatever so you can do this. Better to keep training year round at 95% level than have little bursts of 100% with consequent injury-induced layoffs which you have to come back from.
@jdarun, that might be your definition of proper training but that's certainly not the norm. At club level, there still seems to be a big emphasis on tempo runs, and people do their 'easy' runs too fast (and their hard runs probably not fast enough). The thing I keep coming across is people thinking they need to do a lot of training close to race pace for fear they won't be able to run that pace on the day. But it doesn't work like that - you're building the necessary physiological base with the slower runs, and you only need to do a bit of race pace stuff late on in the programme, as much for psychological as physiological reasons. This is the thing I find people struggle with most - it's a kind of leap of faith.
|
|
Mar 2018
10:29am, 20 Mar 2018
25,698 posts
|
SPR
Jda is correct though. Stephen Seiler observed what many elite athletes were doing and also did research.
Have a look at the 'header' of this thread.
|
|
Mar 2018
10:47am, 20 Mar 2018
1,060 posts
|
J2R
I'm not disputing that jdarun's definition is correct. I'm just pointing out that it is not what people commonly do - at least, not from runners I come into contact with and from what I read on running forums. I'm personally extremely convinced of the merits of a polarized training approach, but the ideas have still not penetrated much into the club running world, although I have come across some people who have read or are reading Matt Fitzgerald's '80/20 Running'. Even there, I have had to reassure people that yes, it really does work.
|
|
Mar 2018
10:58am, 20 Mar 2018
12,416 posts
|
Chrisull
Agree with J2R - we're not elites. Most club runners do their longer runs at tempo pace. In fact any attempt to slow down some of the club runs we have at our club are met with hostile resistance and sulking. (and that's often includes the head coach - who is otherwise excellent)
And as for in the bag. How in the bag, is not always in the bag. A quick story. In 2012 I pb'ed at marathon 3.19.44 on the Duchy. At the 20 mile marker I was in the 2.26.xx. The wind and the big mile long hill at 23 miles lost me a few minutes that day. That same course they do a 20 miler, but flatter (doesn't have the big hill at 23 obviously). So I racked up intending to run exactly the same race of the same training. However I started out a bit too fast and ended up blowing up in the last 3 miles, where a 2.25.xx time became a 2.27.03 time. IN fact it was so unpleasant, I'd pretty much describe it as hitting the wall, it felt like glycogen depletion. So I ended up going slower than I did in a race with 6.2 more miles to go and more hills.
I am slower now, inarguably (and older 42 and now 47). I have practised more strength exercises, I have run far greater polarised runs in training, my average HR is getting lower and lower for easy runs. The signs are good, but you cannot blame me for being nervous.
|
|
Mar 2018
11:07am, 20 Mar 2018
1,062 posts
|
J2R
Hope it goes well, Chrisull. 20 miles is a problem distance. Is it a very long half marathon, or a very short marathon? I would run the two distances quite differently. And it is certainly long enough that glycogen depletion comes into play. I don't use gels or anything for half marathon races, but I will do for the 20 miler. I think maybe I'll try to remember to have one early enough in the race that I don't have to try and consume something yucky when I'm feeling under the cosh.
|
|
Mar 2018
11:43am, 20 Mar 2018
2,717 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Great post from rental canova on polarised training...
atigue a little bit to understand the "zones" of physiologists. For example, the LT1 (which can be also defined as Aerobic Threshold in the common methodology)
is not something at "low intensity", but something we call "regeneration speed", since we don't find in this speed any goal to build-up a better endurance (we speak about very strong runners, of course, not about very Young runners, or amateurs).
About the Max LASS (or MLSS), I completely don't agree if we speak about top runners, since the MLSS is totally different in different athletes, depending on different individual qualities, and can be very much different in the same athlete, depending on his training in different periods.
Some year ago, I presented a study in the European Clinic for European Coaches about relation between the development of Strength Endurance and MLSS, showing as top athletes (the athletes followed in training for a period of about 3-4 months, during the development of their shape, were Shaheen in 2004, Nicholas Kemboi between his PB of 28'19" and 26'30" in 10000m, and James Kwalia between 7'38" and 7'28" in 3000m), where it's possible to see how the athletes build DIFFERENT MLSS, as level of lactate and duration. For example, for specialists of 10000m at their top shape, we can have the ability to remain at a level between 9 and 11 mml, without increasing in short time their lactate, for period of about 18 - 20 minutes, and this is a SPECIFIC MLSS (nothing to do with the MLSS of a Marathon runner).
My approach doesn't start from physiology, but from MATHEMATICS. With a type of training based on mathematic
level of speed, we go to change the ability of runners, in order to become able to run at higher speed WITH THE SAME INTERNAL LOAD.
I can give some example, since, also for problems of Language, can be for me difficult to explain my principles using a correct physiological terminology (my terminology is often different from the classic one used by physiologists).
I have an athlete able running 28'20" in 10 km, and I want to move him to HM and, after 6 months, to full Marathon.
I go to control his lactate, using 5 times 2000m at even pace (the pace of his PB, in this case 2'50" per km = 5'40") with 3' recovery, when he is the shape of his PB, and I see his lactate levels every time (for example,
6.5 for the first, then 7.6 - 8.8 - 10.2 - 13.0).
It's clear, with the continue increase of the level, that this pace is, at the moment, well faster than his MLSS.
I give him an objective goal of running, in 3 months time, a HM at 3% of speed SLOWER than his PB in 10000m at the moment (2'50" means 17" every 100m, 3% means about 5.0 per km slower = 2'55"), which is a PRACTICAL equivalence if the training is correct (61'32").
The development of training needs to look at more "zones" than the 3 zones of physiologists. We can't speak about zones having the same goal when the difference in speed is more than 5%, approaching the speed of the race.
In this case, which are the "zones" we can use ?
1. REGENERATION SPEED (or Speed 1 = S1)
every speed slower than 60% of the PB in 10000m (in this case : if 2'50" = 17" per 100m is 100%, 30% slower is [2'50" + (17" x 4)] 3'58").
Reasons / Effects :
Running at that speed (about 4' per km or slower) we don't build any specific ability, but put the athlete in a better situation for the next workout. If the athlete starts his training with a level of BASIC LACTATE of 1.3 mml, for example, at the end of his easy run his level decreases under 1.0. For that reason, we speak of REGENERATION.
In the training of ALL kenyan, the amount of regeneration mileage is between 50% and 60% of the total training mileage.
2. GENERAL / BASIC AEROBIC RESISTANCE SPEED (S2)
Every speed between 60% and 75% of the PB of 10000m (in this case, between 4' and 3'35").
Reasons / Effects :
This is the first step of real training, and of course concerns runs of long extension and duration (between 1 hr 20' and 2 hrs).
This is a kind of training ALL kenyan do once per week (normally on Monday), for every event (apart 800m), including specialists of 1500m (till 1 hr 30').
3. SPECIAL AEROBIC RESISTANCE SPEED (S3)
Every speed between 75% and 85% of the PB of 10000m (in this case, between 3'35" and 3'20" about).
Reasons / Effects :
this is the speed supporting the workouts of Aerobic Power under physiological and mechanical point of view. It's a training in total Steady State (SS), and increases the ability to remove lactate from muscle fibers.
4. GENERAL AEROBIC POWER SPEED (S4)
Every speed between 85% and 90% of the PB of 10000m (in this case, between 3'20" and 3'10" about).
Reasons / Effects :
this training (with continuous run of long duration) train muscle fibers to better substain lactate accumulation, and helps athletes to raise the LT).
This is a normal training for the best African runners, often made in progressive way (starting from S3 with final part of training faster)
5. SPECIFIC AEROBIC POWER SPEED (S5)
Speed between 90% and 94% of the PB of 10000m (in this case, between 3'10" and 3' about).
Reasons / Effects :
To build the MLSS for HM, increasing the velocity to remove lactate from muscle fibers.
About African runners, this is a training used about once every 10 days (increasing the distance), but several times they go for 20' / 30' at this speed at the end of progressive runs, specially when in big groups.
6. SPECIFIC AEROBIC POWER / LACTIC RESISTANCE SPEED (S6)
Speed between 94% and 98% of the PB of 10000m (in this case, between 3' and 2'53" about), including the SPECIFC HM SPEED.
Reasons / Effects :
To increase the ability of DURATION at targetted HM Speed.
This training lasts between 1/2 and 3/4 of the race duretion (30' - 45') , often is progressive, and trains fibers to increase the ability to work with accumulation of lactate.
7. LACTIC RESISTANCE/SPECIFIC LACTIC ENDURANCE SPEED (S7)
Speed between 98% and 102% of the PB of 10000m (in this case, between 2'53" and 2'46" about), including the SPECIFIC 10000m SPEED.
Reasons / Effects :
To increase the ability to PRODUCE lactate, since if the Lactic System is not used enough, the body loses the ability to produce lactate. Don't forget a part of lactate can be used as energy, and, if athletes are inhibited to produce it, they have at their disposal less source of energy.
8. SPEED (S8)
Speed faster than 102% of the PB of 10000m.
Reasons / Effects :
We use fast speed essentially for BIOMECHANICAL reasons :
short sprint uphill (for ability to recruit the highest percentage of fast fibers), medium and fast tests uphill of duration between 20" and 2' (for increasing muscle strength endurance), short intervals on track (200 - 400m) for creating feeling with high speed and easier technical action.
Sometimes we can use one session at that speed for stimulating the lactic system (for example, 2 sets of 10 times 300m in 44" / 42" with very short recovery), but this happens rarely, and only when we are FAR from the race.
How you can see, the big "zones" of physiologists are too general for considering as basis for building an advanced training plan for top athletes.
What happens following, with right combinations, a training including of the different speeds ?
Happens that, WITH THE SAME INTERNAL LOAD, athletes become able running faster. The level of lactate that at the beginning of the preparation the athlete reached during his 10000m is now lower (for example, repeating the test of 5 x 2000m in 5'40", with the same recovery, now we can have levels of mml as 4.5 - 5.4 - 6.6 - 7.8 - 9.4) and, if the athlete is able to reach THE SAME PEAK OF LACTATE AS BEFORE (for example, 14 mml), THIS MEANS HE CAN RUN AT THE SAME SPEED WITH LESS FATIGUE, SO CAN LAST LONGER AT THE SAME SPEED AND FASTER FOR THE SAME DURATION.
African athletes, following their feeling of fatigue (and, of course, correct ideas of training), go to build their ability changing their physiology, while athletes prepared with "scientific knowledge" depends on the CURRENT PHYSIOLOGICAL DATA for their training. This means a very slow way of improvement, while the room of improvement of an athlete is very much bigger than what normal people think, is we are able to stimulate the body with correct mix of high intensity, big extension, right recovery and right modulation.
|
80/20
Jun 2019