Polarized training

1 lurker | 91 watchers
J2R
Mar 2018
11:05am, 23 Mar 2018
1,080 posts
  •  
  • 0
J2R
It would indeed be interesting to see if the training of this or that top runner was polarised, but ultimately, I suspect you would find a fair few whose training was not. This does not diminish in any way for me the value of polarised training.

There are bound to be some outliers whose bodies can withstand a higher level of hard training without breaking. For me the worth of PT is giving a very effective training approach which is kinder on the body and thus more sustainable. It may not be the training methodology which results in the best performances, but since I took it up in late 2015, my performances have not diminished and in fact I've got PBs in 10K and HM this year, which is something one wouldn't necessarily expect for a runner in their late 50s.

One important reason why I've been able to get those PBs is that I've been able to train continuously, rather than frequently losing time to injuries, as happens to so many runners. For me, it's not so important whether PT is or is not the best way to achieve my fastest times short term, because over the long term I'm sure it is.
Mar 2018
11:11am, 23 Mar 2018
12,446 posts
  •  
  • 0
Chrisull
While we're on the subject of recovery - (I've already posed this in the sub 3.15 thread, so apologies to SPR whose answered there - and whose advice I'm most tempted to follow, just sourcing more opinions). Three days ago I did some speedwork, the 30/30 Billat session, and felt good. Afterwards I was sore and suffered some discomfort/soreness in the abdominal region, lower right. I took Wednesday off and painkillered up, and it went. I ran (without painkillers) last night 7.5 miles, mostly at a 9 minute pace, but I did the first two miles a bit harder to get to the club meet in time, including up a 1/4 mile hill at 10%. I felt some twinges later on (after 4 miles), which faded, but once I stopped I was very sore and remain sore this morning.

I was planning on running this morning very easy on the flat as my last run, but now I'm not sure. I'd describe it as a niggle, no swelling, no direct place I can finger as hurting. So would you a) abandon todays run, and rest up til race? b) do todays run as planned and rest tomorrow, c) abandon todays run and run tomorrow at easy pace (this is obviously more for psychological benefit and keeping fresh). Ibuprofen makes the niggle go, but I know the nasty potential effects of taking it before a race. I won't need any to race, I just slightly fear 20 miles on a niggle will expose it. Of course it may all be taper madness!
Mar 2018
11:11am, 23 Mar 2018
7,814 posts
  •  
  • 0
Cerrertonia
Kimetto is an unusual case. He only started training age 26, having been working on his farm and running around 4 miles per day. He joined Mutai & Kipsang's group and they don't have a coach. They do keep a notebook with more than a decade recording what runs they did. Kimetto had periods of food shortage & homelessness as a child, nearly died in inter-tribal violence after the 2007 election, had worked breaking rocks in a quarry and cutting trees both by hand. No training program is going to give you the level of mental and physical toughness he has.
Mar 2018
11:15am, 23 Mar 2018
7,815 posts
  •  
  • 0
Cerrertonia
Mutai claimed his group (including Kimetto) ran the following program for 45 weeks of the year. (This was in the Boston Globe in 2012)

Monday
A.M. 2 HR easy run (6:30-8 min./mile)
P.M. 1 HR. easy run (6:30-8 min./mile)

Tuesday
A.M. 50 min. run (8 min. miles)
P.M. Speed Workout:
30 min. warm-up
12x1km intervals (4:50/mile pace) w 1 min. rec.

Wednesday:
A.M. 1Hr 50min. run (8min. miles)
P.M. 2 HR easy run (8min. miles)

Thursday:
A.M. 25 mile run (7:15 min. miles speeding up to 5:35 min. miles)

Friday:
A.M. 1Hr 50min. run (8min. miles)
P.M. 2 HR easy run (8min. miles)

Saturday:
A.M. Speed Workout:
30 min. warm-up
20x2min. intervals @ 5 min. mile with 1 min. rec.
30 min. cooldown

Sunday:
Rest

Not sure the advice to run 100+ miles per week at MP+3 mins is applicable to me though :-)
Mar 2018
11:23am, 23 Mar 2018
7,816 posts
  •  
  • 0
Cerrertonia
Eliud Kipchoge's training for the 6 weeks prior to Berlin 2017 is detailed here:

sweatelite.co
Mar 2018
11:33am, 23 Mar 2018
1,847 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Cerrertonia, that link to Kipchoge’s training is very interesting.

I think that what is important is that there have been runners who have achieved excellence with a lot of sub-threshold running (most notably Grete Waitz) and there have been runners who have achieved excellence while including substantial amount of low intensity: ‘All’ current African according to Canova; it appears that Kimetto and Kipchoge did at least a substantial amount of easy and ‘easy-moderate’ running; maybe S3 increasing to S4)

If you want a good prescription for longevity at the top, Seiler’s 80:10:10 is probably sensible. But a higher amount of sub-threshold will probably give you a more rapid route to the top, perhaps with a greater risk of disruption due to injury. Ironically, time out due to injury might provide the body with a chance to recover if you are pushing things too hard, but it can be extremely frustrating: consider the case of Paula Radcliffe.

If you choose the more risky route, you can minimise your chance of wrecking you plans for your target race by taking careful note of how well your body is coping.
J2R
Mar 2018
11:38am, 23 Mar 2018
1,081 posts
  •  
  • 0
J2R
I love the 8 minute miles that Mutai, Kimetto et al are running! I should show that to other runners in my club who feel they need to be doing most of their training runs at 6:45-7:00 pace. I do a lot of my training runs at 8 mins/mile or thereabouts. That is the only thing I have in common with Mutai and Kimetto.
Mar 2018
11:46am, 23 Mar 2018
14,498 posts
  •  
  • 0
Fenners
I was guilty in the past but it does make me smile when people post a run on strava and state 'easy run', and it was only just a smidgen slower than their HM pace.
Mar 2018
11:52am, 23 Mar 2018
7,818 posts
  •  
  • 0
Cerrertonia
I wondered how much Kipchoge's training was periodised - how much did he change in the run-up to Berlin and how different does it look to his "base period" - if he has such a thing.
J2R
Mar 2018
11:58am, 23 Mar 2018
1,082 posts
  •  
  • 0
J2R
Kipchoge's training there is also very interesting - thanks, Cerrertonia. He starts an 18km run at 6:00/km, i.e., 9:39 mins/mile. Imagine the looks the faster runners in your club would give you if you started out at that pace.

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