Hi ,
It looks like you're using an ad blocker.



The revenue generated from the adverts on the site is a critical part of our funding - and it's because of these ads that I can offer the site for free. But using the site for free AND blocking the ads doesn't feel like a great thing to do, which is why this box is so large and inconvenient. Some sites will completely block your access, but I'm not doing that - I'm appealing to your good nature instead. Did you know that you can allow ads for specific sites, whilst still blocking them on others?

Thanks,
Ian Williams aka Fetch
or for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

Polarized training

1 lurker | 91 watchers
SPR
Nov 2021
7:43pm, 5 Nov 2021
35,637 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
SPR
Actually Canute above has but he'd change that if he was "serious about racing" and thinks "it is probably not optimum for efficiency"
Nov 2021
9:24pm, 5 Nov 2021
75,112 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Gobi
I think I'm around that as well SPR

As a coach of slower runners I learned to adapt so they don't think I'm walking .
SPR
Nov 2021
9:43pm, 5 Nov 2021
35,638 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
SPR
Gobi - Had a look at a few recent 10mm runs you'd done and they were mid 160s avg.
Nov 2021
7:23am, 6 Nov 2021
421 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Bowman
Well, maybe, on “slow” run, if you maintain a healthy technique. Maybe 160-170 is quite alright.
I feels like that anyway.
And when I start getting up up there in the tempo, or threshold speeds I’m around 180.

I think I’ll keep maintaining this more or less.
Nov 2021
10:07am, 6 Nov 2021
2,506 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Canute
I believe that if your main goal is to increase (or maintain) aerobic capacity (as measured by VO2 max) the major requirement is to a lot of running at a pace that does not place unnecessary stress on your body. Questions regarding running technique (e.g. optimum cadence etc) are not the major issue, provided you are not putting too much stress on your connective tissues. That is why I am quite happy to run at an easy pace with a short stride (and hence high cadence) at present. This minimises airborne time and impact forces.

However if I was interested in racing I would be aiming to improve not only my aerobic capacity (VO2max) but also my speed when running at VO2max (vVO2max). To achieve this requires focus on technique. You need to optimise mechanical efficiency. This includes an optimum ratio of stride length to cadence.

It is of interest to note that a cardinal feature in Paula Radcliffe’s development as a marathon runner was an increase in vVO2max. Her VO2max itself remained fairly steady over that time. As far as I can see it, Paula produced that improvement by a lot of fairly intense running and also plyometrics (hopping etc). However, her career was blighted by injuries. I wonder could she have been more successful if she had adopted a more polarised approach, or was her high focus on intense training essential for her success.
Nov 2021
10:16am, 6 Nov 2021
423 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Bowman
Interesting Canute, cheers.
SPR
Nov 2021
10:24am, 6 Nov 2021
35,641 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
SPR
Given Paula Radcliffe improved when she moved to marathon, you'd have to say the changes she made were crucial to her improvement. The question is what were those changes? Something else to think about is whether having children made any difference in terms of injuries. Most injuries seem to be after she had her first child.

I think it's pretty well known that elite/ well trained runners don't improve VO2 max but improve their economy.
jda
Nov 2021
10:24am, 6 Nov 2021
11,084 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
jda
I suspect running efficiency is generally more trainable than VO2max itself (which is famously difficult to change according to what I’ve read). Also, threshold as a %age of VO2max.
Nov 2021
10:43am, 6 Nov 2021
2,507 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Canute
I have analysed Paula Radcliffe’s training on several occasions in my Word Press blog. Two relevant posts are:

canute1.wordpress.com
canute1.wordpress.com

I agree that the ability to maintain a pace at a high proportion of VO2max is important. In my 2009 post I noted the substantial right shift of the turn-point in the graph of her blood lactate against pace. This implies increased ability to metabolise lactate. I believe this requires both increase in capillary density and also increased ability to shunt the lactate produced in fast twitch fibres into adjacent slow twitch fibres. I believe the mechanism for shunting lactate can be increased by low intensity long runs.
Nov 2021
2:42pm, 6 Nov 2021
75,114 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Gobi
Spr - damn I'm getting slack :-)

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
  • Show full description...

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 114,030 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here