Polarized training

2 lurkers | 91 watchers
Nov 2021
10:47am, 20 Nov 2021
7,332 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
Question for CanuteGobi....

One of Noakes's suggested guidelines, if I recall correctly, is to max out performance at a certain mileage level (per week) before increasing miles per week. What are your thoughts on this guidance?
Nov 2021
10:54am, 20 Nov 2021
75,189 posts
  •  
  • 0
Gobi
The plateau approach

I have used this
Nov 2021
10:55am, 20 Nov 2021
7,333 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
This is a slightly me, me, me question, as I'm starting out again with the intentions of getting faster over 5km, and at the moment my mileage per week is paltry but I am seeing improvements.....

Thanks Gobi for the swift reply.
Nov 2021
11:14am, 20 Nov 2021
493 posts
  •  
  • 0
Bowman
The plateau approach, I googled a bit, but found nothing.
What is the belief about this?
Nov 2021
2:18pm, 20 Nov 2021
2,519 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
I think the question of when to increase weekly mileage depends on the phase of training.

During base building, I think that minimizing risk of injury or over-training are the major factors determining rate of build-up of volume. Once you have adapted well to a particular training volume (indicated by sense of well-being, perhaps augmented by heart measures such a resting HR) you can increase weekly volume. Perhaps the peak training volume that you are aiming for during base-building can be adjusted according to your goal. (Though Lydiard recommended about 100 mpw for base-building for both middle and long distance, for young runners. i.e. not veterans). However if your goal is a 5K, maybe you do not need such a high volume during base-building.

If you are not following a periodized approach with separate base-building and competitive phases, it makes some sense to do a build up to a plateau where performance is stable. Then increase in training volume before the next set of performance tests.
Nov 2021
2:44pm, 20 Nov 2021
7,338 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
Thanks Canute, that makes perfect sense.

Personally, being the wrong side of 55. I'm trying to have plenty of non-impact days per week, but those non-impact days are not rest days but allocated for strength work.
Nov 2021
2:51pm, 20 Nov 2021
497 posts
  •  
  • 0
Bowman
I’m a little to unstructured to have a definite mpw, I’m above 40km as a absolute minimum, but aiming for 65-70km But I can be anywhere in between depending on how fatigued I’m feeling.
So I more look at the average over longer time. And trying to increase slowly.
How fixed are you guys on mpw?
Nov 2021
3:15pm, 20 Nov 2021
2,520 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
As a recreational runner, you should adapt according to your available time and goals. It would not be wise for a recreational athlete to let training totally dominate his/her life. A professional should generally aim for a consistent programme. Even for a professional, it is probably best to include some planned cut-back weeks.
Nov 2021
8:37pm, 20 Nov 2021
75,190 posts
  •  
  • 0
Gobi
Bowman

Logic is simple

You have 40 miles a week and through smart training you use them until you stop improving , at that point you add mileage.

Taking it further

I have proved that you can do NO SPEED WORK and use this principle

Ie 40 miles a week in z1/2 and 5km test every 4th week.

When you plateau you ask a question

Do I have more time ? If yes stay in z2 add miles and repeat the process

If No, add a single piece of speed each week and repeat process until plateau and repeat etc...
Nov 2021
8:54pm, 20 Nov 2021
7,343 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
Great post, Gobi. Thanks for sharing.

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 113,792 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here