Polarized training
91 watchers
Apr 2023
11:08am, 27 Apr 2023
2,663 posts
|
Canute
Thanks. That sounds pretty good. In the ‘olden days’ you needed to be very tired to enable you to get a good night’s sleep in the Matratzenlager in Alpine huts. The need for a pre-dawn start to minimise getting caught by avalanches also contributed to the issue with sleep.
|
Apr 2023
2:15pm, 27 Apr 2023
79,808 posts
|
Gobi
I have had no alarm since Monday and been awake between 6 and 6.30 every morning going to bed around midnight.
|
Apr 2023
3:05pm, 27 Apr 2023
2,987 posts
|
tipsku
You're my role model, Gobi. I wish I could do that, go to bed around midnight and then be awake at 7 or 7:30 (I need 7-7:30 hours of sleep for optimal function) without an alarm clock. I'm such a night-owl, often awake past 1 am and then I struggle to get up in the morning. The marathon was good in that sense that in the days after the race, I was tired before midnight and went to bed early, was asleep before midnight. I hope I can keep it up |
Apr 2023
3:29pm, 27 Apr 2023
79,811 posts
|
Gobi
Lol tipsku my wife wishes I would got to bed before 11 and sleep until 6 . Hahaha, I wish |
May 2023
12:22pm, 17 May 2023
4,642 posts
|
J2R
Just had a simple thought about polarised training when out for an easy run this morning. Is it the small amount of hard stuff which makes the easy easy? I ask because I am in what might be termed an experimental phase with my running at the moment, having had a heart attack 3 months ago. I am running, but having for the moment to keep the intensity low - shouldn't go above 'moderate' on the Borg scale of rate of perceived exertion. So today, for example, I was mainly running at 9:30-10:00 mins/mile pace, keeping my HR down to 100-105 or so (very much the low end of the moderate range). And I'm loving it! It's so nice to be running very easy, taking in the world of nature around me. But I'm aware that the main reason I'm enjoying it is that this pace is very easy for me because I'm trained to go a lot faster, from before the heart attack. I'm pretty sure that if I just continued to do 10 mins/mile pace runs and nothing else, in time I would lose some of that fitness and the pace would begin to feel harder. So I'm wondering, if you do the 15-20% fast stuff, is it that which makes the easy pace running continue to be easy? I am adding in little surges of 30 seconds to a minute and before too long should be OK to do some slightly more intense short intervals. I'm hoping this will enable me to maintain my current level of fitness. While it's sad to think I'll not get back to the running performances of before, if I can at least continue to run as I'm doing now, I'll be happy enough. |
May 2023
12:35pm, 17 May 2023
6,076 posts
|
Oscar the Grouch
I think the theory is that over time your body would adapt to running at that HR for that pace for that to become easier and you would hence be faster at a given HR. Stand to be corrected by those more in the know, though p.s. glad the revovery from the heart attack is going well. |
May 2023
2:03pm, 17 May 2023
14,845 posts
|
jda
Sorry to hear about the heart attack. I agree with Oscar that steady running will bring gains in itself and not just feel easy in comparison to hard running. Of course as an mv60 you have to recognise that long-term your pace is only going to go one way…but keeping on running should slow that inevitable process. Canine’s recent blogs are interesting on the topic of heart damage from training (too?) hard. |
May 2023
2:17pm, 17 May 2023
21,121 posts
|
larkim
Just as a thought experiment... If I had a volume of 50mpw, a 5k PB of 19m00 (from a very recent race after a consistent build up of training to a traditional plan) and then spent a year running at a single pace with a view to running another race (distance tbc), but maintaining that volume, what would we expect to happen if the pace was the following:- - Everything at 7m30 per mile - Everything at 8m00 per mile - Everything at 9m00 per mile - Everything at 10m00 per mile - etc etc At what point would the training cause the race result to be slower or faster? What distance of race would be most affected? There must surely be a point at which slower running does reduce the stimulus, otherwise simply walking 50mpw would be enough to train runners. And ditto there must be a pace at which faster running either does not produce any benefit or fatigues the system so much that race outcomes are negatively affected. The question is whether within those cut off points the outcomes are pretty much the same, or whether there truly is a sweet spot which is better. (I know there is no precise answer to this, and individual variation will also come into play quite significantly. But sometimes it is worth thinking about a massively oversimplified scenario). None of which answers J2R's question. For me, if I'm doing a P&D training plan I do tend to notice a specific point at which fitness (measured as HR for easy pace) takes a step forward, and it tends to coincide with the P&D plan starting with the intervals. This may be correlation <> causation - the fitness may be higher because of the antecedent training, but at the time it definitely "feels like" the intervals provide a specific stimulus which prompts a noticeable improvement in fitness. |
May 2023
2:28pm, 17 May 2023
4,643 posts
|
J2R
Larkim, I think you are on my wavelength! I keep reading about the miraculous benefits of easy, zone 1-2 running, which, for sake of argument, might be 9 minute miling for me. So if I do lots of running at this pace I should become very fast and fit, shouldn't I? Yet I know loads of people, many in my club, who do lots of their running at that pace, day in, day out, and it is far tougher for them than it is for me (and many of them have been runners for as long as I have, so it's not a question of cumulative gain). So the point is not that 9 mins/mile is an easy pace, it's just that it's easy for me, easy relative to what I'm capable of. But how did I get to this point? If I had just run 9 mins/mile all the time, I suspect I would be no faster than these people, 9 mins/mile would feel hard. It is the extra something on top of the 9 mins/mile pace running which presumably makes the difference. |
May 2023
2:34pm, 17 May 2023
4,644 posts
|
J2R
jda, yes, as a 62 year old even without the heart attack I wouldn't be expecting to get faster. But the drop-off needn't be precipitous - last year I ran 17:31 for 5K, and my PB is 17:18, so there wasn't a lot in it. (I actually ran some decent enough times in late 2022 and early 2023 with what must have been a 90% blocked left anterior descending artery, the biggest heart artery, so it's intriguing to think what I might have done without the blockage. Of course, I now have that situation, after angioplasty, but sadly undoubtedly more than offset by some muscle damage to the heart).
|
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