Polarized training

91 watchers
Oct 2014
9:27am, 28 Oct 2014
1,110 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Rosehip
I am afraid my main reason for being happy about being able to fuel my running with fat is not because it will help me lose weight. Maybe losing a few pounds would be helpful, but I will only achieve weight loss if I do not replace the burned fat with food intake – whether in the form of carbs, fat or protein. That is not my main goal at present.

The reason why it is important for a marathon runner to increase the ability to burn fat is complex, but it is worth discussing.

Burning fat produces no lactic acid. When running near marathon pace using glucose as fuel, some lactate is produced. The lactate itself can be re-used as fuel, especially by the heart, but the inevitable acidity in the skeletal muscles contributes to muscle fatigue.

Secondly, burning fat conserves glycogen, which is the body’s main source of glucose. It is essential to conserve some glycogen because it is crucial to have at least a small amount of glucose to sustain metabolic processes that can only be fuelled by glucose.

The reason an untrained person cannot use fat to fuel running at a marathon pace is that unless you have well developed fat burning enzymes, burning fat alone only generates energy fast enough to maintain a walking pace. One goal of marathon training is to achieve a situation where you can maintain marathon pace fuelled almost entirely by fat. I am hopeful that my long slow runs of the past two months have almost achieved that goal (even though my wife complains that I have that sickly sweet smell of ketones, a by-product of fat metabolism, when I return from a training run)
Oct 2014
9:35am, 28 Oct 2014
4,069 posts
  •  
  • 0
Rosehip
Thanks Canute :) I appreciate your clear explanations.

So I'm aiming for the same adaptations - with the added benefit of potential weight loss by application of some discipline to my refueling.

Do you agree with the concept I've heard voiced that if you eat a relatively high fat diet overall- your body will find it easier to switch to burning body fat on an LSR?
Oct 2014
1:07pm, 28 Oct 2014
2,429 posts
  •  
  • 0
Helegant
Please excuse the daft question: If I start by walking and gradually increase speed, how will I know (while doing it), when I've gone into the next non-fat-burning phase?
Oct 2014
1:19pm, 28 Oct 2014
11,282 posts
  •  
  • 0
GlennR
Heart rate is probably the easiest Helegant. 80% of max as the threshold? Canute might have a better number.

If you don't have a HRM try talking in whole sentences (if you don't mind people thinking you're mad - in my case that ship sailed long ago).
Oct 2014
4:53pm, 28 Oct 2014
2,431 posts
  •  
  • 0
Helegant
Playng devils advocate for a moment Glenn. If I go for a longer stroll, say (shhh) Trailwalker, my legs will be full of lactic acid even though I can still speak (or weep), so is it that simple?
Oct 2014
5:00pm, 28 Oct 2014
23,075 posts
  •  
  • 0
HappyG(rrr)
What's Trailwalker?

HR is the best way to measure being in the fat burning zone. Hadd training (HR based training - very much on the polarized principle) will have you running very slowly, or even walking, depending on where you start from, for many months, as you build up that endurance (fat burning) ability. That's why lots of long, slow running (or walking) is good for marathon training. You still need to do some speed work too, in order to increase your pace, esp sub lactate threshold.

But walking so slowly that your HR isn't even in fat burning (below 70%) is no use either. It's great for recovery, and general cardiovascular fitness, but doesn't encourage or build fat burning.

BTW, for calorie burning (i.e. for weight loss) - higher intensity is better e.g. 1 hour of aerobics or 1 hour of fast running, is better than 1 hour of walking or slow running. But if you are a marathon runner, that's tough - cos you have to do the slow running. And if you find a bit more time in your life, 3 hours of slow running burns more calories than 1 hour of aerobics class or 1 hour of fast running. But you have to put the time in! :-) G
Oct 2014
5:10pm, 28 Oct 2014
2,432 posts
  •  
  • 0
Helegant
Trailwalker is 100km in 24 hours along the South Downs Way
Oct 2014
5:12pm, 28 Oct 2014
1,714 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ceratonia
Trailwalker is an Oxfam charity event, 100km walk/run in 24 (or maybe 30? hours) with the original UK version being over the South Downs & co-organised by the Gurkhas. I'd say a marathon was good training for Trailwalker, rather than the other way round!
Oct 2014
5:16pm, 28 Oct 2014
4,074 posts
  •  
  • 0
Rosehip
:)G - I thought "fat burning was 50-70 % MHR when supposedly 85% of energy comes from fat - the presentation SPR linked to might indicate 55% is the lower boundary. Anything over 70% surely you are talking mainly carbs?

Helegant - that sounds fab :)
Oct 2014
5:22pm, 28 Oct 2014
2,434 posts
  •  
  • 0
Helegant
Oh no Rosehip - it wrecked my knees last time; I won't be doing it again until my knees work properly. Too much pain!

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 113,802 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here