Polarized training

91 watchers
Nov 2014
8:31pm, 9 Nov 2014
3,179 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
Fascinating, reading your paragraph on oxidation seems to suggest that I'm a fat burner, but I'm restricted by my legs. Is my conclusion correct, that I need more miles in my legs?
Nov 2014
9:45pm, 9 Nov 2014
1,122 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
FR
As a rough guide, a tendency towards gradual slow down throughout the second half of a marathon together with seriously aching legs during the following 2 days suggests lack of leg resilience, whereas a more abrupt slow down in the final stages of a marathon suggests inadequate ability to burn fat and conserve glycogen.

For a runner with inadequate resilence, I think the best strategy is to gradually build-up the stress on the legs during longish runs (eg 90 min to 2 hours duration) over a period of several months . For example, start with multiple very easy longish runs each week and then gradually increase the average pace, but remain well below MP. Once you can cope with multiple longish runs in a week at a pace around 1 min/mile less than MP without any aching of legs, introduce occasional progressive runs, in which you achieve MP for several Km. Then extend the proportion of the run at MP. If you develop persistent aching legs, reduce the rate of progression.
Nov 2014
9:48pm, 9 Nov 2014
3,182 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
That's interesting, as aching legs is only temporary and gone within a few hours.
Nov 2014
10:11pm, 9 Nov 2014
1,123 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
FR,
I am inclined to think that if you do not have aching legs after a marathon, your legs are fairly resilient. A more sensitive and technical way to assess the situation is measuring the amount of increase in time on stance over the course of a marathon, but you need a fancy monitor to do that. I do not have a monitor with the ability to monitor time on stance, so I have no direct experience of whether it is a worthwhile guide.

The other major reason for doing long easy training runs (in addition to enhancing fat burning and improving resilience) is enhancing type 1 fibres . Type 1 fibres are more efficient than type 2 at marathon pace. I think that type 1 fibres continue to develop over a period of more than a decade of regular training. Even beyond a decade , it is necessary to keep them in good shape. (In old age, one might need to look after the types 2’s as well as the type 1’s.) For a person with better performances over 5K than marathon, it is probably best to continue to focus on developing the type 1 fibres
SPR
Nov 2014
10:21pm, 9 Nov 2014
19,715 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
Canute - This might be right up your street: runscribe.com

Steve Magness has tested it and thinks it is good: scienceofrunning.com

I am tempted to get one when it is officially released. I don't have a Garmin, and don't feel the need for stats while I run, so this could be perfect.
Nov 2014
11:19pm, 9 Nov 2014
1,124 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
SPR
That looks interesting.

Many of the really important principles of distance training were discovered by trial and error by Lydiard half a century ago – but his terms such as ‘a good aerobic pace’ and ‘a quarter effort’ are actually quite hard to apply in practice. The phrase ‘listen to the body’ is of limited use because the body’s signals can be seriously mis-interpreted.

I hope that devices like Run Scribe will really allow us to assess our weaknesses and also assess how long or hard a training session should be. I think that monitoring fatigue by measuring ground contact time and cadence is likely to be at least as informative as measuring HR ad HR drift. I also hope it will reduce uncertainly when selecting shoes with the optimum amount of padding for a marathon. So I will certainly look further into what Run Scribe has to offer.
Nov 2014
6:37am, 10 Nov 2014
4,128 posts
  •  
  • 0
Rosehip
That looks interestiing SPR

I'm wondering what you all think of the brain training aspect of endurance?

I've just read this RW article runnersworld.com so spare time at work today will be looking for the research papers .
Nov 2014
9:38am, 10 Nov 2014
1,125 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Rosehip,
There is little doubt the brain plays a key role is setting limits. The simplest and approximately correct statement is that the brain allows us to use a certain fraction of our maximal physical capacity (apparently around 70%). So to maximise performance we need to maximise physical capacity, while also ensuring that our brain allows us to extract the greatest possible fraction of our absolute maximum capacity.

The currently popular approach to enabling the brain to extract the greatest possible fraction is mindfulness. The procedure that Alex Hutchinson describes is a crude form of mindfulness training. Mindfulness focuses on the here-and-now, attending to the signals from the body and from the surroundings, while putting aside judgemental thoughts about the future. For years it has been accepted that many elites focus on the here and now, while a lot of recreational athletes employ distraction to minimise self-defeating worry about the future. The current vogue for mindfulness is an elaboration of what many elites have done for years.

For some time I have been applying mindfulness during all of my training (especially when training on the elliptical). I have not run a marathon since adopting this approach, but am hopeful it will be beneficial.
Nov 2014
9:53am, 10 Nov 2014
1,126 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
One further note on mindfulness: Contrary to Alex’s description of how exhausting he found it to focus attention for an hour, I regard focussing on the here and now as a form of mediation. In general, I find it promotes relaxation rather than a sense of exhaustion. However meditation is an art. Beginners often find that attempting to meditate makes them more tense. I can ‘meditate’ in a relaxing manner for several hours while running, but only for about one hour on the elliptical. I think this indicates that non-judgmental perception of the surroundings does assist in maintaining a relaxed state.

In addition, Alex was assaulted with unpleasant stimuli when he lost concentration. Learning to deal with unpleasant stimuli in a non-judgmental manner requires the greatest of mindfulness skill.
Nov 2014
10:08am, 10 Nov 2014
4,130 posts
  •  
  • 0
Rosehip
Interesting - and so, as ever, it's not an easy gain - if you can only have 70% of capacity then increase max capacity rather than hope for some technique to get 80%

I found swimming training meditative, concentration on form and breathing for an hour was not at all boring - need to practice more when running as I rarely manage the same level of "mindfulness" .

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 113,803 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here