Polarized training

91 watchers
Nov 2014
10:46am, 13 Nov 2014
1,744 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ceratonia
Thanks for posting the link to Mike's blog, a rather poignant end to it. Having read an entry from 2009, where he describes being corned by a herd of peccaries, I should maybe stop moaning about pheasants.
SPR
Nov 2014
11:59pm, 13 Nov 2014
19,728 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
I did a progressive run on Wednesday morning and I do breathe through my mouth and nose at faster paces. Beginning was nose only, I switched to in through nose, out through both (this actually varied back to all nose a couple of times), then finally in and out through both. I tried to be aware of how I was breathing rather than control it, only thought was to stay relaxed.
Nov 2014
1:11pm, 16 Nov 2014
3,268 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
In the last twenty-four hours I've been reading about 80:20 training.

The same old same old most people run slow stuff too fast and fast stuff too slow.

Thinking about running 40-50 miles a week using the 80:20 rule that's still 8-10 miles per week 'fast'.

That seems a lot to me?

What are your thoughts?
Nov 2014
6:48pm, 16 Nov 2014
1,142 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
FR

I personally only do between 4 and 10% fast per week – though at present I am specifically focussing on an experiment with Ed Whitlock’s strategy of multiple long slow runs each week. This worked for Ed, but he is phenomenal. I am still evaluating how this experiment is working for me.

I think that each person needs to find what suits them. Also I favour a degree of periodization with increased amount of faster running in preparation for specific races. Although I generally do very little tempo running, I do regard progressive runs as a valuable part of specific preparation for HM and Marathon
Nov 2014
6:50pm, 16 Nov 2014
1,143 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Week 37 polarised training

Easy running: 492 min, 6:26 /Km, aHR 76%
Elliptical easy: 25 min
Threshold: 0
High intensity: 21 min. 1x3; 3x6 min, peak HR 90%
Total 538 min ; 96.1 % low intensity, 0% threshold, 3.9% high intensity

Another week in which work limited my opportunity for running: an unanticipated meeting on Wednesday meant that I had to cut my planned 120 minute run to 93 minutes, and then on Friday I was suddenly faced with the task of delivering a 2 hour lecture – because a colleague had to look after her infant daughter who was ill. On Thursday I had a late night preparing my lecture. During Friday’s lecture I gave the students a break after the first hour to recharge their brains which most did by checking their text messages. I was amused to note that during the break I found myself simply finding a chair to sit down – whereas usually I usually would rush back to my office to deal with administrative odds and ends during the break. I am afraid tiredness is catching up with me.

So on the weekend, I focussed on relaxing as much as possible during my two long runs.

On both days I meandered along quite serenely for about 2 hours 20 minutes, at about 6:30 min per Km. As usual I had only a light breakfast beforehand, and did not refuel during the run. Although I felt tired by the end on both days, my legs coped well. So at this stage, I think I have achieved useful gains in capacity to conserve glycogen , and in leg muscle resilience. However, the combined demands of work and running are leaving me quite tired. Ideally I would want to introduce a little more high intensity training into my current program, but that would be risky until I can reduce the tiredness.

While it is possible to increase muscle resilience and capacity to conserve glycogen merely by training, training does not increase my capacity to avoid tiredness. Despite working long hours for nearly 50 years, I have not developed resistance to tiredness; in fact I am becoming increasingly susceptible it. I think the only answer to tiredness will be finding more time for sleeping.
Nov 2014
6:58pm, 16 Nov 2014
3,280 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
When is the target race, Canute?

Picking up the comment about periodisation I'm really surprised that more people don't take that concept onboard. Running hard all year round is bound to end in disappointment.
SPR
Nov 2014
6:58pm, 16 Nov 2014
19,733 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
The only thing I'll add to what Canute said, is tempo/threshold counts toward your non 80%, so if you're doing that, it could eat into your 8-10 miles pretty quickly. Apart from that, no reason not to do over 80 as easy. Gobi mentioned he does 90% earlier in the thread.
Nov 2014
7:00pm, 16 Nov 2014
3,281 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
Thanks SPR. Where I am at the moment 90:10 seems a far better ratio. :)
Nov 2014
9:38pm, 16 Nov 2014
1,144 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
FR
I aim to run a marathon in spring 2015, yet to be identified – perhaps Shakespeare. Because I am at present experimenting with an approach to training that might not work, it is possible that I will treat a spring marathon as practice for a ‘serious’ attempt in September 2015 or even spring 2016. (GFA criterion for London for age 70+ looks pretty easy, so maybe I should aim for London 2016 but I am not keen on really big races. I am also aware that aging can be a grimly destructive beyond the late 60's, so I shouldn’t be too confident about GFA for 70+)

At the end of December I will aim to reach an interim decision about the success of multiple longish runs each week. If this experiment appears to be working, I will probably move to one high intensity session, 3 easy runs of about 2 hours and one more demanding long run each week. The more demanding long run will probably be progressive or an easy run of increased in total duration, on alternate weeks, aiming to peak for a spring marathon. But if I am not coping with this, I will probably move to a program with more doubles – one running session and an elliptical session several days per week, plus a long run and an interval session.
Nov 2014
9:40pm, 16 Nov 2014
3,285 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
Good luck Canute. :) I'm sure you'll be very successful.

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 113,804 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here