Polarized training

91 watchers
Nov 2014
7:49am, 17 Nov 2014
7,724 posts
  •  
  • 0
Boab
Enjoying the journey with you Canute.
Nov 2014
6:22pm, 23 Nov 2014
1,154 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Week 38 polarised training

Easy running: 492 min, 6:20 /Km, aHR 77%
Elliptical easy: 95 min
Threshold: 17 min HR 87%

High intensity: 32 min. 4x6 min; 1x3min; 15x1min. peak HR 90%

Total 636 min ; 92.3 % low intensity, 2.7 % threshold, 5.8% high intensity

This week I made three small increases in training load: I increased the high proportion of high intensity training by adding15x1min ‘cruise intervals; I made one of the 2 hour runs into a ‘comfortable’ progressive run, exceeding. MP for the final 3Km, and I increased the duration of the longest of the 4 long runs from 140 to 147 min. I did a larger volume of training this week than in any week for over 40 years. My body has coped reasonably well though I will aim for a slightly easier week next week.

Since introducing multiple longish easy runs each week, four months ago, there has been clear evidence of increased endurance. I felt no need for re-fuelling during the long runs, and my legs are coping fairly well. However my aerobic fitness has scarcely increased, which I suspect is due to the reduction in proportion of medium and high intensity running. Over the next few weeks I will continue the gradual build- up of more intense running. I will continue with multiple 2 hours runs each week, with occasional longer runs up to 150 minutes duration.
Nov 2014
7:21pm, 23 Nov 2014
4,200 posts
  •  
  • 0
Rosehip
A 40 year high is pretty impressive Canute champagne
best of luck for planned intensity increases, looks promising so far :)
Nov 2014
7:26pm, 30 Nov 2014
1,174 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Week 39 polarised training

Easy running: 420 min, 6:15 /Km, aHR 77%
Elliptical easy: 88 min
(sub-) Threshold: 30 min, aHR 84%

High intensity: 28 min. 1x3min; 25x1min. peak HR 90%
Total 566 min; 90 % low intensity, 5 % sub-threshold, 5% high intensity

After a 45 year high for volume of training last week I cut back a little this week. Instead of 4x 2 hour runs I did 2x2hour and 2x90min, but as a step towards a modest increase in intensity, I made two of those runs into progressive runs, starting very easily but finishing at around 10K pace. I have now been doing multiple 2 hours runs each week for 8 week. During this time I have done 26 runs of between 2 and 2.5 hours. My legs still feel a bit mashed at the end of these runs though it is pleasing that I can increase to 10K pace without much effort.

However, as noted last week, my aerobic capacity has increased only a little. In my early 60’s I typically achieved less than 600 heart beats /Km (960 b/mile) at mid-aerobic pace, but this past week I got below 700 beats/Km on only one occasion. I have suffered almost a 20% loss of aerobic capacity since my mid 60’s. It is a major challenge to see if I can recover some of this lost capacity.
Dec 2014
4:19pm, 7 Dec 2014
195 posts
  •  
  • 0
exflyboy
Hi Canute, I posted on here a few weeks ago, for some advise from you which you provided. Ive been following an essentially polarized training programme for three months now having recovered from a health problem that was affecting my heart. You might be interested that in early Sept I ran a 11 mile run along the Thames path around Reading and averaged 10:57 pace, this morning I did slightly more (12 miles) at 9:53. These might appear to be slow paces but both runs were done at 75% max hr probably around 135 bpm for the Sept run, and an av of 130 bpm for this mornings run. That's virtually a minute a mile improvement in three months by mostly running at a pace most would say is so slow it cant be providing any training benefit...if only they knew. Ive started to calculate beats per mile and I'm in the range of 1250 to 1300 bpm, but that must have already come down from 1400 plus three months ago. I', hoping I can get close to 1100 b/mile and also push up the hr I can sustain by doing progressive runs on the treadmill to exhaustion, that's the effort part of my weekly training.
Dec 2014
4:59pm, 7 Dec 2014
11,082 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ultracat
That's brillant exflyboy
Dec 2014
5:07pm, 7 Dec 2014
1,181 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Exflyboy
Thanks for the feedback. There is no doubt that easy training can produce benefit.

The notion that the body much be seriously stressed in order to benefit, implied by the no pain/ no gain mantra, is not consistent with the evidence. However a small amount of high intensity does helps.

The three main principles of distance training are:
Build up slowly (for both easy and high intensity)
The high intensity should always be a minor fraction of the total (typically between 5 and 20%)
Back off a little if you start to fee accumulated tiredness.

I hope things continue to go well
Dec 2014
5:34pm, 7 Dec 2014
1,182 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Week 40 polarised training

Easy running: 480 min, 6:21 /Km, aHR 77%
Elliptical easy: 135 min
Threshold: 0 min

High intensity: 31 min. 2x3min; 25x1min. peak HR 91%
Total 646 min ; 95 % low intensity, 0 % threshold, 5% high intensity

The week saw another small increase in total duration of training compared with 2 weeks ago and was my greatest weekly volume of training since I qualified for a pension several years ago (though I have not yet claimed a bus pass – it doesn’t seem right, though maybe it is a form of denial). On Thursday I felt increasingly energetic in the second hour of my 2 hour run and I felt really positive about progress. However, during both runs on the weekend I felt a little tired, so it is clear that I am pushing near to the limit of what my body can cope with at present.
Dec 2014
7:25pm, 7 Dec 2014
11,823 posts
  •  
  • 0
GlennR
How much further do you intend to take this Canute?
Dec 2014
9:44pm, 7 Dec 2014
1,185 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Glenn
My plan is to evaluate the outcome of the first three months of the current program of multiple 2 hour runs each week, in mid-December.

If I conclude that the program has been successful, the logical thing might be to simply continue increasing the duration of these multiple runs, as Ed Whitlock did. But even if I feel I am coping adequately with the training load, the problem will simply be finding the available time for multiple runs longer than 2 hours. An alternative will be to increase the duration of the runs on the weekend and to gradually introduce a more progressive element into the weekday runs.

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