Polarized training

91 watchers
Dec 2014
11:38pm, 28 Dec 2014
1,201 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Week 43 polarised training:

Low intensity run: 80 min; elliptical 46 min

Threshold: 9 min (hills) aHR 86% max
High intensity: 9 min 3x3 min, peak HR 96% max

Total: 144 min; low intensity, 87 %; threshold, 6.5%; high intensity 6.5%

The year has ended on a low key, due to a respiratory infection. The fever settled 5 days ago though a troublesome cough lingers on, so I will take things fairly easily again next week, before commencing marathon specific training at the beginning of January, in preparation for the Manchester marathon in April
Jan 2015
4:58pm, 4 Jan 2015
1,214 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Polarised training –limbo week:

This week I am in limbo, still recovering from the respiratory infection I suffered in mid-December. My current aim is active recovery – training at a level that minimises loss of fitness while nonetheless allowing recovery. The fever settled a couple of days before Christmas; the cough and ear-ache have lingered, but are nonetheless steadily resolving. This week I intended one longish run of 90 minutes at an easy pace, a 75 minute progressive run, and other sessions on the elliptical according to how I felt. During the longish run I felt very comfortable after 45 minutes so decided to stretch it out to a 2 hour run. That felt OK, but in retrospect I discovered that HR had begun to rise markedly after 90 minutes so probably I would have been wiser to have stuck to my original plan. My wings were clipped by the weather during today’s progressive run. The sun appeared to be breaking through the fog as I set out, but the paths were still icy. Then the fog crept back insidiously and the ice remained treacherous. I had to run with short, fast but ineffective slithery strides.

Low intensity: run 191 min; elliptical 313 min

Threshold: 12 min aHR 85% max
High intensity: 40 min; 5x3 min, 25x1 min, peak HR 97% max

Total: 556 min: low intensity 91 %, threshold, 2%, high intensity 7%

The peak HR of 97% during a relatively non-demanding interval session reflects the fact that it is easy to get HR near to peak as fitness disappears. I think this is due to the decrease in blood volume during reduced training, leading to reduced venous return to the heart, and smaller cardiac stroke volume. So HR is high even when cardiac work rate is only modest. I anticipate that as I return to full training, blood volume and cardiac stroke volume will rise and it will once again become hard to get HR near to max.
Jan 2015
1:02pm, 6 Jan 2015
12,081 posts
  •  
  • 0
GlennR
Hope you get better soon Canute.

HRV/RR data now from Garmin - dcrainmaker.com - if I understand properly. Any guidance from you (or indeed Boab) as to what it's all about would be most welcome.
Jan 2015
8:22pm, 6 Jan 2015
1,220 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Glenn
I think that the value of HRV for guiding training remains to be established. As far as I can see, the measurement that has the greatest potential is high frequency HRV measured in a resting state. There are various ways of quantifying this. The easiest to compute is RMSSD, the root mean square of the differences between consecutive R-R interval, averaged over a suitable time period (typically one minute.) RMSSD reflects parasympathetic tone. High parasympathetic tone indicates a well-rested state.

Once you have extracted the series of consecutive R-R intervals over a relevant time period (eg 1 minute) it is easy to compute RMSSD using Excel.

However even if you measure it under standard conditions, day to day variation can be quite large, and in my experience, it is not reliable enough to be used to adjust training load on a daily basis. On the otehr hand, the weekly average of the log of RMSSD, measured over 1 minute each day and averaged over the week, is fairly consistently related to training status, and should show a gradual increase as you get fitter. However if it shows a sudden rapid increase that can be a bad. If at the same time you find it very difficult to achieve your usual training paces, it suggests that your body is over-compensating for an over-trained state with an excessive parasympathetic tone.

Although I continue to measure resting RMSSD, the main reason I continue to use my Polar in R-R mode is to monitor rogue rhythms during training. I do this because I have various oddities of heart rhythm However, interpretation of oddities is tricky. When I see frequent odd rhythms, I ease of the training a bit. However, the data from a HRM is not reliable enough for definitive diagnosis.
SPR
Jan 2015
8:59pm, 6 Jan 2015
19,811 posts
  •  
  • 0
SPR
Garmin has HRV/R-R in the 610 and 910 from what I've read. You just need to turn it on.
Jan 2015
9:09pm, 6 Jan 2015
12,087 posts
  •  
  • 0
GlennR
That'll be fun. It took me quite a while ploughing through the 610 manual to figure out how to reset it the other day.
Jan 2015
8:59pm, 9 Jan 2015
1,998 posts
  •  
  • 0
Ceratonia
Interesting looking PhD thesis here:

Strategies to improve running economy

aut.researchgateway.ac.nz (17MB pdf)

Haven't looked at the detail yet, but it looks at the effect on running economy of hill sprints, weighted , resistance training etc in trained runners.
Jan 2015
1:27am, 10 Jan 2015
1,223 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
This thesis looks interesting. On a quick perusal, it appears to demonstrate that various leg strengthening strategies are of some benefit for improving economy, but in accord with expectation, the beneficial effects are most marked in females. The effects in males appear modest.

Unfortunately the thesis does not appear to address the question of whether a high proportion of type 1 fibres is associated with increased economy. This might be expected on account of the fact that type 1 fibres are likely to be more metabolically efficient than type 2 at the speed of contraction occurring during distance running . I recently summarised the evidence suggesting that development of type 1 fibres might improve efficiency, on my Word Press blog.

canute1.wordpress.com

It is noteworthy that, overall, females are more efficient than males. It is plausible that this might be due to a greater proportion of type 1fibres in females. At first it might appear paradoxical to suggest that females might be more efficient due to having better developed type 1 fibres, but can produce greater improvement by strengthening exercises. However, this is not a paradox if well-developed type 1 fibres produce high metabolic efficiency, while well-developed type 2 fibres achieve better mechanical efficiency. It is plausible that females have greater metabolic efficiency that males, but worse mechanical efficiency, so they benefit most from strengthening exercises that develop type 2 fibres. Conversely, men might be expected to benefit more from strategies that enhance metabolic efficiency.

It is not clear what is the best way to develop type 1 fibres, but I suspect that the gradual build-up of a large training volume over a period of several years is the best approach.
Jan 2015
6:21pm, 11 Jan 2015
1,229 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Polarised training Limbo week 2.

Another frustrating week. Early in the week, the residual cough from the respiratory infection in December continued to settle, but I developed a marked ear ache and deafness in one ear, with painfully swollen glands in the neck on that side – signs of probable otitis media. The cold wind exacerbated the earache, so early in the week I did some low intensity indoor sessions on the elliptical. Elevated HR indicated stress much greater than expected simply from loss of fitness after 3 weeks of diminished training. I therefore took two days of rest.

On Saturday, during a low intensity elliptical session, the moderate elevation of HR was consistent merely with loss of fitness rather than significant illness. On Sunday I was still deaf but the ear-ache had settled so I decided to try a low intensity run. In the early stages, I felt OK despite discernible loss of fitness since early December. However at about 6 Km my breathing became quite constricted, indicating a mild asthma attack so I jogged home, short of breath and with rising HR. When I got home my respiratory Peak Flow was about 40% of its usual value. So I am still not fit to resume demanding training.

Low Intensity run 92 min, elliptical 234 min;

High intensity 18 min, peak HR 92%

Total 344 minutes: Low intensity 95%, threshold 0%, high intensity 5%
Jan 2015
7:01pm, 11 Jan 2015
12,136 posts
  •  
  • 0
GlennR
Take it easy Canute.

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