Polarized training

90 watchers
Mar 2014
1:05pm, 6 Mar 2014
872 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
If you are novice or an old hand returning from injury, almost any sensible training program will produce improved endurance performance provided it is consistent. But when you are stuck on plateau, what is best way to progress to a higher level?

Several studies (eg Esteve-Laneo in 2007 ( ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ) ; Stoggl and Sterlich ( ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ) provide evidence that polarised training is most effective.

Polarised training typically includes 80% easy, 10% tempo, 10% high intensity.

So does a little bit of pain, but not too much, produce the best gain?

What do you think?
Mar 2014
9:55pm, 6 Mar 2014
29,137 posts
  •  
  • 0
Velociraptor
Boing! I want to know what people think about this too :)
Mar 2014
10:00pm, 6 Mar 2014
837 posts
  •  
  • 0
FenlandRunner
Very interesting, from reading people's blogs/facebook posts, etc that I know, the breakdown appears to be less than 40% easy, 40% tempo and 20% high intensity, then people wonder why they get injured or don't achieve what they want! :( :( :(

As stated on other threads, my 5k times are always best after long, slow, Ultra's with many hours time on feet!
Mar 2014
10:10pm, 6 Mar 2014
1,283 posts
  •  
  • 0
Tarahumara
Oh interesting! I will sit on a cushion on my plateau and await the verdict... I am liking the 80:10:10 though :-)
Mar 2014
10:42pm, 6 Mar 2014
1,269 posts
  •  
  • 0
MudMeanderer
It seemed to work quite well for me last year. I know quite a few clubmates who seem to go for the '40% tempo, 40% a smidge slower than tempo, 20% a bit faster' strategy though. I'm convinced there is a prevailing attitude of seeing training as little more than rehearsal for a race, rather than sessions targeted at specific physiological systems.
Mar 2014
10:47pm, 6 Mar 2014
874 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Unfortunately I am on a steepening descent into old age rather than being on a plateau. Nonetheless, I plan to adopt a polarized approach this year.

Two years ago, my training was polarized. At that time, I was a bit disappointed by lack of progress with fitness, though in fact I was fairly pleased with my race performances. However last year, when I experimented with increasing the volume of low intensity training while doing even fewer high intensity sessions, I deteriorated more rapidly, and my race times were mediocre. So this year I will go back to polarized training, with roughly on an 80:10:10 proportion – though depending on progress I might include a few more tempo sessions making it nearer to 75:15:10 because over the years I have obtained clear benefits from tempo sessions.

At present, my fitness is at a low ebb after a few months of trouble with aching joints, so my immediate goal is to re-build the volume of low intensity running, while doing a small amount of high intensity work on the elliptical together with some drills to get my legs ready for some higher intensity running.

I will post my progress here from time to time. If anyone else is using a polarized approach, it would be interesting to hear what they are doing and how they are progressing.
Mar 2014
10:55pm, 6 Mar 2014
14,429 posts
  •  
  • 0
Red Squirrel
So are those percentages taken over your week's training volume?
Mar 2014
11:03pm, 6 Mar 2014
2,939 posts
  •  
  • 0
Rosehip
I like the sound of 80 10 10 -but wonder what the minimum weekly mileage at which "it works" would be. Also, what if the 10% tempo and/or high intensity were within the otherwise easy sessions rather than defined separate runs?
Mar 2014
11:08pm, 6 Mar 2014
29,138 posts
  •  
  • 0
Velociraptor
Canute, I'll be watching with interest :)

I'm not in a position to take on any sort of running training plan at the moment, but in the past my inclination has been to do lots of easy running (that's "easy" by perceived effort - The Gospel According to St. Parker would have it that all these sessions are too hard, but I'm a special snowflake and 70%WHR is more walking than running for me even when I'm at peak fitness), something between 10% and 20% of my miles as a weekly tempo run, and no high intensity sessions. I believe that I'm genetically deficient in fast twitch muscle fibres and won't respond to short reps (my experience on the bike tends to bear this out) but am willing to give it a try when I'm back in action, probably in the context of a Furman training programme.
Mar 2014
12:39am, 7 Mar 2014
875 posts
  •  
  • 0
Canute
Red Sqirrel, I will work out the proportions on a weekly basis.

Rosehip,I will be aiming to work up to about 6 hours training per week by late spring if my joints cope OK. I estimate effort from breathing rate. I am usually aware of my breathing and can easily detect when the number of steps per breath changes. Easy pace = relaxed breathing, 6 steps per breath (3L, 3R), conversation easy. Tempo = 4 steps per breath; brief utterances possible. High intensity = 2 steps per breath, conversation impossible.

I will be aiming for 30-40 minute of tempo running. I will typically do a weekly 20 minute tempo session (after a good warm up) and will include another 15-20 minutes at tempo pace within longer runs, but some weeks I will do a single longer tempo session. The high intensity will mainly be in dedicated intense sessions, but with a good warm up and cool down.

Vrap, I suspect that either due to genes or as a consequence of jogging to school in childhood, I too have better developed slow twitch fibres. However, I regard this as a good reason to do what I can to keep my sparse fast twitch fibres is working order – if for no other reason than to enjoy the devilish delight of outsprinting youngsters at the end of a HM.

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
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 112,238 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here