login
For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
-
No new posts
| General Discussion | Triathlon Talk » For all those geting into the polarized concept of training | Rss Feed  |
|
 2014-12-16 10:43 AM |
Expert  2355    Madison, Wisconsin |  Subject: For all those geting into the polarized concept of trainingAs the polarized model of training is gaining more and more attention in the world of triathlon I re-read this and thought I would share, though I think many have read this before. My professor gave me this article one of the first days I sat in his class a few years ago. Lots of good info to read, and one part is addressed that a lot of research never address; recreational athletes (everyone of us) and how everything applies to them versus elite athletes (those that are being studied). This is very important to recognize as elite and recreational athletes have vast differences in themselves. http://www.sportsci.org/2009/ss.htm Highlighting a portion that I think just about every triathlete is guilty of... "Comparing the intended and achieved distributions highlights a typical training error committed by recreational athletes. We can call it falling into a training intensity “black hole.” It is hard to keep recreational people training 45-60 min a day 3-5 days a week from accumulating a lot of training time at their lactate threshold. Training intended to be longer and slower becomes too fast and shorter in duration, and interval training fails to reach the desired intensity. The result is that most training sessions end up being performed at the same threshold intensity. Foster et al. (2001b) also found that athletes tend to run harder on easy days and easier on hard days, compared to coaches' training plans. " But then some evidence that shows recreational athletes MAY benefit from the polarize model as well.. " Esteve Lanao did succeed in getting two groups to distribute intensity very differently. The group that trained more polarized, with more training time at lower intensity, actually improved their 10-km performance significantly more at 7 and 11 wk. So, recreational athletes could also benefit from keeping low- and high-intensity sessions at the intended intensity. " |
| 2014-12-16 11:52 AM in reply to: bcagle25 |
Extreme Veteran 5722  | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training thanks Ben for those that want the video version :-) http://www.canal-insep.fr/fr/training-periodization-deep-root-cultu... |
| 2014-12-16 2:24 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 1986 Cypress, TX | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Thanks, Ben. I have had a lot of down time the last few months bouncing back from a series of medical issues so I've read a lot about polarized training and conjured up a polarized plan for me for the 2015 season. The major takeaway, beyond knowing how/when to schedule the hard sessions, is to make sure the easy is easy and the hard is hard. One has to be real honest with themselves and/or their coach when it comes to the effort. It's quite obvious from what I've researched that people tend to go too hard during easy sessions and go too easy during the hard sessions, therefore, moving themselves back into that threshold/sweet spot/mid-zone "wasteland" that polarized training looks to avoid. Edited by GMAN 19030 2014-12-16 2:24 PM |
| 2014-12-16 3:45 PM in reply to: GMAN 19030 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training GReat article, Ben thanks for pointing out the differences/sameness of the recreational vs elite that you highlighted. This article is must reading for any coach, and "strongly suggested" for self-coached triathletes. |
| 2014-12-16 3:45 PM in reply to: GMAN 19030 |
Expert 2355 Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by GMAN 19030 Thanks, Ben. I have had a lot of down time the last few months bouncing back from a series of medical issues so I've read a lot about polarized training and conjured up a polarized plan for me for the 2015 season. The major takeaway, beyond knowing how/when to schedule the hard sessions, is to make sure the easy is easy and the hard is hard. One has to be real honest with themselves and/or their coach when it comes to the effort. It's quite obvious from what I've researched that people tend to go too hard during easy sessions and go too easy during the hard sessions, therefore, moving themselves back into that threshold/sweet spot/mid-zone "wasteland" that polarized training looks to avoid. Precisely. Triathletes are very type-a, always want more and to go harder. Unfortunately just like you stated then can never go hard enough when needed in training because they went too hard when they shouldve been going real easy. They race well, think they are doing great wonder why they are not better. Now here is my very elementary diagram. Here is the spectrum Easy (A pace/effort triathletes simply do not understand) |------------------ | Where Triathletes Train (The Black Hole) | -------------------------- | Hard (Where triathletes never reach)| If you want more subjective data then this to illustrate my point on the easy when easy, hard when hard.... Craig Alexander Easy run pace 9-10:30 min/miles on easy runs-------------------------------------------------------------Mile Repeats at 5:10-5:30 He trains across this entire spectrum, he doesnt shorten in but never doing too hard on easy days and not hard enough on hard days. I am not much for copying or looking at what the pros do to plan your training around, but sometimes the examples given can speak volumes on where amateur triathletes are in the spectrum of training. Most triathletes run faster the what Craig does here on their easy runs, yet cannot even come close to what he does on his mile repeats. |
| 2014-12-16 4:00 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by AdventureBear GReat article, Ben thanks for pointing out the differences/sameness of the recreational vs elite that you highlighted. This article is must reading for any coach, and "strongly suggested" for self-coached triathletes. There was another study that showed that in newer athletes threshold training did yield good results but for well trained athletes much less. This matches what many experience, ie good improvements at first using sweet spot/threshold training but then they stop making as much progress. There are studies that show that while you don't train at threshold, polarized training actually improvements performance at threshold more than threshold training. Counter intuitive but true Polarized training gives a good recipe for the mix of training intensity. But according to some pretty smart coaches, training load still trumps. To achieve training load in a pure polarized way, on a limited time schedule isn't always obvious. pros have less of a limitation than AGers. Mixing the 3 sports, isn't always obvious, especially as race day approaches. Edited by marcag 2014-12-16 4:01 PM |
| 2014-12-16 4:18 PM in reply to: marcag |
Expert 2355 Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by AdventureBear GReat article, Ben thanks for pointing out the differences/sameness of the recreational vs elite that you highlighted. This article is must reading for any coach, and "strongly suggested" for self-coached triathletes. There was another study that showed that in newer athletes threshold training did yield good results but for well trained athletes much less. This matches what many experience, ie good improvements at first using sweet spot/threshold training but then they stop making as much progress. There are studies that show that while you don't train at threshold, polarized training actually improvements performance at threshold more than threshold training. Counter intuitive but true Polarized training gives a good recipe for the mix of training intensity. But according to some pretty smart coaches, training load still trumps. To achieve training load in a pure polarized way, on a limited time schedule isn't always obvious. pros have less of a limitation than AGers. Mixing the 3 sports, isn't always obvious, especially as race day approaches. Yeah, the training load stlll has a great impact on everything, the article I posted talks about this. However, for many amateur athletes they have one huge difference compared to elite athletes. Daily life stress. All stress is stress and your body needs to recover from it, both training and life. That is why I feel along with many other coaches that the polarized method works well for amateurs. It is very difficult to effectively and correctly load a very large amount of stress on a body at high intensities when you have a lot of stress in life, work, sleep, family, commuting, etc counterbalancing your training stress. But this again goes back to the easy when easy and hard when hard thought. It doesn't just apply in training but in life too. If you have a very stressful day at work, no matter what you will not be able to perform in your training as best as possible if you have a hard day, unless you recover from the stress of your day beforehand. Too many triathletes live in the sympathetic state daily and rarely are grounded by their parasympathetic nervous system enough to rest and digest (recover). This is another reason as I stated to why I think the polarized model of training works so well for triathletes. That have been in the sport consistently for more then 2-3 years and can consistently get in 6+ hours of training a week that have the typical demands of an adult. But as always everyone is individual and the answer to each person is it depends, it just matters on what fits you best with you life. |
| 2014-12-16 4:25 PM in reply to: bcagle25 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by bcagle25 Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by AdventureBear GReat article, Ben thanks for pointing out the differences/sameness of the recreational vs elite that you highlighted. This article is must reading for any coach, and "strongly suggested" for self-coached triathletes. There was another study that showed that in newer athletes threshold training did yield good results but for well trained athletes much less. This matches what many experience, ie good improvements at first using sweet spot/threshold training but then they stop making as much progress. There are studies that show that while you don't train at threshold, polarized training actually improvements performance at threshold more than threshold training. Counter intuitive but true Polarized training gives a good recipe for the mix of training intensity. But according to some pretty smart coaches, training load still trumps. To achieve training load in a pure polarized way, on a limited time schedule isn't always obvious. pros have less of a limitation than AGers. Mixing the 3 sports, isn't always obvious, especially as race day approaches. Yeah, the training load stlll has a great impact on everything, the article I posted talks about this. However, for many amateur athletes they have one huge difference compared to elite athletes. Daily life stress. All stress is stress and your body needs to recover from it, both training and life. That is why I feel along with many other coaches that the polarized method works well for amateurs. It is very difficult to effectively and correctly load a very large amount of stress on a body at high intensities when you have a lot of stress in life, work, sleep, family, commuting, etc counterbalancing your training stress. But this again goes back to the easy when easy and hard when hard thought. It doesn't just apply in training but in life too. If you have a very stressful day at work, no matter what you will not be able to perform in your training as best as possible if you have a hard day, unless you recover from the stress of your day beforehand. Too many triathletes live in the sympathetic state daily and rarely are grounded by their parasympathetic nervous system enough to rest and digest (recover). This is another reason as I stated to why I think the polarized model of training works so well for triathletes. That have been in the sport consistently for more then 2-3 years and can consistently get in 6+ hours of training a week that have the typical demands of an adult. But as always everyone is individual and the answer to each person is it depends, it just matters on what fits you best with you life. I have been on a very polarized model now for 2.5 months. I am hitting higher power levels on the bike than ever before. My run is at par with my best run times ever. So is my swim. I am maybe 1/2 to 2/3 of normal training time I am a believer. |
| 2014-12-16 4:35 PM in reply to: marcag |
Expert 2355 Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by bcagle25 Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by AdventureBear GReat article, Ben thanks for pointing out the differences/sameness of the recreational vs elite that you highlighted. This article is must reading for any coach, and "strongly suggested" for self-coached triathletes. There was another study that showed that in newer athletes threshold training did yield good results but for well trained athletes much less. This matches what many experience, ie good improvements at first using sweet spot/threshold training but then they stop making as much progress. There are studies that show that while you don't train at threshold, polarized training actually improvements performance at threshold more than threshold training. Counter intuitive but true Polarized training gives a good recipe for the mix of training intensity. But according to some pretty smart coaches, training load still trumps. To achieve training load in a pure polarized way, on a limited time schedule isn't always obvious. pros have less of a limitation than AGers. Mixing the 3 sports, isn't always obvious, especially as race day approaches. Yeah, the training load stlll has a great impact on everything, the article I posted talks about this. However, for many amateur athletes they have one huge difference compared to elite athletes. Daily life stress. All stress is stress and your body needs to recover from it, both training and life. That is why I feel along with many other coaches that the polarized method works well for amateurs. It is very difficult to effectively and correctly load a very large amount of stress on a body at high intensities when you have a lot of stress in life, work, sleep, family, commuting, etc counterbalancing your training stress. But this again goes back to the easy when easy and hard when hard thought. It doesn't just apply in training but in life too. If you have a very stressful day at work, no matter what you will not be able to perform in your training as best as possible if you have a hard day, unless you recover from the stress of your day beforehand. Too many triathletes live in the sympathetic state daily and rarely are grounded by their parasympathetic nervous system enough to rest and digest (recover). This is another reason as I stated to why I think the polarized model of training works so well for triathletes. That have been in the sport consistently for more then 2-3 years and can consistently get in 6+ hours of training a week that have the typical demands of an adult. But as always everyone is individual and the answer to each person is it depends, it just matters on what fits you best with you life. I have been on a very polarized model now for 2.5 months. I am hitting higher power levels on the bike than ever before. My run is at par with my best run times ever. So is my swim. I am maybe 1/2 to 2/3 of normal training time I am a believer. Even though I would say 2.5 months is hardly any time to gather any conclusions, its good to see more believers. What are you doing now in your training that is different from before? What is your typical week like now? |
| 2014-12-16 4:49 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by bcagle25 Even though I would say 2.5 months is hardly any time to gather any conclusions, its good to see more believers. What are you doing now in your training that is different from before? What is your typical week like now? For now, and this will change as race day approaches All running is easy. This is hard for me, I really easily creep into Z3 and Z4 Bike is very polarized. Very hard, or very aerobic Z5 & Z2. Slowly trending to 4x8 at 110%, fall off the bike when complete. 2x sometimes 3 per week + easy rides. Swim is one very hard, feel like puking workout per week. 2x not as intense, but not cake walks but more focused on holding good form, low rest, T+5s type effort. Lots of time focusing on proper pacing and form. Next cycle will see things shift a bit. Before, I spent a lot of time in Z3/Z4. 50% of my time was there. Edited by marcag 2014-12-16 5:01 PM |
| 2014-12-16 5:19 PM in reply to: bcagle25 |
Extreme Veteran 1986 Cypress, TX | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by bcagle25 Originally posted by GMAN 19030 Precisely. Triathletes are very type-a, always want more and to go harder. Unfortunately just like you stated then can never go hard enough when needed in training because they went too hard when they shouldve been going real easy. They race well, think they are doing great wonder why they are not better. Now here is my very elementary diagram. Here is the spectrum Easy (A pace/effort triathletes simply do not understand) |------------------ | Where Triathletes Train (The Black Hole) | -------------------------- | Hard (Where triathletes never reach)| If you want more subjective data then this to illustrate my point on the easy when easy, hard when hard.... Craig Alexander Easy run pace 9-10:30 min/miles on easy runs-------------------------------------------------------------Mile Repeats at 5:10-5:30 He trains across this entire spectrum, he doesnt shorten in but never doing too hard on easy days and not hard enough on hard days. I am not much for copying or looking at what the pros do to plan your training around, but sometimes the examples given can speak volumes on where amateur triathletes are in the spectrum of training. Most triathletes run faster the what Craig does here on their easy runs, yet cannot even come close to what he does on his mile repeats. Thanks, Ben. I have had a lot of down time the last few months bouncing back from a series of medical issues so I've read a lot about polarized training and conjured up a polarized plan for me for the 2015 season. The major takeaway, beyond knowing how/when to schedule the hard sessions, is to make sure the easy is easy and the hard is hard. One has to be real honest with themselves and/or their coach when it comes to the effort. It's quite obvious from what I've researched that people tend to go too hard during easy sessions and go too easy during the hard sessions, therefore, moving themselves back into that threshold/sweet spot/mid-zone "wasteland" that polarized training looks to avoid. The first time I became exposed to this kind of concept was a couple of years ago. Ryan Hall used to (maybe still does) keep his Garmin Connect profile open so anyone could look at it. I remember looking at some of his workouts and thinking "This dude can run a 2:04 marathon and a sub-hour half marathon and a bunch of his training runs are at a 9:30/mile pace. WTF is up with that?" Then I saw workouts where he ran 20 miles at a sub-5:00 pace. Of course, I never really connected the dots and got it until a few months ago. The threshold/sweet spot training had done wonders for me up until this year where I leveled off and, IMO, fatigued my body to the point I had some medical concerns. I was doing the majority of my training in "The Black Hole" and not giving myself the proper recovery. I need a change so I'm going to see where the polarized approach takes me. I think I'm a good candidate for it. |
| 2014-12-16 8:46 PM in reply to: #5075026 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training The biggest takeaway for me is that there are many valid approaches. When I first started coaching I was a huge believe in LSD / winter aerobic base training because that's what my experience was, and it worked for my limited exposure to helping athletes as a new coach. As I learned more, from Phil Skiba for example and bike coach Colin Sandburg, I shifted to an intensity / polarized training model and guess what? It kept working, my athletes kept getting faster. Now I appreciate that different periodiZation models work better for different types if athletes regardless of their whiteness or time to train. That's the beauty. Polarized training has been around for awhile but has gotten renewed attention from triathletes, people are switching and having good results. However as I recall in that same paper Ben originally linked to, a group of athletes who had been Doing polarized training and finding themselves stagnant, switched things up again to more threshold work more often and found results with that. There's no right answer for everyone and that's the beautiful thing about triathlon, so many ways to design training and enjoy the sport while getting faster. |
| 2014-12-16 8:48 PM in reply to: #5075172 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Ugh autocorrect !!! ELITENESS not "whiteness". And no edit on mobile. |
| 2014-12-16 9:13 PM in reply to: marcag |
Expert 2355 Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by bcagle25 Even though I would say 2.5 months is hardly any time to gather any conclusions, its good to see more believers. What are you doing now in your training that is different from before? What is your typical week like now? For now, and this will change as race day approaches All running is easy. This is hard for me, I really easily creep into Z3 and Z4 Bike is very polarized. Very hard, or very aerobic Z5 & Z2. Slowly trending to 4x8 at 110%, fall off the bike when complete. 2x sometimes 3 per week + easy rides. Swim is one very hard, feel like puking workout per week. 2x not as intense, but not cake walks but more focused on holding good form, low rest, T+5s type effort. Lots of time focusing on proper pacing and form. Next cycle will see things shift a bit. Before, I spent a lot of time in Z3/Z4. 50% of my time was there. Agreed that running at that low intensity super easy effort is hard. It takes a lot of discipline, but it works. For me it has helped build my durability tremendously in my running, especially in training. |
| 2014-12-17 4:07 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by AdventureBear The biggest takeaway for me is that there are many valid approaches. When I first started coaching I was a huge believe in LSD / winter aerobic base training because that's what my experience was, and it worked for my limited exposure to helping athletes as a new coach. As I learned more, from Phil Skiba for example and bike coach Colin Sandburg, I shifted to an intensity / polarized training model and guess what? It kept working, my athletes kept getting faster. Now I appreciate that different periodiZation models work better for different types if athletes regardless of their whiteness or time to train. That's the beauty. Polarized training has been around for awhile but has gotten renewed attention from triathletes, people are switching and having good results. However as I recall in that same paper Ben originally linked to, a group of athletes who had been Doing polarized training and finding themselves stagnant, switched things up again to more threshold work more often and found results with that. There's no right answer for everyone and that's the beautiful thing about triathlon, so many ways to design training and enjoy the sport while getting faster. I agree with everything you said. This time of year a very polarized, theoretical 80/20, no yellow model works fine. It's cool. It fits well with the reality of being confined to a bike trainer and snowy roads. But I also don't believe it's ideal (for me anyway ) as raceday approaches. By then I will be in a third block of training and while I will have a clear separation of hard and easy, there will be some threshold and tempo work in there. Edited by marcag 2014-12-17 4:33 AM |
| 2014-12-17 7:14 AM in reply to: marcag |
Extreme Veteran 1986 Cypress, TX | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Agreed. As race day approaches there should be a shift in specificity to more race day efforts, especially for the 140.6 and 70.3 distances. I think polarized already addresses race day efforts for sprint and oly. |
| 2014-12-17 9:39 AM in reply to: GMAN 19030 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by GMAN 19030 Agreed. As race day approaches there should be a shift in specificity to more race day efforts, especially for the 140.6 and 70.3 distances. I think polarized already addresses race day efforts for sprint and oly. There was this one by Seiler & friends http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23921084 |
| 2014-12-17 10:03 AM in reply to: marcag |
| Oakville | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training I understand polarization when it comes to running as it basically follows what most on BT are saying - mostly easy sometimes hard - but I'm trying to wrap my head around polarization when it comes to bike training. For me, I typically spend between 3 and 4 hours a week on the bike which usually consists of 2 threshold rides, a VO2 max workout and maybe a sweet spot ride thrown in. How would that change in a polarization model? I'm guessing 80 to 90% at sweet spot with the balance VO2 max? Or is my training volume too low to gain any benefit from polarization and I should stick with what I'm doing? |
| 2014-12-17 10:22 AM in reply to: marcag |
| Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by GMAN 19030 There was this one by Seiler & friends http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23921084Agreed. As race day approaches there should be a shift in specificity to more race day efforts, especially for the 140.6 and 70.3 distances. I think polarized already addresses race day efforts for sprint and oly. That is good to see, but also note that there still is Z2 time in there as I don't think they were doing 32% (+/-14%) up in Z3. I'm still curious what was going on in that time. Like knowing the difference between a subject going just over VT1 at times, vs doing a 2 x 20' set at say ~95% FTP (or just under VT2), or vs having 4-6 x 30' at IM effort (faster rider). These are all rather different from each other, but would all show up in Z2 and could still keep the Z2 total down depending on the work being performed. I'm also thinking to watch the resolution of the conclusions that we try to take from Seiler's work. Using terms like "most" and "little" vs "all" and "none" as I can't remember any of the subjects actually having a Z2 of zero. Examples could be above and I don't know that Seiler intended to show such differences with his work. And the the VT1 & VT2 points more as "about" instead of super rigidly defined points. The larger point was to show the good deal of separation for most of the work being done as opposed to exactly defining things. |
| 2014-12-17 10:34 AM in reply to: Scott71 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by Scott71 I understand polarization when it comes to running as it basically follows what most on BT are saying - mostly easy sometimes hard - but I'm trying to wrap my head around polarization when it comes to bike training. For me, I typically spend between 3 and 4 hours a week on the bike which usually consists of 2 threshold rides, a VO2 max workout and maybe a sweet spot ride thrown in. How would that change in a polarization model? I'm guessing 80 to 90% at sweet spot with the balance VO2 max? Or is my training volume too low to gain any benefit from polarization and I should stick with what I'm doing? In theory you would get the most bang for your buck with something like 4x8min sessions at VO2max. This is what Seiler found. These are hard. Do 2 of these, 1 hard run and you will beg for the rest to be easy :-). They showed that 4x16 was less beneficial than 4x8min. Of course the 4x8 is at a harder pace. |
| 2014-12-17 10:51 AM in reply to: Scott71 |
Extreme Veteran 1986 Cypress, TX | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by Scott71 I understand polarization when it comes to running as it basically follows what most on BT are saying - mostly easy sometimes hard - but I'm trying to wrap my head around polarization when it comes to bike training. For me, I typically spend between 3 and 4 hours a week on the bike which usually consists of 2 threshold rides, a VO2 max workout and maybe a sweet spot ride thrown in. How would that change in a polarization model? I'm guessing 80 to 90% at sweet spot with the balance VO2 max? Or is my training volume too low to gain any benefit from polarization and I should stick with what I'm doing?
The point of polarized training is too more or less avoid that 80-90% sweet spot training. Easy means easy (z1 or low z2) and hard means hard (high z4 and z5). Avoid the high z2 to low z4 area (the sweet spot, middle of the bell curve stuff). Adapting the polarized model over to tri is slightly more complicated than a single sport focus. The consensus from what I have gathered so far is to do one workout in each discipline very hard with the rest easy. I'm doing 70.3 training the first half of 2015 and then switching to short course for the remainder of the season. I plan to do four bike rides per week. Two easy one hour efforts (let's say 65-70% FTP), one easy long bike ride (2-3 hours at 70% FTP) and one high intensity one hour ride that will include something like 4x8' or 4x10' intervals at 110% FTP. 5-6 weeks out from a race I will make my long bike more race specific (3 hours at 80-85%). The whole point of the polarized model is to do the easy stuff so that you can be recovered and fresh as possible to do the killer hard workouts. Ben and I brought up Craig Alexander and Ryan Hall previously. The reason Crowie can do some long runs at a 5:10 pace or Ryan Hall can do long runs at a 4:45 pace is because much of their other running was super easy (9 to 10 minute/mile stuff). They were better rested and recovered than if they had done all their runs at say a 6:30/mile pace. The threshold/sweet spot training is certainly effective. It worked for me for several years. Then I hit a wall both in terms of stagnant results and fatigue. Cranking out all my workouts at 80% or whatever just didn't allow me to recover properly. |
| 2014-12-17 10:57 AM in reply to: marcag |
| Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Scott71 In theory you would get the most bang for your buck with something like 4x8min sessions at VO2max. This is what Seiler found. These are hard. Do 2 of these, 1 hard run and you will beg for the rest to be easy :-). They showed that 4x16 was less beneficial than 4x8min. Of course the 4x8 is at a harder pace. I understand polarization when it comes to running as it basically follows what most on BT are saying - mostly easy sometimes hard - but I'm trying to wrap my head around polarization when it comes to bike training. For me, I typically spend between 3 and 4 hours a week on the bike which usually consists of 2 threshold rides, a VO2 max workout and maybe a sweet spot ride thrown in. How would that change in a polarization model? I'm guessing 80 to 90% at sweet spot with the balance VO2 max? Or is my training volume too low to gain any benefit from polarization and I should stick with what I'm doing? The study for that was on 4 x 16', 4 x 8', and 4 x 4'. All done at "best effort" and I think twice a week(?) for a period of time. Do you remember seeing data on how hard the subjects ended up working for these? |
| 2014-12-17 11:01 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training I agree with what Gman said. Although my current and future mix is a bit different. But there is no "ideal model that fits all" Also remember, if you are doing that same mix you're doing, over and over, year round, you will limit your improvement. Edited by marcag 2014-12-17 11:11 AM |
| 2014-12-17 11:07 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by brigby1 The study for that was on 4 x 16', 4 x 8', and 4 x 4'. All done at "best effort" and I think twice a week(?) for a period of time. Do you remember seeing data on how hard the subjects ended up working for these? yes, best effort. I remember when I read it, I imagined designing the workouts by changing the power level to get to the same W', which BTW is how I gradually adjust my intervals to get to the best 4x8 I can possibly do. correction, found it http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21812820 Interval training was performed at 88 ± 2, 90 ± 2, and 94 ± 2% of HR(peak) and 4.9, 9.6, and 13.2 mmol/L blood lactate in 4 × 16, 4 × 8, and 4 × 4 min groups Also note in that study that power at threshold, (~FTP), rose the most of the 3 groups as did VO2 power Edited by marcag 2014-12-17 11:30 AM |
| 2014-12-17 11:51 AM in reply to: marcag |
Expert 2355 Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by AdventureBear The biggest takeaway for me is that there are many valid approaches. When I first started coaching I was a huge believe in LSD / winter aerobic base training because that's what my experience was, and it worked for my limited exposure to helping athletes as a new coach. As I learned more, from Phil Skiba for example and bike coach Colin Sandburg, I shifted to an intensity / polarized training model and guess what? It kept working, my athletes kept getting faster. Now I appreciate that different periodiZation models work better for different types if athletes regardless of their whiteness or time to train. That's the beauty. Polarized training has been around for awhile but has gotten renewed attention from triathletes, people are switching and having good results. However as I recall in that same paper Ben originally linked to, a group of athletes who had been Doing polarized training and finding themselves stagnant, switched things up again to more threshold work more often and found results with that. There's no right answer for everyone and that's the beautiful thing about triathlon, so many ways to design training and enjoy the sport while getting faster. I agree with everything you said. This time of year a very polarized, theoretical 80/20, no yellow model works fine. It's cool. It fits well with the reality of being confined to a bike trainer and snowy roads. But I also don't believe it's ideal (for me anyway ) as raceday approaches. By then I will be in a third block of training and while I will have a clear separation of hard and easy, there will be some threshold and tempo work in there. Polarization can work up to race day, you just need to think about how you will periodize your training, as always you want to get more specific as your peak race approaches. You can still use the model, but the success of that model is dependent on how well you manage the load and intensity. The tough part is understanding that everyone is individual and what works for one might not work for another. BUT the more experience you have in dealing with a variety of different athletes the more experience you will get and you can find trends which helps you predict how certain people will respond to training. That is the key to building programs, and what most textbooks, blogs, and articles do not teach. |
| General Discussion | Triathlon Talk » For all those geting into the polarized concept of training | Rss Feed |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK