General Discussion Triathlon Talk » For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 3
 
 
2014-12-19 4:49 PM
in reply to: marcag

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training

A very interesting topic indeed. Thank you for posting.

If anything it makes me feel better about my slug-like paces I often run on my easy days. Early on it had concerned me how slow I ran but it truly has allowed me to execute my hard workouts the way I am supposed to and show up to my A races feeling rested and ready to go, so I'm not sure I would heed Canova's caution, personally.  



2014-12-19 5:12 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

User image

Master
8247
50002000100010010025
Eugene, Oregon
Bronze member
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
I find this whole "polarized training" thing interesting. As I recall, as a high school and college runner back in the 80's, we almost never did tempo runs/Zone 3 type training, even for 5 and 10 km. It was either long, slow distance or intervals. I qualified for Olympic Trials with a 2:44 (at Cal. International!) having never done a tempo run, or timed long run pace with a watch. It was after XC season--training consisted of a long run on weekends ( at a fairly moderate effort), 3 interval workouts a week (400m to one miles reps), the rest easy running. It was a very high-powered team, most of the girls were 1500-3000m runners, so all that speedwork would have been at a very high effort level. I always felt like a mule trying to run with thoroughbreds! I didn't even know what a tempo run was until I worked with another coach before Trials. At that race I did a 2:43 on a tougher course in much hotter conditions. Hard to know if the improvement (I also set lifetime PB's in everything from 3000m on up that year) was due to greater volume, the tempo runs, or just physical maturation (I was 20).

Just putting it out there that " polarized training" is nothing new--it's the way a lot of people trained back in the day, some of them with a lot more amazing results than me! In my mind, the real value of tempo runs is to teach good pacing. I've struggled a lot with them here as they get me seriously overheated--maybe it's time to go back to the "polarized" model. I'll take some good lung-busting halves or quarters over. 30-50 minute tempo run any day!
2014-12-19 5:49 PM
in reply to: marcag

User image

Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training

Originally posted by marcag
Originally posted by Scott71

Coincidentally, Joe Friel's latest blog post talks about polarized training and low intensity workouts:

http://www.joefrielsblog.com/

Here is another he wrote http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2014/10/polarized-training-update.html

I like the way Joe described it in this article.  Thanks for sharing.

2014-12-19 5:53 PM
in reply to: Hot Runner

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training

Originally posted by Hot Runner I find this whole "polarized training" thing interesting. As I recall, as a high school and college runner back in the 80's, we almost never did tempo runs/Zone 3 type training, even for 5 and 10 km. It was either long, slow distance or intervals.

It's no different today for the fast folks.  The only thing I've read here that is different from what I've been watching is that the easy runs could be much slower than they are (I guess)....but the intervals are smoking fast.

2014-12-19 7:30 PM
in reply to: marcag

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training

Originally posted by marcag
Originally posted by Scott71

Coincidentally, Joe Friel's latest blog post talks about polarized training and low intensity workouts:

http://www.joefrielsblog.com/

Here is another he wrote http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2014/10/polarized-training-update.html

Had a thought, have you ever tried adding a plot of a VO2 curve on top of something like this one? Might be a little tricky since while VO2 max and Threshold can affect each other, they don't necessarily stay at a fixed percent of each other. I've had thoughts of this rolling around a bit. Curious what others thought.

2014-12-20 2:02 AM
in reply to: Hot Runner

User image

Coach
9167
5000200020001002525
Stairway to Seven
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
Originally posted by Hot Runner

I find this whole "polarized training" thing interesting. As I recall, as a high school and college runner back in the 80's, we almost never did tempo runs/Zone 3 type training, even for 5 and 10 km. It was either long, slow distance or intervals. I qualified for Olympic Trials with a 2:44 (at Cal. International!) having never done a tempo run, or timed long run pace with a watch. It was after XC season--training consisted of a long run on weekends ( at a fairly moderate effort), 3 interval workouts a week (400m to one miles reps), the rest easy running. It was a very high-powered team, most of the girls were 1500-3000m runners, so all that speedwork would have been at a very high effort level. I always felt like a mule trying to run with thoroughbreds! I didn't even know what a tempo run was until I worked with another coach before Trials. At that race I did a 2:43 on a tougher course in much hotter conditions. Hard to know if the improvement (I also set lifetime PB's in everything from 3000m on up that year) was due to greater volume, the tempo runs, or just physical maturation (I was 20).

Just putting it out there that " polarized training" is nothing new--it's the way a lot of people trained back in the day, some of them with a lot more amazing results than me! In my mind, the real value of tempo runs is to teach good pacing. I've struggled a lot with them here as they get me seriously overheated--maybe it's time to go back to the "polarized" model. I'll take some good lung-busting halves or quarters over. 30-50 minute tempo run any day!


You're right, it's not now. What's happened is that this fellow Seiler presented a paper at a conference several years ago looking at various professional athletes who have been using it for a their training...Seiler didn't invent it either, he only reported on it. Just this past winter a video of Seiler presenting on this started to make the rounds, so it's been recently "discovered" by lots more people. it's just information getting spread around as it usually does...slowly at first, then it reaches critical mass and suddenly everyone seems to know about it.


2014-12-20 5:40 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
Originally posted by AdventureBear

You're right, it's not now. What's happened is that this fellow Seiler presented a paper at a conference several years ago looking at various professional athletes who have been using it for a their training...Seiler didn't invent it either, he only reported on it. Just this past winter a video of Seiler presenting on this started to make the rounds, so it's been recently "discovered" by lots more people. it's just information getting spread around as it usually does...slowly at first, then it reaches critical mass and suddenly everyone seems to know about it.



IMO, yes and no. While Seiler did present this a few years ago, since, several others have taken it and confirmed it's findings. For example, there were studies within the last year or two on it's applicability to recreational runners. There was the study comparing the various HIIT/TH/POL...study which isn't that old. As I said, more and more data is coming out and providing information that coaches are hopefully at least considering.

You are right, there is nothing new to this. You can back to the 70s and say they were training this way. Back then is is how some of the fastest AG marathoners in the world would train. They would run easy, and at a light they would check their pulse at their neck. If it was about 75% of (220-age) they would proceed. Then they would run a 5k race on the weekend. This is how they got their speedwork. They would easily rack up 100km per week. When you speak to the Norwegians they seem to think there can't possibly be any other way of training. So you are right, this is not new.

Yet most people do not train this way. They can certainly learn from it.

I said it before, it's not a training plan.The very best coaches themselves say they require more of a mix of intensity, but there is something to be learned here and I thank Ben for bringing up the discussion.





Edited by marcag 2014-12-20 5:45 AM
2014-12-20 11:35 AM
in reply to: marcag

User image

Veteran
177
100252525
Berlin, Germany
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
Got it .... am trying it ..... and luving it.

One question: when we talk about Z1 - and knowing that different people use different zones - this "Z1 one" ... ?

Z1 = 66 - 84,7%..........(of LT)
Z2 = 85,3 - 90,7%.......(of LT)
Z3 = 91,3 - 95,3%.......(of LT)
Z4 = 96 - 99,3%..........(of LT)
Z5 = 100 - 102%.........(of LT)
Z5a = 102,7 - 105,3 %..(of LT)
Z5b = 106 - 110,7 %.....(of LT)
2014-12-20 12:38 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
Originally posted by rpistor

Got it .... am trying it ..... and luving it.

One question: when we talk about Z1 - and knowing that different people use different zones - this "Z1 one" ... ?

Z1 = 66 - 84,7%..........(of LT)
Z2 = 85,3 - 90,7%.......(of LT)
Z3 = 91,3 - 95,3%.......(of LT)
Z4 = 96 - 99,3%..........(of LT)
Z5 = 100 - 102%.........(of LT)
Z5a = 102,7 - 105,3 %..(of LT)
Z5b = 106 - 110,7 %.....(of LT)


Those definitions seem close to Friel's here : http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/joe-friel-s-quick-guide-...

In his presentation Dr Seiler kind of collapses The Z1/Z2 into Green, Z3/Z4 yellow Z5+ Red
The boundaries are in fact Aerobic threshold and Anaerobic threshold. He calls these LT1 and LT2

LT1 is close to your top of Z2 (a bit lower than that for me, probably for many people)
LT2 would correspond to your LT

To make things confusing, in the papers sometime they call the Yellow zone Z2 which is Z3/Z4 in Friel speak.



Edited by marcag 2014-12-20 12:40 PM
2014-12-20 5:59 PM
in reply to: marcag

User image


87
252525
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
I have only been doing any sort of sport since the start of this year (tri's funnily enough!) and have nev er heard of this polarized training idea. I am going to have to do some research into it, as I find almost all of my runs end up being in z4-5!
2014-12-20 6:35 PM
in reply to: #5075026

User image

Extreme Veteran
1986
1000500100100100100252525
Cypress, TX
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
I wouldn't consider 85% zone 1.


2014-12-20 7:14 PM
in reply to: marcag

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training

Originally posted by marcag
Originally posted by rpistor Got it .... am trying it ..... and luving it. One question: when we talk about Z1 - and knowing that different people use different zones - this "Z1 one" ... ? Z1 = 66 - 84,7%..........(of LT) Z2 = 85,3 - 90,7%.......(of LT) Z3 = 91,3 - 95,3%.......(of LT) Z4 = 96 - 99,3%..........(of LT) Z5 = 100 - 102%.........(of LT) Z5a = 102,7 - 105,3 %..(of LT) Z5b = 106 - 110,7 %.....(of LT)
Those definitions seem close to Friel's here : http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/joe-friel-s-quick-guide-... In his presentation Dr Seiler kind of collapses The Z1/Z2 into Green, Z3/Z4 yellow Z5+ Red The boundaries are in fact Aerobic threshold and Anaerobic threshold. He calls these LT1 and LT2 LT1 is close to your top of Z2 (a bit lower than that for me, probably for many people) LT2 would correspond to your LT To make things confusing, in the papers sometime they call the Yellow zone Z2 which is Z3/Z4 in Friel speak.

More specifically, those look like Friel HR zones for running. He has another set for biking. Which should not be confused with his power zones for biking.

2014-12-20 8:36 PM
in reply to: brigby1

User image


643
50010025
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
I think the actual zones is a huge question. I did a long run today and averaged 131bpm. My LTHR is 176 (at least it was ~9 months ago), so this puts it at about 74% LTHR for this run. This got me to the 9:00-9:30/mile range for the run. I normally run at 150-155 (85-88% LTHR...Z2) for my long/easy days. It sounds like this is the yellow zone or is this still the "easy" pace? I just watched the video again and he seems to hint the yellow zone is around LTHR and other parts he seems to hint that yellow is tempo.
2014-12-21 1:34 AM
in reply to: GMAN 19030

User image

Veteran
177
100252525
Berlin, Germany
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
up til 85% of LTHR and not Max HR ....

seems like that is the "Friel Z1 Zone"
2014-12-21 5:36 AM
in reply to: Blastman

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
Originally posted by Blastman

I think the actual zones is a huge question. I did a long run today and averaged 131bpm. My LTHR is 176 (at least it was ~9 months ago), so this puts it at about 74% LTHR for this run. This got me to the 9:00-9:30/mile range for the run. I normally run at 150-155 (85-88% LTHR...Z2) for my long/easy days. It sounds like this is the yellow zone or is this still the "easy" pace? I just watched the video again and he seems to hint the yellow zone is around LTHR and other parts he seems to hint that yellow is tempo.


What you call LTHR he calls LT2 and is the start of the red zone
In his 3 zone model, yellow includes tempo and sub threshold, so Z3 and Z4 depending on the way zones are defined. Sometimes the top of Z2 is in there.

The problem with HR zones defined by various sites, is they do not necessarily line up perfectly with what he is saying is the border of Green/Yellow.
For him, and many sport scientists, Green/Yellow border is a physiological marker which is the aerobic threshold, the point where the usage of fat/carbs starts burning more carbs and lactate production increases. Yellow/Red is the point where lactate starts to accumulate.

He gave rough markers of where is occurs in terms of % of MAX HR, % of VO2max, lactate levels, points that many people never had measured.

The % of LTHR which corresponds to Aerobic Threshold varies from person to person. This is why the mapping is so hard. But it doesn't need to be precise down to the beat

What I would do, and this is just one person's opinion :

Use at the McMillan calculator (or Daniels) and pick the easy pace.
Run at the easy pace. Is it conversational ? It should be
Look at the HR. Is it say mid Z2 of your previous set zones ?
Does it feel easy ?
Are you able to maintain form running at this pace ?

Again, Polarized is not a training plan and the danger is people will just slow down and not necessarily do the hard part. Or they will improperly do the hard part and hurt themselves. I think it's great for people that have some experience and want to experiment. But newbies need to be careful.


2014-12-21 5:58 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: For all those geting into the polarized concept of training
Originally posted by Blastman

I think the actual zones is a huge question. I did a long run today and averaged 131bpm. My LTHR is 176 (at least it was ~9 months ago), so this puts it at about 74% LTHR for this run. This got me to the 9:00-9:30/mile range for the run. I normally run at 150-155 (85-88% LTHR...Z2) for my long/easy days. It sounds like this is the yellow zone or is this still the "easy" pace? I just watched the video again and he seems to hint the yellow zone is around LTHR and other parts he seems to hint that yellow is tempo.


coming back to your numbers, because they are similar to mine, so to give you an example

I looked at your race reports and you are just a tad slower runner than me, not by much.
You did 1:45 on your HIM run, goal 1:40, I run a 1:35 on a good day, but we are close. I run about 1:28 open half, I have never done a full M. But we are similar.

I have been measured in lab

Your LTHR is 176. Mine is 172
My aerobic threshold is at 5min/km or about 8min/mile. My lacate at that point was 1.92. My HR will be at about 145ish if I run that pace.
If I run at 145 I finish with a lactate below 2. I tried this a few times.
McMillan says my easy runs should be around 8min/mile
I start my easy runs at about 8min/mile naturally. Slower than that I feel I lose form.
I naturally trend towards 7.5min/mile and I have to slow myself down or after 6 miles I will go "ooops" and the easy run has gone beyond easy. This is a bad habit.
I used to run 50% of my time at around 7min/mile, including long runs. Not good.

Edited by marcag 2014-12-21 6:28 AM


New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » For all those geting into the polarized concept of training Rss Feed  
 
 
of 3
 
 
RELATED POSTS

Geting fit to be triathlon fit.

Started by saint100
Views: 1278 Posts: 8

2013-11-14 7:30 AM switch

Easton EC90 or Oval Concepts Fork

Started by luv2flyjrn
Views: 888 Posts: 3

2007-01-11 8:40 AM jpb0009

Concept 3 Rower vs Swimming

Started by Itsallgood
Views: 2541 Posts: 5

2006-11-13 3:44 PM AusVirgin

Which training concept is better?

Started by MrCjolsen
Views: 1118 Posts: 4

2005-10-09 8:44 PM Steve-

Running Efficiently.....total immersian concept

Started by clightle
Views: 865 Posts: 5

2003-12-02 10:22 AM NY_red_head
RELATED ARTICLES
date : April 14, 2008
author : FitWerx
comments : 1
The bike fitters at Fit Werx talk about all the components of a triathlon bike fit and how it relates to aerodynamics and the individual.