Meh, you wouldn’t know as you seem to have registered for this thread. Though perhaps you want to use the search function and type in polarized. It’s big since years.
Perhaps you can even participate in the study on POL TR was supporting at the end of last year/beginning of this year.
And let’s not forget that the DJ video and the TrainerRoad podcast (uploaded today) reference 8 of the same studies.
But yeah, the DJ video had nothing to do with it.
Try finding more studies on the matter. 
Another fun fact, TR even had recorded a podcast with 80/20 Matt Fitzgerald in 2017(!). 
ok.
Both Stöggl and Sperrlich are referenced on the podcast.
When?
Might as well bother reading the sources. Hint, 11.
So changing the goalposts then? Hint: you wrote “try finding more studies on the matter”, not “try finding more authors on the matter”.
You brought up studies by the same scientists on the same matter from the same chair in the same timeframe which overlap by 60-70%.
Also, the study you referenced list 5(?) of the studies and researchers TR has referenced.
Superb!
They are different studies and that is what is asked for. Are you going to argue over what the definition of a separate study is now?
Read both studies and report back. 
Actually, please don’t bother. Not much to get out of this.
No I think I will, because with every response you change your goalposts.
The 2014 study is a 9 week trial of 18 athletes. The 2015 study is a meta-analysis of the wider topic.
The authors are the same but it is a different study. As an analogy, Oliver Twist and a Tale of Two Cities are not the same story because they were both written by Charles Dickens.
Like I said, read the studies:
Since nearly all studies dealing with TID were based on retrospective analysis, we recently employed a randomized controlled design to investigate which TID (HVLIT vs. THR vs. HIT vs. polarized) provided the greatest response on key components of endurance performance among well-trained athletes (Stöggl and Sperlich, 2014). We concluded that the polarized TID resulted in the greatest improvements in the majority of key endurance performance variables assessed, and THR or HVLIT did not lead to further improvements in performance. However, as numerous retrospective reports have shown conflicting results, the question regarding which TID represents the “best-practice” model for inducing performance gains—while avoiding overtraining—remains open to debate. Therefore, the aims of the present review were to: (1) summarize the main responses of different retrospective and prospective studies exploring TID; (2) provide a systematic overview of TIDs during preparation, pre-competition, and competition phases in different endurance disciplines and performance levels; (3) address whether one TID has demonstrated enhanced efficacy over another; and (4) highlight research gaps in an effort to direct future scientific studies.
No goalposts were changed and your analogy doesn’t check out. The LOTR trilogy would be a better fit.
So the fact they commented on a previous study they had undertaken in a meta-analysis of the wider topic makes this the same study?
Right. Is Return of the King the same story as the Fellowship of the Ring?
They follow their own study up because their results were not without doubt. In simpler words, they didn’t finish the job in the first run and hence went back.
LOTR is a better analogy because it’s a series of movies that tells one story from beginning to end. Just like the two studies do.
No, that’s not it. They ran a trial in the 2014 study then conducted a meta-analysis in the 2015 study. Two different things.
Why don’t you simply read their explanation? They specifically describe why they followed the 2014 study up in 2015. Literally in the next sentence they explain what they did.
Yeah you’re correct actually. It’s actually exactly the same study. Sorry.
Oh boy, I am out. In case you find actual new research on POL let us know.