Yes, but the study he performed was just to try and validate why the athletes he studies tended to do longer intervals as opposed to the intermittent shorter intervals. Seiler is basically only a coach to his daughter, and is studying results of athletes who were performing intervals other than 4xY minutes. I’m not really complaining here though just an FYI. Don’t forget one of the most often quoted interval sessions he talks about is a guy doing 6x10’s a significant number of times in his olympic year preparation. Longer intervals tend to have more elapsed time ~ 90% HR and he suggests that is the main driver of the polarized model fitness gains.
1 Like
Who is Seiler?
He is the guy who help identify Polarized training via his research and shared the info around that helped drive the interest in it via many different channels and podcasts.
3 Likes
We’ve officially come full circle
11 Likes
Just looked a Dylan Johnson video about that. Very interesting.
Unfortunately the polarized plans are just available with the webinterface. On iOS its not available.
Are the TR Plans for polarized training good or do you have some better?
- You can use a web page to apply the desired plan to you calendar, and should be able to run the workouts via iOS like any other training plan.
2 Likes
Well I am all in on this.
Have cancelled my coaching and am starting 8 week HV next week.
I will be following the plan as closely as possible - especially the THR and VO2 workouts, however
I am used to doing higher TSS than even the HV plan shows and more hours. Therefore I will be doing a mixture of increasing effort on such rides as Petit (from 60-65% to 70-75%) as well as extending duration of workouts.
My longer term plans include doing longer rides and next week I had planned my first 100 miler of the year. I also planned a half Everest effort (indoors) towards the end of April. I will still ride those but ensure I stay in Z1 as much as possible.
I have read/listened to most things Seiler for the past year and I really think it will suit my cycle training aims.
As far as ATA I only see that as icing on the cake. I call that Xert on steroids.
3 Likes
That depends. Structured training in any form will lead to improvements in fitness. Polarized plans have less intensity per time, so they may be better for athletes who cannot handle or do not want as much intensity.
TrainerRoad’s polarized plans are an experiment to find out the efficacy of polarized plans compared to TrainerRoad’s usual plans. Note that officially polarized plans are only meant to replace base and build plans, but not specialty. If you are interested, just go ahead and try.
1 Like
Something very interesting here… Ive just finished reading the running book and am 90% through the triathlon book and Matt fitzgerald writes decent stuff.
If the vid doesn’t start at the right “mark” its around 16’30"
He basically explains that its a framework thats made to put limiters… I didnt listen to all of it, but it was posted in the 80/20 group i joined and thought id share!
1 Like
@Nate_Pearson, curious whether part of the issue with people saying hte build plans are “too hard” is actually that for some people they are too long.
Like maybe the training density per week is fine, but after 8 weeks build people are hitting a peak and after 4 weeks specialty they are well on their way back down with fatigue instead of raring to go.
I think polarized plans are a great addition–these will be perfect for in-season doing a weekly series every weekend–but maybe another big improvement could be just to (i) let people specify (within boundaries) the duration of build and/or (ii) specify the load/recovery cycle (to be able to move from 3 weeks on to 2 weeks on.
I mean intuitively it makes sense to consider training density in conjunction with duration, right? Becuase for example maybe you could actually complete FIVE interval sessions in a week . . . but only for one week.
2 Likes