I’m actually a cyclist looking to set up my base plan for the year. Via another site’s forum I was given information about Polorization Training. I watched the Seiler vid and this seemed much easier to do week to week, even during base. I was also given this link to where ST users debated it. However, at the end of the post, there isn’t anyone saying how it worked or did not work for them.
So did anyone do it over the past year?
Did it work? i.e. did you get better results than if you followed more typical periodization training plans?
Edit: How many hours a week on average did you train with the plan?
My wifes training plan was loosely based around the basic idea. Really almost every bike racer’s training is though, since once you start riding a LOT, a lot of it needs to be easy.
Ride lots, ride really hard 2 or 3 times a week.
Lots being ~15-20 hours in the saddle or hitting 120CTL if you use CTL, easy days targeting zone 2 (~60% of FTPish) hard days in our case being a mix of structured intervals of duration specific to upcoming important events, and hard group rides or races. Most weeks that would mean about 3 days of hard intensity. The other days being as much zone 2 as I thought I could prescribe without divorce.
Worked well for her, she gave birth in june 2013, won the state TT in 2014 with a 56:23 for 40k, 6th in GC at the Joe Martin pro stage race, won a stage of the Cascade Classic pro race, set a new FTP 15 watts higher than her old and got up to world class level of 1 minute watts/kg
I mostly followed a “polarized” plan. Typically 9-11 h/wk, training for Oly. This is consistent with my previous training loads, though the composition changed from significant threshold work to higher intensity intervals and more recovery workouts.
My results were in line with previous training–I improved over previous years but not more or less. I’m not fast (FOMOP), so there’s plenty of room for improvement, and being polarized wasn’t a magical formula. Where I felt it worked well was I didn’t always feel drained–like I had more capacity to do longer easy/endurance workouts, but I didn’t have the time to capitalize on that. Improvement in individual disciplines seemed to scale with time spent, so no surprise there. Still, improved quality of life from all the recovery. If nothing else, I learned how to do that better.
The other thing I noticed was how few quality sessions I ended up doing. Every week, something had to be in maintenance mode (swimming or running usually) because doing >5 hard sessions/wk (i.e. 2 bike, 2 swim, 2 run) left me trashed. 3-4 was typical.
I could definitely see this working great for single sport work, but don’t know that it’s better/worse than traditional periodized training for AG with limited time. I’m also sure a good coach would make a difference in scheduling things better, as I did my best but family & job get top priorities. My n=1. YYMV. -J
I mostly followed a “polarized” plan. Typically 9-11 h/wk, training for Oly. This is consistent with my previous training loads, though the composition changed from significant threshold work to higher intensity intervals and more recovery workouts.
My results were in line with previous training–I improved over previous years but not more or less. I’m not fast (FOMOP), so there’s plenty of room for improvement, and being polarized wasn’t a magical formula. Where I felt it worked well was I didn’t always feel drained–like I had more capacity to do longer easy/endurance workouts, but I didn’t have the time to capitalize on that. Improvement in individual disciplines seemed to scale with time spent, so no surprise there. Still, improved quality of life from all the recovery. If nothing else, I learned how to do that better.
The other thing I noticed was how few quality sessions I ended up doing. Every week, something had to be in maintenance mode (swimming or running usually) because doing >5 hard sessions/wk (i.e. 2 bike, 2 swim, 2 run) left me trashed. 3-4 was typical.
I could definitely see this working great for single sport work, but don’t know that it’s better/worse than traditional periodized training for AG with limited time. I’m also sure a good coach would make a difference in scheduling things better, as I did my best but family & job get top priorities. My n=1. YYMV. -J
how many hours a week were you training?
also, your easy sessions were easy I assume?
As it says up top, 9-11 h/wk typical. Easy was pretty embarrassingly easy.
Desert Dude’s n=1 post is the main modification I’ve made to my training. At 4-6ish weeks out, threshold/race specific effort helps. If it’s mental, physical, or a combo, I don’t know.
I didn’t use it as my Base plan as i learned more about it after that, but early in season moved my training to Polarized in theory and trained less than previous years overall due to focus on 70.3/HalfIM.
N=1, this is roughly yr 8 and my best results ever, so far top in Masters Regionally in pts. Also had my 2 best 70.3 times of 4:37/4:43 where previous best was 4:54 (4 years back).
I also used my last 9 weeks of race prep using MOA (now STT), which seems like Polarized (PT) to me in practice.
My season is done and i have already developed my Base Plan which starts in Oct and outline of 2015 build/race plan for 2015.
My Base Plan at this time has 3x4week Base Period with Zero Hard in it at this time. I plan to use PT once i am done with Base for the Build Phases.
I would consider my plan 2015 plan a mix of TB/Maffatone/PT.
TB for periodization+strength training
Maffatone for Base period+ HR cap+Testing
PT for defining Hard/Easy during Build
I started doing polarized training in the spring - Weds were intense days in all 3 sports, as were either Sat or Sun - once racing started in early June, I raced sprint to olympic (ok, only one olympic) almost every weekend - 13 races, 10 podiums - biggest improvement was in my run, and it was already pretty strong.
Felt great once I started tapering - felt fresh even as the season ended (though did have 9 days in Paris w/o swim, bike mid-Aug so that helped).
Will definitely use again next season but start implementing earlier - hopefully to even greater effect, especially on the bike.
Sat was my last race - kind of glad to be done “training” so that I could do what I wanted - this morning I got to do a hilly 1.5 hour run, which would not be in my PT plan - this aft I’ll ride what I want, how I want - I like the freedom not being on a plan for a while.
I started doing polarized training in the spring - Weds were intense days in all 3 sports, as were either Sat or Sun - once racing started in early June, I raced sprint to olympic (ok, only one olympic) almost every weekend - 13 races, 10 podiums - biggest improvement was in my run, and it was already pretty strong.
Felt great once I started tapering - felt fresh even as the season ended (though did have 9 days in Paris w/o swim, bike mid-Aug so that helped).
Will definitely use again next season but start implementing earlier - hopefully to even greater effect, especially on the bike.
Sat was my last race - kind of glad to be done “training” so that I could do what I wanted - this morning I got to do a hilly 1.5 hour run, which would not be in my PT plan - this aft I’ll ride what I want, how I want - I like the freedom not being on a plan for a while.
if you don’t mind me asking, how slow (in terms of avg speed) were your bike rides when not intense?
I train by feel so have no idea what speed that would be - but I do remember the researcher (I think) saying that cyclists seemed to overestimate their ‘easy’ speed, so I became more conscious of going even a little bit easier on the bike on the easy days.
I train by feel so have no idea what speed that would be - but I do remember the researcher (I think) saying that cyclists seemed to overestimate their ‘easy’ speed, so I became more conscious of going even a little bit easier on the bike on the easy days.
The reason I asked is that past couple sessions I went
About 13-14 mph which was very very easy
And wonder if that’s rihht
.
I train by feel so have no idea what speed that would be - but I do remember the researcher (I think) saying that cyclists seemed to overestimate their ‘easy’ speed, so I became more conscious of going even a little bit easier on the bike on the easy days.
The reason I asked is that past couple sessions I went
About 13-14 mph which was very very easy
And wonder if that’s rihht
What is appropriate for you and someone else are two different things.
I know you *want *to hear what workload your should be at.
But you what you need to hear is that without much more information no one can really say.
Additionally 13mph up a 12% grade is much harder than on the flats.
A best guess (as Jack mentioned above) is approximately 60-65% of threshold wattage.
Rating of perceived exertion between a 1 and 5, depending on your own perception.
I train by feel so have no idea what speed that would be - but I do remember the researcher (I think) saying that cyclists seemed to overestimate their ‘easy’ speed, so I became more conscious of going even a little bit easier on the bike on the easy days.
The reason I asked is that past couple sessions I went
About 13-14 mph which was very very easy
And wonder if that’s rihht
for a rider with normal fitness that seems awfully easy. Does your heart get going enough to get much out of it? If so, great. Pro bike racers can get away with doing some dawdling around because they have such a long season with day after day of long races and can do early season stage races just for training. For the rest of us, riding around real easy isn’t the best use of time most days if the objective is improving at a TT type event like a triathlon bike leg.
i guess it depends on your fitness, but for someone who races in the mid 20 mph range, 13 would not be much different from laying in a hammock. I have no idea about this training method, but you have to do your work on the bike, otherwise it’s just cyclo touring which is good for sightseeing but less so for training.
for that prototypical sort of 23 mph triathlon rider, an endurance day on flat ground might be say 18-20, with intervals up to 26-ish. 13 is recovery between reeeeeealy hard intervals maybe and not much else.
I’m not trying to be a dick, but running and biking are different like that, a runner can go a couple minutes a miel slower than race pace and get a good benefit, slow biking isn’t so hot
I train by feel so have no idea what speed that would be - but I do remember the researcher (I think) saying that cyclists seemed to overestimate their ‘easy’ speed, so I became more conscious of going even a little bit easier on the bike on the easy days.
The reason I asked is that past couple sessions I went
About 13-14 mph which was very very easy
And wonder if that’s rihht
What would you estimate your very, very easy 13-14 mph would be on a 0 - 10 perceived exertion scale?
My easy bike (or swim or run) days were about 4 or 5 out of 10. Intensity days, perceived exertion during repeats would be about 8.5/9.
if you look up to Jackmott’s post, he nails it really well in terms of the intensity and quality. Bear in mind his wife’s performance and training is clearly elite
Intensity felt like 2-3, with HR in zone 1-2
I guess I’ll up it a bit
That seems about right.
Have you watched the video of the polarized training by Seller? He uses HR zones in his presentation, which you may find helpful in determining your easy effort - but if memory serves, he divided HR zone into 3 sections, not the usual 5.
i guess it depends on your fitness, but for someone who races in the mid 20 mph range, 13 would not be much different from laying in a hammock. I have no idea about this training method, but you have to do your work on the bike, otherwise it’s just cyclo touring which is good for sightseeing but less so for training.
for that prototypical sort of 23 mph triathlon rider, an endurance day on flat ground might be say 18-20, with intervals up to 26-ish. 13 is recovery between reeeeeealy hard intervals maybe and not much else.
I’m not trying to be a dick, but running and biking are different like that, a runner can go a couple minutes a miel slower than race pace and get a good benefit, slow biking isn’t so hot
When I first used a power meter I was shocked by how much power I was actually putting out on what I had previously assumed were very easy rides to work, which I tended to use as recovery rides. Even on the slightest gradient my power was creeping up above 55% FTP and drifting into zone 3 above 76% FTP.