I know there is a lot of exercise physiologists and coaches here. I wonder what they think about this huge scientific study which seems to convincingly favour a training program based on low impact training (LIT) as opposed to a HIT-based program (which of course is more demanding and but which is also less time-consuming) for endurance sports.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2017.01069/full
Likewise, the study reiterates the effectiveness of polarized training. “Our study supports previous findings highlighting the importance of a high training volume, using a polarized training pattern with a large amount of LIT to reach world-class level in XC skiing.”
I want to preface this by saying that my opinion is the Polarized training tends to be beneficial.
For clarification:
This is a retrospective case-study of what one individual athlete did and does not carry the same weight as an interventional study of a representative group of athletes for particular populations.
Likewise, the study reiterates the effectiveness of polarized training. “Our study supports previous findings highlighting the importance of a high training volume, using a polarized training pattern with a large amount of LIT to reach world-class level in XC skiing.”
Yes, nothing like confirmation bias.
(Meta-analyses have demonstrated that elite athletes tend to train in a pyramidal, not polarized, manner.)
Thanks. Would you have an example of a recent study providing for such an empirical evidence (i.e. interventional study of a representative group)?
Thanks. Any recent references?
Review:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26578968
Interventional study:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28824440
(Neither of which, IMO, really address the question of how **you **should train.)
.
This study is describing Marit Bjoergen.
The most successful xc-skier ever. To put it in perspective, Marit walked away from the 2018 olympics with 5 medals, two of them gold.
It is not secret what xc-skiers are doing and what it takes to become top level.
It is not secret what xc-skiers are doing and what it takes to become top level.
Is that Hi-lo (polarized)? Or pyramidal?
It is not secret what xc-skiers are doing and what it takes to become top level.
Pick your parents wisely (twice-over)
Train long and hard/hard and long.
It is not secret what xc-skiers are doing and what it takes to become top level.
Is that Hi-lo (polarized)? Or pyramidal?
If you trust the results of this review:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4621419/figure/F1/
then X-C skiers seem to be about the *only *endurance athletes that consistently train in a polarized manner.
Thus, rather than representing “best practices” as has been ass u me d, what data on elite endurance athletes actually seems to show is that “there is more than one way to skin the training cat.”
It is not secret what xc-skiers are doing and what it takes to become top level.
Is that Hi-lo (polarized)? Or pyramidal?
It will be what you in Norway call polarized. A lot of easy training and intervals twice a week.
Since xc-skiers are not running marathons they do not need to do any L2 running as an example. Lots of L1 on trails will do fine.
And of course they do rollerskiing in off season and strength.
Based on the results from the olympics. they must have done something right.
Based on the results from the olympics. they must have done something right.
…and yet, where are the Norwegian swimmers? Distance runners? Speed skaters? Etc…
It is not secret what xc-skiers are doing and what it takes to become top level.
Pick your parents wisely (twice-over)
Train long and hard/hard and long.
Winner. (not kidding)
Super simple.
The fact that the woman that looks like this has never been busted for steroids is a true God’s miracle.
Based on the results from the olympics. they must have done something right.
…and yet, where are the Norwegian swimmers? Distance runners? Speed skaters? Etc…
Not sure what your question is but based on the results from the olympics Norwegian speed skaters got two gold.
Compared to how many by, say, the Dutch? Or South Korea in short track speed skating?
Look, everyone gets it, you (and Seiler) are proud of your (adopted) countrymens’ and countrywomens’ accomplishments. It is ludicrous, however, to argue that that somehow validates a particular approach to training. Traditions/opportunities/genetics of various populations have a huge impact on whether a country does/does not do well in a particular sport. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the “best practices” polarized approach that you (and Seiler) advocate really provides any particular group of athletes an advantage over other athletes (see examples above). Really, the whole argument you (and he) have staked out is so weak that I am surprised that anyone would be willing to put it out there…
This is a retrospective case-study of what one individual athlete did and does not carry the same weight as an interventional study of a representative group of athletes for particular populations.
Hey, it could be worse… somebody could be touting the performance of a teenager as if it really meant anything other than the fact that they have a lot of talent (and have worked hard to develop it, of course).
Compared to how many by, say, the Dutch? Or South Korea in short track speed skating?
Look, everyone gets it, you (and Seiler) are proud of your (adopted) countrymens’ and countrywomens’ accomplishments. It is ludicrous, however, to argue that that somehow validates a particular approach to training. Traditions/opportunities/genetics of various populations have a huge impact on whether a country does/does not do well in a particular sport. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the “best practices” polarized approach that you (and Seiler) advocate really provides any particular group of athletes an advantage over other athletes (see examples above). Really, the whole argument you (and he) have staked out is so weak that I am surprised that anyone would be willing to put it out there…
You sounds bitter. Did you wake up on the wrong side of the medal count this morning…?
Or are you just trying to sell books…?
I don’t care who won how many medals. I also don’t really care how many copies of TRWPM are sold (if I did, I wouldn’t be so blunt).
What I do care about, though, is logical thought and reasoned arguments, something that I have never seen you offer. Instead, you routinely claim that polarized training is superior, based strictly on Norway’s performance in one sport, while conveniently ignoring the lack of dominance (or even competitiveness) in other endurance sports, as well as the fact that most elite endurance athletes don’t actually train that way.