Polarized training
 

Anybody still using polarized?

Very few people ever use polarized to begin with.

Hmmm. Seemed like the benefits were good, and the process not too intricate. Record keeping up to the individual, of course. It seemed like a lot of folks deep-dived on what the intense phases needed to look like. Why did few embrace it?

I had a go at it. Don't remember exactly when that was, maybe at 68 y.o? Quickly saw that 80/20 wasn't possible for me, not nearly enough recovery. The other thing was that it just wasn't fun. Too regimented. I'm not elite, not getting paid, no podiums in my future.

I just came back from a 10-day backpack with my wife, I had 28 hrs. of zone 1 over 10 days. I feel pretty good. We'll take the tandem on a group ride this coming Sunday, see what we've got. So that's sort of the spirit, just not the numbers.

Because it's not practical and not specific.

Polarised is the only plan I know that has coherent science behind it. But I do quasi-palarized: 4x8’s twice during the week plus lsd and maximum overload weight training. Set it up to do 80/20 and I’m probably close but don’t really track it. Tremendous impact on my cycling.

Periodization has a lot of coherent science behind it.

What does 80/20 mean to you? How do you actually apply it to your training?

Because unless you do over ten workouts a week, the two workouts you're doing plus the weight training is definitely not polarized training, quasi, semi, or anything related.

Hence my comment that it's not practical nor specific.

Maybe I'm too ignorant, but I thought all I need to do (and have done a few times) is to decide how much time my indoor pedaling today is going to take, pedal in the lower zone until I've done 40%, do 20% ramping it up into the upper zone (this threshold value is a guesstimate, but I have no problem just doing RPE), then dialing it back at 60% time and finishing the ride at 100%. Pedal at a walking pace for a few minutes more to let my heart rate ramp down to around 80, and done.

And I think I understand that polarization and periodization are not the same thing, and that polarization does not imply periodization. I understand there is a lot of science behind periodization, and I respect that. I found it too much as well several years ago when I tried to take it on.

No?

Ok, I will take your word that it is not specific enough for what you need to accomplish, but I am not training for a specific goal. Rather I'm workng to in general iprove my fitness to where I am comfortable in a leisurely 45 miles on level ground, in April, with perhaps some light midwestern hills. Right now my goal is to work up to where I can break in my butt after a long cycling layoff, and be capable to start some outdoor hill training in April if not before. My intuition about this is that I should start by just pedaling, and I think a polarized "just pedaling" will give me a more effective workout than 30 minutes of just pedaling at 50 or 60 watts. I think my interpretation of 80/20 is practical for me, and is consistent with the goals as I shared in my previous post, and for these goals I think it is adequately specific.

Whatever works. But what you're doing is essentially just making something up as you go along so you're not doing the same thing the whole time. You could call it a fartlek-style workout if you wanted, but it has nothing to do with any type of actual training regiment; polarized or periodized.

And to be honest, it really doesn't matter a bit. Do what you enjoy. Enjoy the process, enjoy the resulting fitness.

You're correct, it isn't necessary to train within any particular strategy. As it is I want to get up to four hours a week, and besides some rides I'd like to do next year, I'm not very specific on goals.

In my case the labels "polarized" and "periodized" don't directly apply.

What you have described here is not polarized training.