UT2/Polarization (trying to move this from PB thread)

[G-dub]

Great stuff. At the end of the first article, he mentions what Seillor says about interval length and, again, here is where I get confused, it would seem to me that 4 x 8' intervals would be very lactaty and in the AT / TR range. They are longer than 4 x 2K for most of us and if we use pace at 2K as a proxy for pace at VO2 max, we would need to be doing those right around that pace to be "polar", which doesnt make sense if we can barley hold that pace for one of them.

[hjs]

Great stuff. At the end of the first article, he mentions what Seillor says about interval length and, again, here is where I get confused, it would seem to me that 4 x 8' intervals would be very lactaty and in the AT / TR range. They are longer than 4 x 2K for most of us and if we use pace at 2K as a proxy for pace at VO2 max, we would need to be doing those right around that pace to be "polar", which doesnt make sense if we can barley hold that pace for one of them.

4x8 hard can ofcourse never be done at max 6/7 min. 4x8 at max can be done around 25 min Time trail pace.

And most don,t have the fitness to do 4x8 hard at all.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

Great stuff. At the end of the first article, he mentions what Seillor says about interval length and, again, here is where I get confused, it would seem to me that 4 x 8' intervals would be very lactaty and in the AT / TR range. They are longer than 4 x 2K for most of us and if we use pace at 2K as a proxy for pace at VO2 max, we would need to be doing those right around that pace to be "polar", which doesnt make sense if we can barley hold that pace for one of them.

2k pace is NOT VO2max pace - not by a long shot.

Secondly, 4 x 8' is right in AT range. Thing is, you can make the same workout target a different energy system just by manipulating the pace or even manipulating the # of intervals and the pace. Anyway, something like 4 x 2k or 4 x 8' is going to be best used as an AT workout, though you can turn that into a UT1 workout (though it'd be really short).

[G-dub]

Great stuff. At the end of the first article, he mentions what Seillor says about interval length and, again, here is where I get confused, it would seem to me that 4 x 8' intervals would be very lactaty and in the AT / TR range. They are longer than 4 x 2K for most of us and if we use pace at 2K as a proxy for pace at VO2 max, we would need to be doing those right around that pace to be "polar", which doesnt make sense if we can barley hold that pace for one of them.

2k pace is NOT VO2max pace - not by a long shot.

Secondly, 4 x 8' is right in AT range. Thing is, you can make the same workout target a different energy system just by manipulating the pace or even manipulating the # of intervals and the pace. Anyway, something like 4 x 2k or 4 x 8' is going to be best used as an AT workout, though you can turn that into a UT1 workout (though it'd be really short).

I am saying the same thing you are - the otherwise nice article about polarized training that Henry posted contradicts itself and I would like to unbundle that. If we are supposed to avoid the middle zones, 4 x 8' doesnt do that. But it and other articles talk about the purety of polarized and then say to do intervals at 4-8 minutes each, which is more AT/TR. And then there is this article (well its not a true article but it references having read articles!). This suggests it may be close.

http://scullduggery.blogspot.com/2009/1 ... lator.html

[mdpfirrman]

Great stuff. At the end of the first article, he mentions what Seillor says about interval length and, again, here is where I get confused, it would seem to me that 4 x 8' intervals would be very lactaty and in the AT / TR range. They are longer than 4 x 2K for most of us and if we use pace at 2K as a proxy for pace at VO2 max, we would need to be doing those right around that pace to be "polar", which doesnt make sense if we can barley hold that pace for one of them.

From Henry's second article Glenn:

Lactate threshold occurs at the point where the amount of lactate in the blood reaches it’s highest sustainable level. In simple terms, your lactate threshold is how hard you can ride for a prolonged period without blowing up.

Perhaps that explanation helps. It's still considered "Polarized" in that you're pushing it as hard as can be sustained (for us individually) for the 4 X 8 minute pieces. If you blow up, by definition, then it's not LT. The PP standards for recommended pace help with this a lot. They do push the boundaries but seem pretty accurate.

[G-dub]

Mike, you are reading the book 80/20. I did too. In it, he lays out training plans and they all include AT/TR interval sessions, which to me is not going "fast". Going hard yes. My point is that everyone is trashing AT work and then in the next page prescribing it in their hard sessions.

[hjs]

Mike, you are reading the book 80/20. I did too. In it, he lays out training plans and they all include AT/TR interval sessions, which to me is not going "fast". Going hard yes. My point is that everyone is trashing AT work and then in the next page prescribing it in their hard sessions.

What is fast for you G.?

If you go for fastfiber training, you don,t to go full lactic. But keeping or building theo potential for producing lactate.
And in two k, speed is seldom the limiting factor. You proberly hit race pace in 2/3 seconds. Thats not the weak link.
You should also look at overall workload. If I am not mistaken you do a good bit.
I erg roughly 45/50 k a week, plus 2/3 weightssessions, which are not overly tough. In the summer I cycle, but a few hours max and very relax.

[G-dub]

Mike, you are reading the book 80/20. I did too. In it, he lays out training plans and they all include AT/TR interval sessions, which to me is not going "fast". Going hard yes. My point is that everyone is trashing AT work and then in the next page prescribing it in their hard sessions.

What is fast for you G.?

If you go for fastfiber training, you don,t to go full lactic. But keeping or building theo potential for producing lactate.
And in two k, speed is seldom the limiting factor. You proberly hit race pace in 2/3 seconds. Thats not the weak link.
You should also look at overall workload. If I am not mistaken you do a good bit.
I erg roughly 45/50 k a week, plus 2/3 weightssessions, which are not overly tough. In the summer I cycle, but a few hours max and very relax.

When I read the articles they all say "and then you GO FAST, REAL FAST on the hard days (or maybe its REAL HARD). So when reading that I would assume that we would be going faster than 2K and more like 1K for short hard intervals, combined with the long slow days. I want to be "polarized", but the dexription of hard days confuses me since they sound very much like what we are already doing (4 x 500, 4 x 1K, 4 x 2K, etc. and yes, these are REAL HARD). So maybe the point is more about the easy days?

[mdpfirrman]

I guess I'm reading it different Glenn. They prescribe both. What they term "junk" (at least in my mind) is when you let the UT2 creep into UT1 out of boredom or some sense of accomplishment. The AT work and the anaerobic stuff at pace or higher = 20%.

What you and I (and many others that don't do the long type of rows that Dean does) struggle with is how to work this into a 4 or 5 day a week plan. That answer is hard. I think with you and I, probably best forgetting most of the higher paced stuff unless it's very short and sweet and just working mostly on the aerobic base for the base building season. Then working it in once you build the aerobic base. My resting HR (to pick on me) isn't below 60 (that the formula some use to tell if you need more base building work - if it's below 60 you more than likely don't need to do too much base building as it's already there and you just need to sustain it). For me, the aerobic stuff at this point is probably more beneficial but boring as hell. I can always add in the Fall or late Summer a couple of more harder duration training plans. That stuff builds up much more quickly than the aerobic stuff does. With 4 hours on the rower a week it's very hard to do all the different types of work needed to be improving in all areas 12 months out of the year (like recommended for top performers). With 10 to 12 hours on the rower, not nearly as hard. That's what I (and I think you) grapple with.

For now, my plan is to shorten the fast PP type work (about 40% less than prescribed) and just sit my butt on the rower a lot more at UT2 pace as much as I can stand. For me, I'm working 6 days a week to add volume.

[hjs]

When I read the articles they all say "and then you GO FAST, REAL FAST on the hard days (or maybe its REAL HARD). So when reading that I would assume that we would be going faster than 2K and more like 1K for short hard intervals, combined with the long slow days. I want to be "polarized", but the dexription of hard days confuses me since they sound very much like what we are already doing (4 x 500, 4 x 1K, 4 x 2K, etc. and yes, these are REAL HARD). So maybe the point is more about the easy days?

The point is a bit that most people don,t really know what fast is. Being a bit out of breath is already fast.
I myself had trouble doing hard sessions on the gym, the intensity is so far beyond what you mostly see on the cardio spaces that you get strange looks. For those people going real fast is not what they know.

And to give an example, I mostly do low rate stuff and speedsessions are based around 2k pace, but still I can roughly pull around 500 m pb pace atm. Without actually doing real fast work. So I am not really affraid for loosing my top speed. Its not 100%, but it stays pretty ok. Just by doing weights and low rate rowing.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

I'll tell you the paces I do my workouts, if that helps at all.

2k PR from this past weekend: 1:34.4
UT2 SS pace: 1:58.5-1:59.5 depending on the length of the workout
UT1 SS pace: ~1:55-1:56
AT pace: ~ 1:47.0-1:47.5
VO2max pace: ~1:40-1:41 depending on the workout and the rest interval
Transport/anaerbic pace: ~1:35-1:38 again depending on the length of interval, number of intervals, and rest

As has been mentioned, a proper AT workout shouldn't be anywhere near all out, nor should it hurt too badly - it's not quite what I would call easy, but it's also not HARD. It's right around the pace you can hold for 50-60 minutes all out.
Also as mentioned 2k pace is NOT VO2max pace. A 2k is way beyond VO2max pace, as can be evidenced by the fact that it has a significant anaerobic/alactic component.

The mistake a LOT of people make is that they go all-out for all workouts, whether it's supposed to be an AT or VO2max or any other workout. They take everything as an all-out effort. This is not a good way to train because you're not training in the proper zone.

[G-dub]

Well dang boys, I knew that already! I see now where I might have gotten hung up and that is that everything above UT2 ish is considered "hard". So its not that we can't work the different energy systems (I was also hung up on the new term for me: alactic), but that we shouldn't do too much of it during the week, or try to do all of them during the week if it pushes us to too high a percentage of total work. And I think the alactic thing is coming up because it fits into "Base Building" period when an even higher percentage of work is being done at lower intensity. Please just say I got it (even if I don't) and I can shut up and get back to work.

[hjs]

Well dang boys, I knew that already! I see now where I might have gotten hung up and that is that everything above UT2 ish is considered "hard". So its not that we can't work the different energy systems (I was also hung up on the new term for me: alactic), but that we shouldn't do too much of it during the week, or try to do all of them during the week if it pushes us to too high a percentage of total work. And I think the alactic thing is coming up because it fits into "Base Building" period when an even higher percentage of work is being done at lower intensity. Please just say I got it (even if I don't) and I can shut up and get back to work.

Alactic is the shortest energysystem we have. It uses the fastmuscle fibers, but does not yet produces lactic acid. It recovers very quickly, roughly 95% in 60 seconds. Teamsports uses it a lot. Lots of fast but short bursts, with short rest inbetween. Think soccer, hockey, basketball etc..

[Cyclingman1]

I can see the confusion in this 80/20 stuff. In the first place, 20% of volume is a lot for so-called fast work. I tend to be a high-pace trainer, but I'm positive that my fast work (AN/TR) does not come close to 20%. But if one is talking about AT for fast work, it really seems to me that falls into the dreaded black zone as some have called it. 80/20 is supposed to avoid that. Course, that is not my view. I spend a lot of time doing AT, but remember all zones have ranges. I seldom do max AT.

What is the AT range. AT is all aerobic. It pushes anaerobic at the high end. The ISS program does a pretty good job of showing where AT zone lies. For a 6:20 2Ker, they call for 1:42-1:47 for AT. That seems about right to me. 1:47 should not be too tough, but 1:42 will be noticed more so.

[G-dub]

Yep, I use the IP ranges too. They are very convenient since they also range HR, which can also be useful. One thing that I am learning about myself is how much my mtn biking takes out of me when it is plugged into a decent rowing training schedule. I wanted to think of it as a nice break day, but the reality is that it usually takes a couple of days to recover since the climbs can be long and steep and the downhill is usually no picnic either - you still use a decent amount of energy. So I need to take that into account as being part of the "hard" work even though it isn't specific training.