Moderators: JeffN, f1jim, carolve, Heather McDougall
Spiral wrote:Have their been any studies comparing 80/20 to 90/10 or 100/0 ?
Skip wrote:Spiral wrote:Have their been any studies comparing 80/20 to 90/10 or 100/0 ?
Most of the people (recreational athletes) train in the a zone that is to much high intensity vs low intensity, like 60/40. The studies that he sites shows that the optimal training improvments happen when these athletes slow down and train 80/20. For someone who is training 100/0, they are not doing enough speed work to optimize their performance and improvement over time (while it is still a very healthy way to train).
For me, it is boring training 100/0 and I look forward to pushing it 20% of the time. I have found it a much more challenging and effective way to improve my endurance and confidence.
But I guess is depends on the distances you are going. If you are running ultra distances, it probably isn't that useful.
vgpedlr wrote:Finished the book. I like it. The differences between 80/20 and polarized training was interesting. Unfortunately on my Kindle, the charts related to the training programs were very hard to read, and I couldn't flip back to the workout menu to see the progressions. In any case, it won't change my training significantly as I feel the Maffetone Method works best for my needs. I will continue with that, building as big a base as I can before adding any intensity. Most likely I'll just let the intensity come to me because I train a lot and race exclusively off road. It's far more difficult to change up intensity when you can't control the trail, though with a HRM you can keep intensity low. I also might slightly adjust my heart rate zones and see if that makes any difference.
Skip wrote:I think that by adding some intensity, that will help to build a bigger base and more speed. Agree?
vgpedlr wrote:Skip wrote:I think that by adding some intensity, that will help to build a bigger base and more speed. Agree?
No.
I define base fitness as Maffetone does, which is low intensity. Adding intensity builds a different kind of fitness. It is valuable, but I think less important than true low end aerobic power. My take from the book is that nearly everybody goes too hard, too often. By clearly defining low intensity, and wearing a heart rate monitor to stay honest, one can reap the benefits. I focus on the 80%, not the 20%.
Skip wrote:vgpedlr wrote:Skip wrote:I think that by adding some intensity, that will help to build a bigger base and more speed. Agree?
No.
I define base fitness as Maffetone does, which is low intensity. Adding intensity builds a different kind of fitness. It is valuable, but I think less important than true low end aerobic power. My take from the book is that nearly everybody goes too hard, too often. By clearly defining low intensity, and wearing a heart rate monitor to stay honest, one can reap the benefits. I focus on the 80%, not the 20%.
Suppose you have just finished or about to finish (perhaps in cool down mode) your Maffetone workout and are about to end for the day. But now, instead of stopping, you add a high intensity burst at the end. This can only add to the benefits of the workout, unless you push yourself so hard that you get inured. Agree?
Arthur Lydiard learned this more than 50 years ago. Too much speed work in your base phase will interrupt your fitness development. Olympic bronze medalist Lorraine Moller, whose training was Lydiard-based, says that in the era of New Zealand track domination, "Going to the track to do speed work during the base phase was considered the height of folly and something only the ignorant would do."
Endurance training (all training at an easy effort, below your lactate threshold) causes two important adaptations within the muscle cells. First, you grow more and larger mitochondria, often called the "powerhouses" of your cells because they provide essential energy for distance running. This increase allows you to run faster and is a primary reason why new runners find their pace gets quicker over the first two to six months of training. This aerobic (with oxygen) energy system has no detrimental side.
Within the mitochondria are key enzymes that help liberate energy from our fuel stores. Endurance training produces more of these aerobic enzymes, the second key adaptation that occurs during base or conditioning training.
In preaching against speed work during endurance training, Lydiard was fond of saying, "Don't pull down the pH in your base phase." Peter Snell, exercise physiologist and Lydiard's most famous runner, explains that the enzymes within the mitochondria operate at an optimal acidity (or pH) level. High-intensity exercise, however, causes significant and repeated high levels of lactic acid (and thus decreased pH) in the muscle cell. Given too much intensity, the environment within the cell becomes overly acidic and the enzymes can become damaged. Snell says that the increased acidity is also harmful to the membranes of the mitochondria, and it takes additional recovery time to allow the membranes to heal.
Skip wrote:I would agree that "to much" speed work in your base phase will interrupt your fitness development. The question is how much is to much? And might a small amount of speed work be beneficial?
Skip wrote:
Suppose you have just finished or about to finish (perhaps in cool down mode) your Maffetone workout and are about to end for the day. But now, instead of stopping, you add a high intensity burst at the end. This can only add to the benefits of the workout, unless you push yourself so hard that you get inured. Agree?
Return to Exercise and Fitness
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests