Do you recall the strong results with polarized training in the study by Stöggl and Sperlich (1)?
Allow me to recap.
The well-trained endurance athletes (and cyclists) in question experienced an 8.1% improvement in threshold power during the 9 week experiment.
What were to happen if you combined the above approach with the effective workout formats from the 30/15 study of Rønnestad et al (2) and the long interval approach described by Seiler and colleagues (3)?
My anecdotal experience suggests the results are pretty interesting. If you are keen on finding out for yourself, you may find this free training program useful.
What is the deal with this training program?
The training program consists of 9 weeks built on the above models and workouts.
That is, I’ve actually made 3 different versions of it. So that they cater for training volumes of 250, 400 and 600 hours per year.
Within the program are:
- daily workout instructions
- heart rate and FTP recommendations
- conceptual explanations
- recommendations for individual adjustments
The program also comes with a brief series of additional email instructions to facilitate a useful learning experience throughout the 9 weeks.
I would not go as far as calling this program the best thing in life.
But it is free, reasonably well-founded as well as tried and tested.
Hoping you will find it useful!
- Stöggl T and Sperlich B. Polarized training has greater impact on key endurance variables that threshold, high intensity, or high volume training. Frontiers in Physiology, 2014;5:33
- Rønnestad BR et al. Short intervals induce superior training adaptations compared with long intervals in cyclists – An effort-matched approach. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 2015;25:143-151
- Seiler S et al. Adaptations to aerobic interval training: interactive effects of exercise intensity and total work duration. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 2013;23:74-83