Polarised, pyramidal or threshold: how to distribute intensity
Successful endurance athletes spend most of their time at low intensity and a little time, done well, at high intensity.
What we see
In well-trained endurance athletes, around 75–80 % of sessions are at low intensity (below the first threshold, able to hold a conversation) and the rest at high intensity. The polarised model has little time in the middle zone; the pyramidal model has a bit more threshold work. Both are common in elite athletes.
In a study of trained athletes, 9 weeks of polarised training improved VO2peak and performance more than training focused on threshold, high intensity or high volume.
The most common mistake
Doing the easy days too hard and the hard days too easy. The result is a lot of time in the "grey zone" (tempo/threshold pace), accumulated fatigue and little quality in the sessions that count.
Simple rule: on easy days, truly easy (zones 1–2). On hard days, hit the targets and the recoveries.
How Zenvit uses this: The app works out your intensity distribution over the last 4 weeks (by HR zones) and warns you when there's too much time in the middle zone.
Sources
- Seiler S. What is best practice for training intensity and duration distribution in endurance athletes? International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2010;5(3):276–291.
- Stöggl T, Sperlich B. Polarized training has greater impact on key endurance variables than threshold, high intensity, or high volume training. Frontiers in Physiology. 2014;5:33.
- Stöggl TL, Sperlich B. The training intensity distribution among well-trained and elite endurance athletes. Frontiers in Physiology. 2015;6:295.
General information for amateur athletes; not a substitute for medical advice or a coach.
Plans by sport
Your plan, made for you
Join the early access list and be among the first to try it.