I would only argue though, that Seiler never said you should simply do these 4, 8, 16m intervals. They were the result of a seperate study that simply compared them - there was never a suggestion that this is the work you should do. For some reason TR seem to have made 4, 8 & 16m intervals the backbone structure of all Pol plans.
As always, the choice of intervals should be based on what you are trying to achieve. My problem with these TR plans is that they appear to simply be a progression of these types of intervals without any consideration of what people might be trying to achieve through a base-build cycle etc. I’ve looked at quite a few training plans and listened to loads of podcasts etc from coaches that support a Pol approach, and none suggest anything like these!
Sailer said by himself that 4, 8 and 16m workouts provided the same fitness gains but not performance gains… if I remember they did some short TT to evaluate “gains”….
What about repeatability, microrecoveries, fatique resistance and other performance gains?
yeah, i dont think that is an accurate method… Other sports focus on heart rate drift at constant power over an hour to estimate Lactate Threshold (LT), which is a critcal part of following a well constructe polarized plan as well as one of the best methods to track progress. >5% HR drift over an hour = above LT.
Caveat first: with Progressions Levels, everybody has now different workouts in their plans, even if not added to calendar yet.
Differences as I see them (tried twice POL6 HV during last summer, without AT):
Tuesday: VO2max progression looks same: 6x → 12x 2min intervals ranging 120%-124%, with single 3x4min workout thrown in, weekly PL increases around +1
Friday: Threshold progression is based on 8min intervals, with lower PL increases over weeks
Easy days: in middle of week looks same, weekend rides are now longer.
Those are good changes from my perspective. VO2max was comfortable but struggled with Threshold 4x16min at 100% (4th week) and burned at 4x16min at 102%. Can’t comment weekend easy days, I did my own way longer progression anyway.
I think the question is also how much all these details matter for adaptions? Probably not very much. Does the body really react differently depending on how you do the intervals?
Of course, many different intervals are more exciting on the other hand if you do the same prescription over and over you learn more how you body reacts.
However, I do agree that closer to race season it makes more sense to have the efforts closely match the demand of the race. As such, prior to crit season I plan to include more 30/30 style workouts.
I too have listen to various podcasts (Seiler, DJ, et al.) The 80/20 idea is an old one, and I used it for many years when I was racing Marathons and half Marathons(running).
I think Pol training TR style would bore me silly.
On the other hand, if I were to consult DJ for coaching, I’m sure he would find a way to keep it interesting for me.
I found Lazy Mountain extremely hard and the hour went so slowly. Imagine having to do 3 hours of that, plodding round the roads like a touring cyclist, or getting a sore bum on the trainer
First time doing polarized and I was wondering if you are tired is it generally easier to do a longer easier endurance ride (3hr plus) or a harder shorter one (2hr)? What are the pros and cons of each?
Havent done it on the trainer, but outside I find it easier to do a low z2 3hr ride, than say a high z2 2hr ride. Mine are usually on a mtb so I am changing position a lot , pedalling different cadences, and also getting on and off the bike to open gates and stuff.
Doing this on the trainer is a whole 'nother story!
You are pedalling constantly on the trainer with NO breaks. Ouch. So maybe just get it over with and do the 2 hours.
If you’re tired, you might be better to reduce the time ,and do an easy 45 minutes instead.
QFT.
This was one big criticism of mine: the workouts felt extremely repetitive and artificial, as if created in a lab. Some things could be adapted a little (e. g. varying the warm-up). Indoor Z2 rides can be extremely boring and hard on you mentally once they are longer than 2:30 hours.
My understanding is that sticking to some structured plan has much more benefit than a plan that works better if you can stick to it. What use is a sport when you take all the fun out of it.
On the flip side, I found that polarized blocks steel my inner toughness, they made me able to suffer through hard workouts. Afterwards, all sweet spot workouts TR threw at me were easy (I went to PL 9.2, I think). So horses for courses, and PL plans are not a panacea. Nor are they bad. Just know what you want and what you are signing up for.
When we (my wife and I) first got a trainer it was back in the days before the current offerings like TR, Sufferfest, Zwift. Just noodling along was boring and I’d last maybe 20mins. Then you could generate your own workouts in Garmin and follow those - that upped the ante to maybe 30mins, possibly because I didn’t know what I was doing.
When I joined TR that limit jumped pretty quickly to 1hr because there was interest - how long till the progress bar drops off the end of the block? etc., longer workouts were more about getting used to the discomfort of sitting on a static bike for that period.
I’ve done a couple of years of the Sweet Spot plans but I’m now on my second block of Polarised. Yesterday I was served up Walker - https://www.trainerroad.com/app/cycling/workouts/1056140-walker 2hrs at 75% No Thanks!! I headed outside and did the workout on my MTB using HR and RPE. RPE gave me virtually the same TSS, HR estimation has it lower.
I’m lucky in that I live in a rural location, if someone lived in the middle of a big city getting out could well be a lot of hassle.
For polarised to work you need that low intensity volume, once you get beyond a few hours training a week that’s all that you are going to be able to add: doing workouts like Mary Austin every day is going to burn you out pretty quick. Look at the High Volume SS Base - even the long Sweet Spot workouts only have the same TSS as Walker (in the versions offered to me the highest TSS is 128), so once you get to high volumes of training you are pretty much forced into something approaching polarised. Obviously SS is in Z2 of the three zone model so there’s an underlying difference.
That’s why I’ve done so much of my z2 indoors. Gotten pretty used to it though. Walker would drive me nuts though. I prefer the workouts that have a bunch of 15 minute ‘intervals’. I’d rather count those down than be staring at a 4 hour countdown clock.
I did do several 5 hour spinervals workouts way back when though. Maybe I’m weird.
I am going through the 8 week low volume polarised training program for the second time right now, but currently the intensity distribution doesn’t seem polarised to me, I am spending way to much time in zone 2.
Hopefully adaptive training will soon get better at optimising for polarised training.
Besides that I like this training plan, and find it easier to sustain than sweet spot training ( maybe my hard days are not hard enough )
your brand of humor 
