Apologies if this is covered elsewhere. There are a lot of posts on similar topics, but I cannot find this addressed directly.
I am fully onboard with Seiler’s polarised training approach. Mostly because I understand that mitochondria increase is primarily linked to volume, and to manage volume effort should be low so as not to impact said volume due to the requirement for increased rest. On the flip side, this allows you the head room to increase mitochondria function/efficiency and VO2 max with specificity (high end intervals). Managing my training load in this way has led to a lot less fatigue, and ultimately I can get more quality sessions and more volume with less session-impacting fatigue.
However, my work can have a big impact on my training. Sometimes I may be away for a few days abroad and tied up in endless meetings. Whilst I ensure I make the most of the time with runs, what I have tended to do is accept I am going to have a few days with much lower load, and tend to ‘blow out’ the day before I travel. i.e., polarised goes out the window and I will do a long and hard session or race pace set.
Is this a sensible approach, or am I better off sticking to the polarised principles regardless of knowing my volume is going to drop? Has Seiler or anyone else addressed forced periods of rest and how you should train before hand? I know he says that the principles apply to time constrained age-groupers as much as much as pros, but is there any evidence to support this?
Thanks in advance