It’s interesting watching this discussion and how it keeps jumping back and forth. 2 months ago the 30/15’s were king. Now it’s longer vo2 intervals and 30/15’s are viewed as trash. I’ll continue to enjoy this thread with my 
.
3 Likes
Us amateurs love to latch on to anything an informed individual says, right, wrong or otherwise. For what it’s worth, I’ve had my best season thus far incorporating both 30/15 (and 30/30’s) along with old-school 5-min intervals to my vO2 workout repertoire.
I think Kolie of @empiricalcycling makes a really strong case though for the physiological stimulus we’re after for driving vO2max and why the HIIT style 30/15’s might not be optimal. I’m definitely going to consider all of the above. I do think 30/15’s have a definite place in my workout library as primarily a CX racer, but I’m always open to learning and adopting new ways of thinking/training.
2 Likes
I agree with you, and myself 
I give my athletes intermittent work all the time, just not to improve vo2max. I like to assign those intervals more based on motor unit recruitment, buffering, neural, contractile, and specific race needs.
2 Likes
I hear ya. I’m actually liking the turn the discussion has taken since I like and seem to perform the longer hard start intervals better. And the difference between the two that @empiricalcycling has mentioned makes a lot of sense in my mind and will be useful in the future. Prior to this discussion I never heard anyone actually discuss what the differences are, just which they thought was better.
2 Likes
As I just mentioned in that thread about the podcast in particular, I think that it’s important to look under the hood of vo2max improvements. It’s what all the last few podcasts have been about. If anyone’s happy with their improvements doing 30/15s, or whatever else, that’s alright.
But the popularity of the 2020 Ronnestad study always made me cringe knowing it was on a shaky foundation, and I felt bad that most folks didn’t seem to understand that, or have better information when making training decisions. It showed those 30/15s are better compared to those 5min intervals at that time of year for those athletes, but not all continuous intervals, which is how the discussion in the study seemed to frame it, and definitely how it’s usually been interpreted in discussion here in the trenches.
3 Likes
Actually 40/20 is where it’s at. 30/15…not so much. 
6 Likes
I like to assign [intermittent] intervals more based on motor unit recruitment…
As an n=1, I find the high RMP 30/15 et al workouts really feel like my entire leg-glute-hip chain is delivering/developing “connective” power, much more so than slogging out a quad-busting 5min interval.
Apart from that, I do think Coach Chad’s use of intermittent intervals as an entry/build-up to longer work is reasonable. So they might not be the most effect workout, but probably very effective in getting people to actually do VO2max work.
I’m yet to listen
I remember doing a “WTF” when I read it after seeing the power at which the 5-minute intervals were performed at. So thanks for illuminating that, but mostly thanks for providing a great deal of insight and context around the preload and how cadence can achieve a greater amount. To me that’s the takeaway.
Feel free to answer or not (you’ve already been insanely generous with your information), given that %HRmax and absolute power are not super useful metrics when evaluating whether or not we’re truly working at vO2max, is breathing or respiration rate the best indicator? Also, what happens to our vO2max interval(s) if we go too hard and end up anaerobic?
For the first question, effort and breathing are my go-to for figuring out if you’re doing it right. For the latter, we’ll put that in the listener Qs episode next since I’m sure a lot of folks are wondering that. It dovetails nicely with another question we got.
1 Like
For those of you that have done a Polarized block, how long was it and what type of training did you move to next? Back to Sweet Spot? Something else?
1 Like
Only just started a polarized approach and really enjoying the workout structure. For me after I finish my 12 week block of mostly Z1 or Z3 (3 Zone Model) I plan to do 4 weeks of SSB before jumping back into another polarized block with different Vo2 workout progressions. Similar to your thinking I am unsure where to go and what to do next? Could you just keep retesting and repeat the cycle?
My 2 hard workouts a week looked like this;
Block 1 (3 weeks) = 4x6mins @106% + 2x30/15s (13reps) @130%
Block 2 (3 weeks) = 4x7mins @106% + 3x30/15s (13reps) @130%
Block 3 (3 weeks) = 4x8mins @106% + 4x30/15s (13reps) @130%
1 Like
Me again. I went into SS. I was going to do a Threshold block but after the dismal Ramp rest I thought I’d better beef up mah musc’lar endurance first. Seems that was a premmie decision as I just crushed a TTE test.
My answer: Threshold training.
Suggestion: train what you would have been racing. 
1 Like
For us here racing seems to return again, however, without racing I would have continued building my engine. Racing brings you forward - there is no way to replicate this in training - but we can use the current situation to lift us to a new performance level.
Changing the stimulus keeps training varied and may be beneficial from a physiological standpoint. A tempo/SST block seems the obvious choice following a pol block. Pure endurance blocks (which really overload the system), tempo/SST blocks, threshold blocks, pol blocks, pure HIT blocks. Assemble your own playlist from this. Experiment. Make use of the current situation and learn about your n=1.
2 Likes
Sorry for not reading the whole thread.
Was this study already discussed here?
I see a major gaff right at the beginning of the article. Polarized and 80/20 are different - similar but different. Seiler doesn’t say that athletes spent 20% of their time at high intensity. It’s 20% of sessions. 80/20 comes from Alex Hutchinson’s running book. Under 80/20 you count sweet spot in the 20% whereas Seiler would suggest staying out of the middle zone.
5 Likes
So what happens if someone “skips” high intensity training (over FTP, z5/z6 what ever) because there is no racing? What happens if i just continue “building the engine”. Should i worry about my anaerobic capacity? It’s kinda weird situation because this year i am not going to race and races have always been part of my training (because of those short efforts; sprinting, full gas 1-2min etc.) and now i’m not doing it. Should i still do it or wait till next year…
For me “engine” comprises every physiological zone. Building the engine touches all of them, not necessarily at the same time. I just don’t believe in avoiding Certain zones. Same with food, a balanced diet is my favourite, no matter what some podcast guru says eloquently
4 Likes
Thanks for sharing this @DarthShivious I have modelled some of my sessions off of these progressions.
I have myself penciled in for a Polarized training block in about 8 weeks time. The block will go for about 6 weeks (including a rest week) and that should put me at a bit of a peak leading into Summer holidays down the coast where I won’t be racing, but I will be riding with some fast bunches out on the road for a few weeks.
I’ve used workout creator to come up with a few sessions like these below:
I have ran the numbers on my 6 x sessions for the weeks and I should be around the 85% Z1, 5% Z2 and 10% Z3 mark for the weeks to make it more of a Polarized approach. The preceding four week block (including a rest week) is a Sweet Spot block so I am looking forward to mixing the training up and building for the coastal rides.
3 Likes
What’s the 118 / 105 etc in the workouts? They are also 2:00:00 long - which makes me thinks is going to blend into a workout with two priorities - vo2 and endurance