Training Characteristics of a World Championship 5000-m Finalist and Multiple Continental Record Holder Over the Year Leading to a World Championship Final.

PURPOSE: Optimal training for endurance performance remains a debated topic. In this case study, the training of a world-class middle-/long-distance runner over a year's duration is presented. METHODS: The training is analyzed via 2 methods to define training intensity distribution (TID) (1) by physiological zones and (2) by zones based on race pace. TID was analyzed over the full season, but also over the final 6, 12, and 26 weeks to allow for consideration of periodization/phases of season. The results of both methods are compared. Other training data measured include volume and number of sessions. RESULTS: The average weekly volume for the athlete was 145.8 (24.8) km·wk-1. TID by physiological analysis was polarized for the last 6 weeks of the season but was pyramidal when analyzed over the final 12, 26, and 52 weeks of the season. TID by race-pace analysis was pyramidal across all time points. The athlete finished 12th in the final of the World Championship 5000-m and made the semifinal of the 1500-m. He was ranked in the top 16 in the world for 1500, 5000, and 10,000 m. CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate a potential flaw with recent work suggesting polarized training as the most effective means to improve endurance performance. Here, different analysis methods produced 2 different types of TID. A polarized distribution was only seen when analyzed by physiological approach, and only during the last 6 weeks of a 52-week season. Longer-term prospective studies relating performance and physiological changes are suggested.

Training intensity distribution analysis by race pace vs. physiological approach in world-class middle- and long-distance runners.

This study aimed to analyse the training intensity distribution (TID) of a group of 7 world-class middle- and long-distance runners over 50 weeks using two different approaches to organise TID zones: (1) based on individual specific race pace and; (2) based on physiological parameters. Analysed training data included training volume, intensity and frequency. The average weekly volume for the group was 135.4 ± 29.4 km·week-1. Training volumes for Z1, Z2 and Z3 were 88.5 ± 1.1%, 7.4 ± 0.8% and 4.1 ± 0.7% respectively for race-pace based approach, and 87.2 ± 1.2%, 6.1 ± 0.7% and 6.6 ± 0.9% respectively for the physiological approach. Differences were found between the approaches in Z2 (large effect, ES = 1.20) and Z3 (moderate effect, ES = 0.93). The approach based on race-pace zones produced pyramidal distributions in both middle- and long-distance runners across all phases of the season. The physiological approach produced polarised and pyramidal distributions depending of the phase of the season in the middle-distance runners, and pyramidal type TID across all phases of the season in the long-distance runners. The results of this study demonstrate that the training analysis in a world-class group of runners shows different TID when assessed relative to race pace versus to physiological zones. This highlights a potential deficiency in training analysis and prescription methods which do not make reference to specific performance. An approach which makes reference to both physiological and performance measures may allow for a more consistent and logical analysis.

The Effect of Periodization and Training Intensity Distribution on Middle- and Long-Distance Running Performance: A Systematic Review.

This review aimed to examine the current evidence for 3 primary training intensity distribution types: (1) pyramidal training, (2) polarized training, and (3) threshold training. Where possible, the training intensity zones relative to the goal race pace, rather than physiological or subjective variables, were calculated. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched in May 2017 for original research articles. After analysis of 493 resultant original articles, studies were included if they met the following criteria: (1) Their participants were middle- or long-distance runners; (2) they analyzed training intensity distribution in the form of observational reports, case studies, or interventions; (3) they were published in peer-reviewed journals; and (4) they analyzed training programs with a duration of 4 wk or longer. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, which included 6 observational reports, 3 case studies, 6 interventions, and 1 review. According to the results of this analysis, pyramidal and polarized training are more effective than threshold training, although the latest is used by some of the best marathon runners in the world. Despite this apparent contradictory finding, this review presents evidence for the organization of training into zones based on a percentage of goal race pace, which allows for different periodization types to be compatible. This approach requires further development to assess whether specific percentages above and below race pace are key to inducing optimal changes.