{"id":581369,"date":"2025-11-19T23:29:21","date_gmt":"2025-11-19T23:29:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/581369\/"},"modified":"2025-11-19T23:29:21","modified_gmt":"2025-11-19T23:29:21","slug":"are-we-getting-it-wrong-on-polarised-training","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/581369\/","title":{"rendered":"Are we getting it wrong on polarised training?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The mantra of polarised training<\/a> is \u2018go easy or go hard \u2013 never in between\u2019. But what if that\u2019s all wrong? Rob Kemp meets the coach who says the middle is where the magic happens<\/p>\n

For more than two decades, polarised training has dominated endurance sports. The model \u2013 popularised by physiologist Stephen Seiler \u2013 demands that athletes spend about 80% of their training at low intensity, and 20% at very high intensity. Anything in the middle, the theory goes, is no man\u2019s land: too hard to recover from, too easy to stimulate real adaptations.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a simple, compelling message \u2013 especially in an era obsessed with data purity and perfect zone distribution. But what if everything we thought we knew about how to divvy up our effort across the week was wrong?<\/p>\n

Best picks for you<\/p>\n

\n

\"CYW531.fit_feature.tim_russon_172\"\n<\/p>\n

Tempo training is the key to real-world endurance<\/p>\n

(Image credit: Unknown)<\/p>\n

Steve Neal, a Canadian coach with 37 years in endurance sport, doesn\u2019t believe in a single \u201cone-size-fits-all\u201d model. Instead, he adapts training to the season and the athlete\u2019s specific needs \u2013 sometimes pyramidal, sometimes polarised. The key, Neal says, is selecting the right method to move fitness in the desired direction.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

While pyramidal training often emphasises tempo and so-called \u201cmiddle\u201d intensities, Neal doesn\u2019t view this mid-level work zone as wasted effort. Used correctly, it can be the engine room of real-world performance.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cWHEN I LOOK AT RIDERS\u2019 DATA, WHAT I OFTEN SEE IS PYRAMIDAL TRAINING I OFTEN SEE NOT POLARISED\u201d<\/p>\n

Steve Neal, Canadian coach<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u201cI\u2019ve been doing this for a long time, and whenever I look at riders\u2019 data \u2013 whether it\u2019s in TrainingPeaks, INSCYD, or Xert \u2013 what I often see is pyramidal training, not polarised,\u201d Neal says. \u201cPeople talk about 80\/20, but in reality, when you analyse it properly with power data, my athletes are often at more like 95\/5. Even when they\u2019re racing stage races, doing two-and-a-half to three hours a day for a week, they very rarely break 90\/10.\u201d<\/p>\n

If Neal is right, the implications are huge. Most of us might be telling ourselves we\u2019re doing polarised training while actually implementing a structure with a broader base, heftier middle and much sharper tip \u2013 better described as pyramidal. Even at pro level, the roots of the polarised model may be shakier than most realise.<\/p>\n

The latest race content, interviews, features, reviews and expert buying guides, direct to your inbox!<\/p>\n

\n

\"img_46-1.jpg\"\n<\/p>\n

(Image credit: Photos ANDY JONES & ANDREW SYDENHAM)<\/p>\n

Neal\u2019s approach blends old-school coaching wisdom with new-school ideas. His mentor Juerg Feldmann, a Swiss speed skater who later coached Canadian mountain bike world champions and Olympians, taught him to combine rigorous fundamentals with innovative methods. \u201cSome of the methods I learned from Juerg years ago are only just being discussed widely today. For example, respiration [breath<\/a>] training \u2013 he was using it over 30 years ago.\u201d<\/p>\n

Neal has built on these innovative foundations. Unlike many modern coaches, he doesn\u2019t take training software outputs at face value. \u201cI think software does a great job of the higher-intensity training zones,<\/a> but I still prefer to use lactate testing to dial in the training below threshold.\u201d<\/p>\n

At the heart of Neal\u2019s philosophy \u2013 and his success in raising the performance of elite riders across varied disciplines \u2013 is pyramidal training. He has found that this approach especially suits athletes aged over 40, who make up 95% of his coaching clients.<\/p>\n

At its core, pyramidal training means plenty of easy endurance<\/a> work, a solid dose of tempo or \u201cmiddle\u201d intensity, and just a small amount of hard effort at threshold or VO2max. Picture a pyramid: a wide aerobic base that narrows as intensity rises, with that middle zone getting real attention.<\/p>\n

Unlike more strictly polarised models, pyramidal training doesn\u2019t avoid the \u201cgrey zone\u201d \u2013 it makes smart use of it.<\/p>\n

Neal\u2019s cyclists use pyramidal training to build aerobic durability and fatigue resistance, improving their ability to ride at or near race pace for extended periods. \u201cThe key,\u201d Neal says, \u201cis looking at the actual intensities that will drive performance. Many riders and coaches neglect to consider this, and instead train in zones that look right on paper but don\u2019t match what racing actually demands.\u201d He points out that in stage races and Gran Fondos, riders often spend hours at tempo, which for Neal sits within Zone 3.<\/p>\n

\n

\"img_49-1.jpg\"\n<\/p>\n

(Image credit: Unknown)<\/p>\n

He defines his zones by heart rate (see box), refined with lactate, metabolic, or muscle oxygen testing where possible. When he prescribes pyramidal training, the focus is on Zone 2a\/2b endurance and Zone 3 tempo, with just enough high intensity to maintain race readiness. This differs sharply from polarised training, which avoids tempo almost entirely. \u201cOne of the biggest misconceptions is that Zones 2 and 3 are fundamentally different,\u201d Neal explains. \u201cThey\u2019re not \u2013 it depends on the person.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why I measure LT1, LT2, and a point in between that I call the \u2018balance point\u2019.\u201d That balance point, he says, can shift dramatically even when the thresholds themselves barely move. \u201cSometimes I only move an athlete\u2019s LT1 or LT2 by five watts across a whole season, but that balance point can shift by 30 or 40 watts \u2013 and that\u2019s what makes people faster.\u201d In other words, the athlete\u2019s usable range of performance expands, and they are able to ride at closer to threshold (LT2) for longer periods of time, even if the threshold itself doesn\u2019t move.<\/p>\n

Have we been getting it all wrong?<\/p>\n

For Neal, the entire polarised model rests on a methodological error. \u201cPolarised training was studied at the elite level in rowing, running and cycling \u2013 but only using heart rate,\u201d he says. \u201cThe problem is, heart rate is usually a zone lower than power.\u201d He alludes to the fact that heart rate doesn\u2019t always match how hard the legs are pushing: it lags behind changes in effort, and drifts with fatigue or heat.<\/p>\n

\u201cSo those studies probably just showed what we now call pyramidal training. That\u2019s why I think comparing pyramidal and polarised is misleading \u2013 because most of what we think we know about polarised is wrong. What I really notice in my athletes isn\u2019t a lack of low-intensity work, but that the supposed 15\u201320% above threshold just isn\u2019t there.\u201d That\u2019s a bold claim, but Neal has evidence on his side. Analyse a year of training from almost any serious rider, he says, and you\u2019ll find pyramidal, not polarised, distributions.<\/p>\n

\u201cEven elite athletes people assume are polarised are actually pyramidal if you track them properly.\u201d<\/p>\n

So what does pyramidal training actually achieve? Neal points to three key adaptations. First, aerobic development: by training near the balance point, where fat and carbohydrate contribute in roughly equal measure, riders can push their aerobic system to become more efficient. Second, durability:<\/p>\n

\u201cIf I can get someone\u2019s tempo power closer to 75% of their VO2max power, they will race better,\u201d Neal says. \u201cEven if their VO2max number drops slightly, their ability to sustain power over time improves dramatically.\u201d Finally, metabolic efficiency: riding long at tempo teaches the body to manage fuel better, delaying fatigue.<\/p>\n

TRAINING ZONES<\/p>\n

As defined by Steve Neal<\/p>\n