Im confused. With regard to middle distance racing. There was such a push from 70's on and seemingly still (Ingebrigtsens) with regard to threshold training. Bob Larsen was a big threshold guy and no doubt got good results. However, my understanding is... the recent (last 20 years ish) scientific literature (running, rowing, XC ski...) strongly suggests that polarizing your training around threshold is superior (surprising, but clear)? Also the subject of the 80/20 training concept based on Matt Fitzgeralds observation of Kenyan elites, and also the current published literature on Polarized training. In other words, very little actual threshold, more Zones lower than threshold...say <75%, and workouts on the other side of threshold (VO2max, 90/95% efforts). Or in other words workouts less than 75-80% and workouts above 90. Both of which are not threshold runs. Isnt that the new understanding supported by evidence? Not saying no threshold runs but way less than we thought? It feels like the best MD runners are still doing a heck of a lot of threshold to me. Why haven't we moved on, or have we at HS and college level?
I guess what im saying is why do I still read so much about threshold running from experts despite the evidence that is not as effective as polarized training?