Is "Periodization" A Myth?

What you are thinking of as "periodization" is linear periodization. Linear periodization is only one type of periodization.

I would actually like to see more use of undulating periodization used in distance running. It would be difficult though as you have weeks on weeks where you are racing.

Here is how undulating periodization would work using a college XC runner:

Week 1: high mileage, hard aerobic runs, long runs, hard runs slower than tempo, easy runs

Week 2: strength based and tempo, hills, tempo runs as workouts

Week 3: race pace work, intervals, mile repeats, 800s etc

Week 4: race simulation, race pace work

So in theory you would keep this up all year, but the problem is we have "seasons" so you will have stretches of peak weeks. One idea then is so use this undulating periodization from June to October then the last 4 weeks you would just do the race sim weeks since that's when you are running key races

Fair enough.

I think you're suggesting something very similar to what I was. The difference being you're looking at hitting the major systems (aerobic mileage, tempo, hill, intervals, RP) every 4-week cycle, where I as I suggested hitting on a little bit of everything EACH week (7 day cycle).

Either way, the popular idea of "base phase, then intervals, then "speed," then taper" still seems like total BS to me.

The way I look at it, your body doesn't know you're preparing for a race, it just knows what stimulus you're giving it. So when you've ceased aerobic/strength work for a month or two in exchange for race pace intervals, all you're body knows is it hasn't had to adapt to hard-aerobic stimulus for awhile (you get less fit). It's not as if you're body can do a few track workouts and know that it's "race time" or "peak time." So you're better off just focusing on the aerobic system all the time, that's how you're body gets "fit."

And I should've proof-read my last post, I'm ashamed of my misuse of "your" and "you're".....ooops

Trust me periodization works. I like beating the coaches that don’t use it. Of course you need to know how to apply it correctly.

Lydiard's approach was extreme.

As the OP said, it's probably more effective to stay in touch with all paces throughout the training cycle, just gradually shift the emphasis of the workouts from aerobic to anaerobic, and don't do much of a taper.

My approach to periodization is to try to extend to distance AND slightly increase the pace of intervals as the training cycle progresses. For example, I will do 15x400 at date 5k pace in week three, 10x600 in week six, 8x800 in week nine, and 6x1k in week 12. My total mileage is constant. I have other workouts like 300s at 3k progressing to 600s, 1ks at 10k progressing to miles, and fartleks progressing from 15x1on/1off to 6x4on/2off. Fartleks are run as over/under threshold. For track sessions, the volume of work stays the same throughout (4800m at 3k, 6000m at 5k, 8000m at 10k).

As a 1,500m-5k runner, throughout the training block, I'm touching on 6-8s hill and flat sprints (even these are periodized as 4 weeks of hills, 4 weeks of downhill accels, 4 weeks of flying 40s, and a 200m and 400m time trial), 15s strides at 400m-3k pace, 200s at 800-3k pace, the aforementioned VO2 max work, threshold/sub-threshold sessions, and easy mileage/long runs. At 90mpw I don't plan on much of a taper.

I disagree based on a couple of reasons.

First, you never really abandon aerobic work during a training cycle; you are always going to have plenty of easy distance.

Second, and more importantly, there is really good evidence out there that you can increase adaptation in a particular area (I'm a Daniels guy, so I will go with vo2max/lactate threshold/running economy as the areas for improvement) by emphasizing that area for 6 weeks or so of effort in that area. But those gains don't just go away when you shift your focus to a new area.

The reason those guys don't go away are at least twofold:

First, most forms of hard running have both a lactate threshold and a vo2max impact, just in different proportions. So while a vo2max workout of say 4 x 1 mile with 3:30 rest may not be the ideal way to train lactate threshold, there is some impact, and when you have already trained lactate threshold, that impact is enough to maintain the bulk of the adaptation that you've worked for.

On top of that, you don't really need to abandon one kind of workout just because you are emphasizing workouts relating to a different limiting factor. In other words, just because I have moved into the vo2max phase of my training cycle doesn't mean I ignore threshold work or running economy work altogether. I will still do tempo workouts almost every week, and will also do a fair number of strides or maybe start and finish my tempo sessions with short sets of 200s.

So I disagree with you because I don't think your take on periodization reflects the reality of what most people are doing as part of a periodized training cycle.

WTF?

This lines up closely with my line of thinking. You’re not really periodizing, you’re slowly building up all training paces all the time. Fartleks get progressively harder, intervals, LT, etc. The point is nothing is ever being neglected, or CEASE TO BE ACTIVELY WORKED ON, which I think happens a lot when coaches “periodize.”

Nonlinear periodization works for other sports. There's no reason it wouldn't work for running. It just requires you to think outside the box.

Random example:

80 mi week, long run focus

70mi week, tempo/long interval focus

60mi week, interval focus

50mi week, race focus

90 mi week, long run focus

80mi week, tempo/long interval focus

70mi week, interval focus

50mi week, race focus

100mi week, long run focus

90mi week, tempo/long interval focus

80mi week, interval focus

50mi week, race focus

110mi week, long run focus

100mi week, tempo/long interval focus

90mi week, interval focus

50mi week, race focus

120 mi week, long run focus

110mi week, tempo/long interval focus

100mi week, interval focus

50mi week, race focus

100 mi week, long run focus

90mi week, tempo/long interval focus

80mi week, interval focus

50mi week, race focus

50mi week, race focus

50mi week, race focus

Basically a different spin on the old year round 5 pace training theory.

Alan

Periodization has become just a broad term describing a general structure for training based on the principals of specific adaption towards a specific peak. I can't think of any successful coach that does not use some form of periodization in planning out the season. Lydiard wasn't the only one fiddling with it back in the late 40's (though he certainly brought it to running) and it has grown far more sophisticated in the many years since. Your arguments against it are against its application as you have seen it - not the concept itself. If you are interested in the science - there is some good stuff by Tudor Bomba (though his books has much broader application) but my favorite is Peak When it Counts by Freeman (somewhat dated now but still great reading)

There are certainly "periods" of emphasis placed on training one component of fitness or another. I think all elite runners dabble in all type of training all year round but have different focuses. As a college middle distance guy, this was our schedule for example:

Base Period (as many weeks as possible): Major emphasis on mileage and time on your feet. 50-150 meter strides are still done 1-2 times a week after an easy run to maintain speed. Tempo run, fartlek, or mile repeats are also probably one time a week for threshold work (still a hugely aerobic workout). Intervals are also done occasionally, maybe once every 2-3 weeks, to maintain VO2max. Long run is done every week. As a middle distance guy, mileage was 60-70 per week at peak with a long run of 10, but it was a build to this number.

Early-Season Period (6-8 weeks): Number of total sessions per week does not change from base period, but emphasis is on threshold work, hence overall mileage will be slightly lower. 2 threshold sessions per week, typically with one continuous tempo run per week and one long interval session with short rest (i.e. cruise intervals or mile repeats). For speed, fast 200s were added after the continuous tempo. No specific VO2max sessions were completed as the thresholds and 200s did more than enough to maintain this. Long run frequency was reduced to every other week, but was still 10. Again, for middle distance, total mileage was around 50.

Mid-Season Period (4-6 weeks): Emphasis is shifted to VO2max with some anaerobic work thrown in. One continuous tempo run was maintained, but it was a little shorter and a little faster, and then a few all-out efforts were added after this to get use to going hard on tired legs (i.e. 8x200 all out, 4x400 out). Other hard session would be intervals, usually alternating 6x800 and 12x400, decreasing rest as season went on. to make them more anaerobic. Usually, there was a race on a weekend. Long runs were completely eliminated. Total mileage was in the 40-50 range.

Peak Season Period: Emphasis is shifted to being fresh. One hard session was done per week, typically pyramids (400-800-1200-1600-1200-800-400) or 400s or 600s hard without a lot of rest (number was always undefined, typically we went until we were borderline passed out or puking). This session was done 5 days out from race. Other runs were 4 miles top. 2 days out from race, usually we did fast 200s with lots of rest. Peak season races were on weekend for as long as we were still in it (most didn't go past conference). Total mileage was 25-30.

Two weeks off was mandatory after each track season, then the base period would start again for as long as possible. I did not run cross country. I was a 1:50 800 guy (not that fast, I know), but I seriously doubt that I could have broken 2:00 during the base phase. I could, however, run under 1:20 for a half marathon, and that aerobic base made the hard workouts a lot easier once they started. I always wonder if I could have gotten faster had I added an early-seasons period and mid-season period in the middle of the base, which typically lasted 8 months. Maybe? Elite runners peak more than college do, so I think they do operate this way.

This is another of the reasons CU is falling behind the times.

Waiting for his stupid theory.

Periodization of course works, but there is no absolute need for it. Many ways lead to Rome. :)

Murph800 wrote:

Waiting for his stupid theory.

Well done. He replied after you.

The Wizard JS wrote:

Periodization of course works, but there is no absolute need for it. Many ways lead to Rome. :)

Funny that DANCAN leads to failure.

Is sports science a myth?

Couldn't find it in my quick Google search, but I recall a study where they divided groups into periodisation training model vs a non periodisation training. If I recall correctly it was something like a 10% difference in terms of improvement. And that was just a short term study. Not only that, but it makes sense to cycle through hard workouts and than to give your body a break to rebuild. A good analogy, you can only red line a car so long before you either blow out the engine or slow down. And I'm pretty sure Steve Scott as your one example didn't do quarter mile reps year round at mile pace. If I recall his training log on here correctly, he spent a good part of the year doing good mileage (up into the 90+ MPW rang) with some good tempos, fartlek and hills than as track rolled around he would drop his mileage and start doing more specific mile workouts. That sounds like periodisation to me. And if you're going look at three elite endurance athletes, you can look up other studies looking at what do the elite olympic level endurance athletes training look like leading up to the Olympics/world championships(these studies aren't just 3, but dozens of athletes). Here's a hint, their training changes through out the year to build up to their most important race of the year.

There are many ways of including periods in the training. What is proven is that to race well you need to peak towards that race. The things you do to peak is different than the other training so obviously we need periodization.

Block training on a short cycle is also promising since special blocks (1-2 weeks) with emphasise on one aspect and just maintenance of others seem to in the longer term give better improvements than a steady plan. I do not know how short the special blocks can be. Canova has one day special block.

I do think there is plenty of evidence that periodization works, but the term is very wide as periodization can be done in numerous ways

This video describes something similar to what ive been doing with my teams for years. Sine watching the video, ive made a few adjustments that see ed to have really helped

Just “adjust the heat on the burners”

https://youtu.be/VjzQ6mdYN04

I mostly train for longer road races, running a two or three races about once per month until finally the goal race of half marathon or marathon. It's largely what you just gave an example of, except even the intensity of this 4 week cycle builds and the volume of the week 1 builds each time. Because you're not going to be doing your highest mileage on week 1 of the training block, more like week 1 of the 3rd or 4th month depending how spaced out your 'goal' race is