80/20 Training

I just saw a post on Facebook from Paddle 2 Fitness about 80/20 training and then read this article:
What is 80-20 Running?
At the moment I'm doing almost 100% downwind paddling (Cape Town is such an awesome place to paddle) and of course as soon as I turn downwind, I'm going gangbusters and end up with average heart rates in the 90% of max area...

Anyone out there do 80/20 training?  What heart rate do you aim at for the low intensity stuff?

I read books on endurance training by Phil Maffetone, Joe Friel and Matt Fitzgerald - all these guys promote some kind of "80/20" split nowadays. I tried to follow this plan by increasing my "steady state" sessions, which I try to do at a reasonably constant heart rate. It is boring at first, but it pays off because standardizing your sessions is a great way to avoid injuries and observe your progress.

Phil Maffetone is probably the most famous, he is the creator of the MAF concept (maximum aerobic function). Roughly speaking, a MAF session is a steady state session aiming to a heart rate of 180 minus your age. For me it is 134 bpm, which is really hard to keep because it feels very easy and comfortable. My typical MAF session is a 10-mile paddle on the river, upstream and back. One must have a good sense of discipline to paddle at such a low level of exertion for such a long time. As I said, terribly boring at first, but it gets interesting as you start registering the data for these paddles. Oscar Chalupsky is a big fan of Dr. Maffetone, he prescribes MAF sessions in his online coaching platform.
Joe Friel wrote a great book (Fast after 50) which I can't recommend strongly enough. His training system is more complicated, he prescribes 3 kinds of sessions. His low intensity sessions must be done at "aerobic threshold". It is not easy to determine the heart rate level for this, but for me it is somewhere close to 125 bpm. Joe Friel's system worked great for me.

However, I have a feeling that ideas like the 80/20 split are just common sense. Most people simply can't train as often as the pros. Weekend warriors have so little time to train that anything they do will be better than nothing. People who can paddle 4+ times a week are very privileged, but of course they must take it easy somehow, otherwise they will hurt themselves.

I use to say that downwind paddling is by far the best way to train. It is the most complete form of surfski training, you get everything: balance, technique, cardio, muscle strength, speed, fun! If I could paddle downwind 2 times a week, I wouldn't bother at all with 80/20, low intensity sessions, MAF etc.

Pavel breaks down cardio endurance in this clip.

He explains the difference between "repeat" training and "interval" training.         

Repeats are the ideal cardiovascular endurance workout for aging athletes IMHO.

Fast twitch is what we must train as we age.  It atrophies faster.  Pavel describes this in another part of the interview.

Like intervals, repeat training will increase cardio AND engage fast twitch fibers.  But unlike intervals, IMO, repeats won't break you down. 

I gauge my downwinding efforts as repeats, not intervals.  I can sustain the same power output for my short sprints at the end, as in the beginning.  Usually stronger actually... 

When I'm downwinding regularly, my overall well being soars.  I always knew it was the perfect workout for me.  I'm glad Pavel came along to explain why. 

I'll have to see whether I can find Seiler's papers to read what they exactly studied. The big issue with all the polarized training research is that pretty much all the studies have been done on elite athletes with the characteristic that they train at least 12 hours/week, often much much more. E.g.: "Whether the elite is training 20 or 40 hours a week, the training broadly follows this 80/20 split," says Seiler. My takeaway from reading papers is that at that point the body just can't recover from one session to the next and so piling up one high intensity session on the other with insufficient recovery ends up in what's called over-training. With so many training hours per week low intensity sessions have positive training benefit, so there's something productive for the athlete to do in all these training hours as opposed to just resting until the body can take another high intensity session.

I tend to surfski 3x -4x per week, that's 8 hours tops, typ more like 5. As far as I can tell different rules apply (the cross-over seems to be in the 8-12 hours/week range). The best info I've found for that number of hours per week is by searching for "time-crunched cyclist". Basically the recommendation that made the most sense to me is that if your body is fully recovered, then go at high intensity. If your body is not fully recovered (happens to me when I surfski on back-to-back days) then going slow would be better. I find that if I listen to my body I can tell how recovered I am.

The article says "We undertook further research and showed that it’s equally relevant if you’re training four sessions a week or 14." so I'm off to google to find that stuff...

I tend to surfski 3x -4x per week, that's 8 hours tops, typ more like 5.

Yep, that's me too.
So the question for me, as it seems to be for you, is whether these considerations even apply to people like us. 

I did two Miller's Runs back to back on Sunday, both at high intensity.  For the first one (50min), my average HR was 152, for the second one (52min), my average HR was 148.  At 57, my estimated 90% HR is 147, so (while I understand that HR varies from person to person) clearly those two runs were at high intensity.

I didn't feel particularly fatigued after the second run - and the lower HR was at least partly due to the fact that I wasn't putting as much effort in because I'd pulled a muscle in my side about half way into the run.

I felt a little stiff on Monday, but by Tuesday, I wasn't feeling it at all.  So, do I really need a "recovery" paddle before I go hard again?  Isn't it true to say that compared to elite athletes, I'm doing very little training and "recovering" is what's happening on the days that I don't paddle anyway? 

Or would I improve my fitness by doing, say two (or even one) paddle flat-out per week, and three focused on keeping my HR down?  I feel like I paddle so seldom (comparatively speaking) that I want to go for it every time.

And it's not as if I'm not improving; I beat my all time personal best a couple of weeks ago for the Miller's Run (43:10 with an average speed of 16.3kph and best split of 3:28.)  The question is though, if I start paddling more slowly, will I end up going faster? 

In downwind conditions of course, fitness is only part of the story; technique plays a large(er?) role too.

My conclusion is that if you have rested then go all out. If you haven't, then from a training perspective you're better off going at low intensity. So, if the DW is great and you end up at high intensity then your body is digging into a deeper hole. As long as you don't repeat this situation frequently, you'll be OK.

I've been surfskiing only for 2 years, didn't do any regular sports before that. I'm now pretty much at the same speed as the other locals that are about my age (55) but have been doing it for way longer. All I've done is to be out in the open ocean in the waves 3-4x per wk for 1-1/4-1-3/4 hrs each time and it's always high-intensity unless my body says "not today" (and then I try hard to really listen). If I had had to do 80/20 or MAF I really cannot believe I would be where I am plus I would have given up of boredom long ago.

If I had had to do 80/20 or MAF I really cannot believe I would be where I am plus I would have given up of boredom long ago.

Hahaha, yeah, that resonates so much with me!

I do have another consideration though and that is that I seem to be injuring myself more frequently of late.  I haven't two lots of intercostal muscle tears and I did something similar just this last weekend. 

Anyway - for the sake of trying to improve my downwind technique I'm going to focus on keeping my HR down on at least some of the downwinds and see where that takes me.  "Extending the glide" is my aim!  If that keeps my HR down as well, so much the better.

Disclaimer! Not an expert, but a student commenting here.

There are loads of different training theories but basically there are 3 different energy systems to be trained.

Aerobic training involves training at an effort level that can be maintained for a long time a la Dr. Phil Maffetone at a heart rate of 180- your age.
Joe Friel in Fast after 50 also recommends training in this zone which he determines as about 30 bpm below your lactate threshold HR.
These efforts are what are generally called base training.
My experience is that if you're an average Joe training for long endurance events like Ironman or the Berg river marathon, this is all the training you need. But for it to work you need to put in the hours, I would say a minimum 8 per week.

Lactate threshold or glycolic training efforts are those where you training to endure the burn, at or around your lactic or anaerobic threshold. Generally trained using intervals from 3 to 20 minutes, at least in Joe Friel's book. These are the training days you need to recover from.
Typically a downwind paddle or 10km + race is done at around these effort levels.

Anaerobic training is generally done in short flat out bursts above your lactate threshold effort, from 20 seconds to 2 minutes with proportionally longer recovery periods. You'll do many of these efforts on a typical downwind, but without the recoveries!

Joe Friel and Matt Fitzgerald both recommend training all 3 zones. Matt's aerobic zones are a bit higher, though.

Pavel and his organisation Strongfirst have promoting what they call Alactic+Aerobic or anti-glycolytic, training.
Instead of training to ensure the glycolytic burn, you train to delay the onset of the burn by avoiding it in your training.
Typically it involves short hard efforts of about 10-15 seconds with about 45-50 seconds rest.
With Strongfirst, this is typically implemented with kettlebell swings or snatches.
Strongfirst also lean heavily toward Maffetone style aerobic training as in long walks, slow jogging as part of your basics.

The takeaway is that they all advise building an aerobic base, and if you're doing exclusively downwind paddles you're probably not doing it.
If you want to maximise your performance and health, strap on your HRM, swallow your pride, because all your training buddies are going to drop you, and settle in for long (boring?) slow easy paddles at 180- your age. That is max, not average and should probably be 80% of your training time.
If you're just paddling for fun and thrills then do whatever the heck you like!

A last note: imho, at your (and my) age, functional strength training combined with aerobic training is probably the best thing you can do for all round general physical health and preparation. 

If you are training to race, there is another factor; training to suffer.
Nobody racing seriously is going 'gently' during a race. If you aren't suffering during a race, you aren't going hard enough.
If all your long paddles are at a MAF pace, you will have absolutely no psychological preparation for withstanding the suffering during a race. No feeling for whether you are going too hard to sustain the pace, or just a bit off your max sustainable pace.
    
I firmly believe that is extremely good race practise to take part in regular time trial events, over the same course. This enables comparison of performance, and, sustaining speed during the time trial will give you a good feel for race-pace.

robin.mousley wrote: I do have another consideration though and that is that I seem to be injuring myself more frequently of late.  I haven't two lots of intercostal muscle tears and I did something similar just this last weekend. 

Anyway - for the sake of trying to improve my downwind technique I'm going to focus on keeping my HR down on at least some of the downwinds and see where that takes me.  "Extending the glide" is my aim!  If that keeps my HR down as well, so much the better.

Robin, you may have tried this.  Do an entire run inhaling only thru your nose.     
1. Keeps your heart rate down.     
2.  You will focus on making each stroke more efficient.   
3.  Your ability to choose which swells to "go for" will improve - because you will be forced to stretch glides out. All those mantras like "relax and keep the nose going downhill" and "let the boat run" will take on a new meaning. 
4. It will improve your posture.  This video illustrates it beautifully.  (see #2)

mrcharly wrote: If you are training to race, there is another factor; training to suffer.

Psychologically yes.  Physiologically, no.  Pain is ONE way, but it's not the ONLY way.  Opening up the pain locker once and awhile is necessary, but counterproductive on a regular basis.  Pavel talks about it in the interview.  The science is in. 
    
I'm 59 now and prefer not to risk overtraining and injury.  Endorphins can mask injuries in progress.  I did the racing thing in boats, in my early 50's.  It was super fun.  But I was always sore the next day, so I faded out of that scene.   
 
Hammering with your friends is fun and produces gains, sure.  But be careful.  It's not the only way to get fitter. 

We all did it in our 20's and 30's, it feels great.  Nothing better than a 'runners high'.  It comes with a host of benefits:  sleep, recovery, digestion etc.  Humans evolved as endurance athletes and we feel great when we are fit.   

As an older guy, I'm glad to know that the suffering part is not necessary.  Endurance and strength can be gained with steady, sub lactic output. 

As for my sport - downwinding - there are more important things to fix before worrying about my anaerobic threshold.  I just finished off a stretch of 8 Malikos in a row.  Fit as a fiddle the next day.  Felt and paddled stronger (and faster) every day.  I did 56 in a row a few years back - just for the heck of it -  never opened up the pain locker.  I charged, sure.  But never anaerobic.  No pain.  No suffering.      

robin.mousley wrote:
Anyone out there do 80/20 training?  What heart rate do you aim at for the low intensity stuff?

I surfski for fun but I'm a serious cyclist at heart and as an academic I'm reasonably familiar with Seiler's 80/20 studies. The 80/20 concept is doing the rounds at the moment but it's worth outlining some of the pro's and con's.

80/20 provides a simple and easy to follow training methodology that is proving popular with both coaches and athletes alike. If you train 5 times a week, 4 are at low intensity and one is at a high intensity. This percentage split is based on the number of sessions, not the work time. Seiler has done a lot of work to promote this with TED talks and frequent interviews.
However, some caution is advised. He obtained the concept by reviewing endurance athletes training logs retrospectively but there is actually a world of difference between what you prescribe an athlete and what actually takes place.  Plus recording heart rates is actually only in response to training unlike power output is actually what happens. In some cases, he only had written comments in logs and not numerical data. I can see this in my own cycling data that I've stored over the last 15 years. You find things like warm ups and cool downs can skew the data. His review of the data also looked at athletes over many years, pooling it together thereby ignoring the changes that athletes training would have had in macro or microcycles or over the course of a year.
Secondly, 80/20 is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy when you're a pro. As a pro athlete, you may be logging 20 hours upwards per week of training as a norm. When you do that kind of volume, it's hard to do anything other than a rough 80/20 split without overreaching and then eventually overtraining. That doesn't make 80/20 'better' but just means its a consequence of your actions with that lifestyle. We have started to see a shift in some sports to move away from traditions and focus more on a reduced number of hours and differing intensities in recent years but his study didn't cover that. I know of one recent study whereby marathon runners were shown to train by anything other than an 80/20 method (and I've seen pro cyclist data that doesn't do this either).
Finally, contrary to what Seiler says, there is no published evidence (and I mean NONE) that downscaling the concept for amateurs works. If you only train for 5 hours per week for example, he has claimed that 80/20 is still the best way to go but the volume of that is so low to be useless if you do that in my view. Likewise, that shunts the only opportunity for physiological performance progression mainly onto really pushing the intensity in that one session which is, frankly, not mentally sustainable in the long run. Couple this with evidence that has been published that higher intensity sessions such as Vo2 max development can max out in 6-8 weeks and you'll suddenly find you have a problem.

This all reads like I'm not a fan of 80/20...... and I'm not really. Not only does it ignore the specific needs of training for particular events but you find that whilst the concept is currently hugely popular with coaches and amateurs athletes, it has little traction or credence with sports scientists and academics.

gearmuncher, that makes a lot of sense.

We should also take into account all exercise; I get limited time on the water, however I also cycle to work. This is about 45min each way, 5 days a week. Low intensity. 
All in I guess my training (exercise is):
7.5 hours a week low intensity
1.5hr gym (50% time high-intensity working on hand crank machine)
4-5hrs paddling. 2/3rds of the time spent actually on the water is doing intervals or sprints. 

I suggest that isn't atypical; quite a few paddlers mix in a bit of jogging and cycling, some gym sessions. Maybe 50/50 rather than 80/20.

mrcharly wrote: gearmuncher, that makes a lot of sense.

We should also take into account all exercise; I get limited time on the water, however I also cycle to work. This is about 45min each way, 5 days a week. Low intensity. 
All in I guess my training (exercise is):
7.5 hours a week low intensity
1.5hr gym (50% time high-intensity working on hand crank machine)
4-5hrs paddling. 2/3rds of the time spent actually on the water is doing intervals or sprints. 

I suggest that isn't atypical; quite a few paddlers mix in a bit of jogging and cycling, some gym sessions. Maybe 50/50 rather than 80/20.

I think also that ocean ski paddling is more about lifestyle or the relative chaos of the environment than other more controllable sports like running/cycling/swimming, etc. 80/20 just isn't a controllable outcome if the sea conditions vary a great deal. If you're using ergo's to train, well, sure. Plus like you highlight, it's not really workable if you cross train or want flexibility.

uk gearmuncher wrote: Finally, contrary to what Seiler says, there is no published evidence (and I mean NONE) that downscaling the concept for amateurs works. If you only train for 5 hours per week for example, he has claimed that 80/20 is still the best way to go but the volume of that is so low to be useless if you do that in my view. Likewise, that shunts the only opportunity for physiological performance progression mainly onto really pushing the intensity in that one session which is, frankly, not mentally sustainable in the long run. Couple this with evidence that has been published that higher intensity sessions such as Vo2 max development can max out in 6-8 weeks and you'll suddenly find you have a problem.

Amen!

However, there are a number of papers that address recreational athletes with studies that focus on <10hrs/wk. I typed a whole bunch of links up but posting my message resulted in "Your message has been considered spam" from surfski.info. I don't have energy now to rewrite the whole thing . (Hey Rob, if at least the response repeated the message I could figure out how to chop it so it gets accepted...)

There are an abundance of conflicting training theories all with science and studies backing them up. It's the same with diet.

At the end of the day we, as recreational athletes, have to make a choice as to who and what we believe will work for us.

I believe all training works to a point. However, there is no one size fits all training program.
I've trained for Ironman at exclusively MAF heart rates. I've trained for mountain bike racing with exclusively interval training.
Both worked for the task at hand. However (post event) I couldn't sustain the training time required for MAF training to work nor could I sustain the prescribed interval training intensities for a long period of time without burning out.

I've discovered that for me, MAF training works but I must put in the time, that interval training works but that I cannot, at 56, sustain more than 1 or 2 high intensity sessions per week without overtraining. Find out what works for you.

Also I think many people confuse being fit with being healthy. It's not the same thing.
Consistently hard training can have have many detrimental side effects on health if not balanced with adequate recovery.

Most people also focus on optimising fitness for improvement at the expense of learning the skill of the sport.

I like the Strongfirst principles:
Don't train, but practise (learn the skill!)
Practise almost daily
Finish your practice sessions feeling refreshed and energised with something in the tank for tomorrow.
Go hard only occasionally - when testing yourself or peaking for an event.
Practice and learn the skills and the strength and fitness will come along with it.

This especially resonates with me for something like downwind paddling, where even someone like Robin, who at 57 years old is unlikely to be increasing his physiological performance potential, is still doing faster Miller's runs as his skill improves. I believe this to be Oscar's method too.

Unfortunately our egos cloud the issue by driving us to chase better performance at any cost.

Good luck out there guys. Don't over analyse it. Rather have fun and stay healthy. I think those are the primary goals for most of us.

I typed a whole bunch of links up but posting my message resulted in "Your message has been considered spam" from surfski.info. I don't have energy now to rewrite the whole thing 

. (Hey Rob, if at least the response repeated the message I could figure out how to chop it so it gets accepted...

Damnation.

I'm so sorry about that.

I've increased the maximum number of links to 20...  

I like the Strongfirst principles:

Don't train, but practice (learn the skill!)
Train almost daily
Finish your training sessions feeling refreshed and energised with something in the tank for tomorrow.
Go hard only occasionally - when testing yourself or peaking for an event.
Practice and learn the skills and the stength and fitness will come along with it.

From all the responses, it seems to me that I'd need to train a lot more often and with a lot more intent to gain any benefit from prioritising MAF.
But...  it seems much more likely that I'll improve by going less hard, and focussing on skills.

After all, my goal is to keep beating my Miller's Run PB.  Doing better at flat-water racing is not a high priority for me.

More often than not, the conditions prevailing on the Miller's Run are not PB conditions in any case - so what's the point of going flat out?  Much rather go more deliberately and do the 50 stroke challenge (how far can you get in 50 strokes) and other drills and then when the wind and waves are optimal, go flat out.

This was highlighted for me yesterday when I paddled on the back of a double with Oscar Chalupsky.  I've had the privilege and pleasure of doing this half a dozen times now, and every time it's the same - I end up gobsmacked at the skill and precision efforts and the low average heart rate.  The big O is a total magician on the runs. 

(He's going a little slower now - chemo means he's not allowed to put too much effort in - but he's in good shape and good heart otherwise.)

robin.mousley wrote:

I like the Strongfirst principles:

Don't train, but practice (learn the skill!)
Train almost daily
Finish your training sessions feeling refreshed and energised with something in the tank for tomorrow.
Go hard only occasionally - when testing yourself or peaking for an event.
Practice and learn the skills and the stength and fitness will come along with it.

From all the responses, it seems to me that I'd need to train a lot more often and with a lot more intent to gain any benefit from prioritising MAF.
But...  it seems much more likely that I'll improve by going less hard, and focussing on skills.

After all, my goal is to keep beating my Miller's Run PB.  Doing better at flat-water racing is not a high priority for me.

More often than not, the conditions prevailing on the Miller's Run are not PB conditions in any case - so what's the point of going flat out?  Much rather go more deliberately and do the 50 stroke challenge (how far can you get in 50 strokes) and other drills and then when the wind and waves are optimal, go flat out.

This was highlighted for me yesterday when I paddled on the back of a double with Oscar Chalupsky.  I've had the privilege and pleasure of doing this half a dozen times now, and every time it's the same - I end up gobsmacked at the skill and precision efforts and the low average heart rate.  The big O is a total magician on the runs. 

(He's going a little slower now - chemo means he's not allowed to put too much effort in - but he's in good shape and good heart otherwise.)

Rob a word of advice from someone that once was an elite athlete and is now more broken than anything else. Prioritise mobility training and mobility related strength. What I mean by that is we need to make sure we stay flexible but strong as we age. There is a book called the Supple Leopard by Kelly Starrett. It is a lifesaver. He provides tests for mobility in the body and then simple at home mobility drills to fix the imbalances.

Studies have shown one of the biggest issues with ageing and sport specific training in general is the decreasing mobility issue. As mobility decreases muscles begin to take over movements they should not which results in injury. I wish I had access to this information when I was a competitive MMA fighter. Not only was my training wrong but the constant battering of sparring and fighting messed up my mobility. However it is something that occurs in all of us, the build up of scar tissue or muscle knots and imbalances. 

Focus on your mobility and keep hammering those downwinds. 

manta wrote:

Prioritise mobility training and mobility related strength. What I mean by that is we need to make sure we stay flexible but strong as we age. There is a book called the Supple Leopard by Kelly Starrett. It is a lifesaver. He provides tests for mobility in the body and then simple at home mobility drills to fix the imbalances.

Spot on Manta. Kelly Starrett has also published Waterman 2.0: Optimized Movement For Lifelong, Pain-Free Paddling And Surfing. I haven't bought a copy (yet) but believe it be similar to the Supple Leopard, just with a water sport slant based on his attempt at Molokai. Also look at www.flexiblesteel.com.