Goldilocks and the Barbell

When to go for the sweat spot and when to go for the poles

Generally, people would understand the Goldilocks principle if mentioned, even if it is the first time they have heard about it. In short, the sweet spot in the middle, not too far to either end of the spectrum. The barbell principle, whilst an investment principle primarily, is seen in training too, more commonly called a “polarised model” when referring to training. It is the antithesis of the Goldilocks principle, that is, nothing in the middle.

So, in one strategy we have only the middle, whereas in the other we have the two ends of the spectrum.

Some ideas on when to use these principles are below

Use Goldilocks for

Stress

I don’t think there is much argument that too much stress is an issue. I do think some may advocate for the lower the better, which I tend to disagree with. Probably best illustrated or explained by formal vs informal study, the notion of optimal stress is that with too little stress you will not perform, just as with too much stress. Those online, free courses, in areas of quasi interest that you signed up to and didn’t complete? Yup, they are the ones that show the benefit of a little stress, be it through skin in the game, loss aversion, embarrassment or some other potential stressor.

Variety in training

I’ve had the privilege of being involved with many athletes and coaches over the years. One question that seems to arise not infrequently is the question of variety, that is, “how much do we mix up what we are doing in training?” There are full systems built on this (Crossfit) and then the polar opposite at times too. I have seen athletes thrive on using the bare minimum of variety and the opposite too.

The reality is that with too much variety it is hard to know if you are progressing, it can create excessive soreness and can cause suboptimal adaptation in my opinion, though this is hard to prove or be sure of. With too little variety you can stagnate completely, making little to no progress, this is another bad situation to get yourself into, you want reward for your hard work.

You need enough, but not too much variety. The exact means of change and the frequency are part of the art of coaching and depend on factors like age, training age, goals, training methods etc.

Some more simple approaches I have seen used include not changing programs until stagnation, using a set period of time before change (usually 8-12 weeks) or building small amounts of change into the program in that 8-12 weeks before significant change.

Use Barbell/Polarised for

Intensity distribution in training

Full articles, and even books, can and have been written on this topic. That said there are numerous ways to use this lens to view training and I will explain a few, which are less about the nuts and bolts of training and more about the concepts.

One of the most basic tenets of endurance training is “keep your hard days hard and your easy days easy”, I think this applies more widely than endurance training, to training in general as a start point. The more you sit towards the performance rather than health side of the spectrum, the more this probably pertains to the contrast between training and activities of daily living too. I remember an elite sports team I had some involvement with cutting down their walking to and from training sessions to allow more recovery time and less stress on the system. There are also stories of Bill Kazmaier (former World’s Strongest Man) actively avoid activities like taking the stairs as they were counter productive to his training goals.

The premise of the design of polarised training in endurance sports is that too many sessions are otherwise in the middle zone of intensity and thus not stressful enough to induce a strong training stimulus but too stressful to recover from easily. To apply this to someone who is less performance and more health focussed, I would suggest that on days where things have been stressful and training awaits, it may perhaps be a good idea to cut intensity from the session.

To zoom out a level, and look at more general advice for someone more health focussed, this advice ends up looking more like advocating for more lifestyle based activity (active commuting, walking the dog, taking the stairs at work etc), more intermittent high intensity activity (strength training, power training like plyometrics and sprinting) and less of the, middle ground, large effort (though middle intensity ultimately) for 10-60 mins continuously (for example jogging). The key phrases in this paragraph being “more” and “less”.

Focus during the day

We tend to think that we can focus for a long time but unless we get into flow state or manage to ingest enough caffeine to make us smell colours (or indeed partake in other nootropics some colleagues of mine in medical school managed to get hold of) we probably don’t manage good focus for long periods. This is made worse by the distractions of the modern world where our attention is the key commodity being fought for.

A strategy I have employed successfully and would advocate is as follows:

1. Block your time (I usually use one-hour blocks)

2. Set alarms to alert you to these

3. Focus deeply for that time and then switch off for a period of time

Being a task switcher by nature, I tend to do best when I am working on different things in each block, but I am sure that is probably more about me than human nature. Likewise, I do best with some momentum, that is, NOT finishing something on a day to end the block of work but finishing that as the first piece of work I do in a fresh block, giving me some momentum to start the work block off.

Of note, breaks or low focus points are NOT time to scroll social media or check emails, these require focus or impair the ability to focus subsequently in of themselves. So I would suggest that if these are a priority you build your blocks for these too.

Better ideas for breaks are meditation, walks and music breaks.

Don’t forget, like many heuristics, principles and similar, these are just models. And of course, as George Box said in 1976: “All models are wrong, some are useful”

Reference List

1. Muñoz, I., Seiler, S., Bautista, J., España, J., Larumbe, E., & Esteve-Lanao, J. (2014). Does polarized training improve performance in recreational runners?. International journal of sports physiology and performance, 9(2), 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2012-0350

2. Seiler, Stephen. (2010). What is Best Practice for Training Intensity and Duration Distribution in Endurance Athletes?. International journal of sports physiology and performance. 5. 276-91. 10.1123/ijspp.5.3.276.