# Polarized Training a la Dylan Johnson

**URL:** <https://forum.intervals.icu/t/polarized-training-a-la-dylan-johnson/50378>\
**Category:** Training\
**Created:** [29 September 2023 19:06 UTC](https://forum.intervals.icu/t/polarized-training-a-la-dylan-johnson/50378 "2023-09-29T19:06:44Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Morten\_Horning\_Jense](https://forum.intervals.icu/user_avatar/forum.intervals.icu/morten_horning_jense/32/26645_2.png) [@Morten\_Horning\_Jense](https://forum.intervals.icu/u/Morten_Horning_Jense)\
**Post date:** [30 September 2023 10:52 UTC](https://forum.intervals.icu/t/polarized-training-a-la-dylan-johnson/50378/2 "2023-09-30T10:52:19Z")

</div>

This is an important question, there is a discussion of the topic here as well: [Combined Zones on Weekly Summary - #5 by Gerald](https://forum.intervals.icu/t/combined-zones-on-weekly-summary/21270/5).

I think that it is next to impossible to reach a 80/20-target if you calculate it by minutes/hours spend in each zone on a weekly basis. So my question is if it rather should be calculated on sessions per week - that is, if you do 5 sessions, only one should be intervals above FTP.

So I would like to know if is NOT the wright way to estimate your weekly distribution by looking a the weekly distribution in intervals.icu.  
Morten

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.intervals.icu/t/polarized-training-a-la-dylan-johnson/50378)._