19 sources: 1 meta-analysis, 4 narrative reviews, 1 non-randomised trial, 6 randomised controlled trials, 5 systematic reviews, 2 with design not recorded

Cardio & Endurance · 20–40 min · 1-2x/week

Tempo / Threshold Session

A 'comfortably hard' continuous effort at threshold (RPE 7) bookended by easy work. Requires an aerobic base first. Default 45 min; adjust the tempo block length to fitness.

How often: 1–5 sessions/week · trial frequency reported by the sources of the review summary this routine was written from (2 of 19 sources named by SR18.4 state one) · planning default: 1-2x/week · the review report’s bottom line: 2–5 sessions/week, clustering at 3×/week

When: any time · the sources state no time of day; the planner's slot is a default

The time slot is a planning choice: a swap can keep it.

The evidence applies to the practice, not to these particular steps — they are one way to carry it out.

1
Easy Run (Zone 2)
10 min easy warm-up
Include a few strides to prime the legs.
Slot: pre-activity preparation
Named by a Round-2 review (by reading)App-designed prescriptionthe finding states no duration for this.
9 options for this requirement
These are the practices the completed Round-2 reviews name for pre-activity preparation. The evidence rating on this routine belongs to the practice and its dose, not to any one of these. Choosing one changes what you read on this page only — it is not saved on any session in your week, and it never changes what the routine prescribes. To keep a choice, make it on the session itself in My Week.
Ballistic stretching
Compared in the review
10 papers put it in this slot · dose unit not stated
Evidence and how-to
Dynamic stretching
Compared in the review
40 papers put it in this slot · dose in sets × time
Cannot be used here: This step's dose is measured in duration and this option's in sets × time. Converting between them is not something the research says, so the swap is refused rather than converted.
Evidence and how-to
Dynamic warm-up
Compared in the review
6 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Foam rolling
Compared in the review
7 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Hold-relax
Compared in the review
1 paper put it in this slot (inferred by the extraction, not stated in the paper) · dose unit not stated
Evidence and how-to
PNF stretching
Compared in the review
4 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Static stretching
Compared in the review
39 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Strap-assisted
Compared in the review
1 paper put it in this slot · dose unit not stated
Evidence and how-to
Vibration-assisted
Compared in the review
1 paper put it in this slot · dose unit not stated
Evidence and how-to
2
Tempo / Threshold Run
25 min at threshold RPE 7 (or 2 x 12 min with 2 min easy)
Hold an even effort; can be run, bike, or rower.
Slot: continuous moderate
Named by a Round-2 review (by reading)App-designed prescriptionthe finding states no bouts or intensity for this.
7 options for this requirement
These are the practices the completed Round-2 reviews name for continuous moderate. The evidence rating on this routine belongs to the practice and its dose, not to any one of these. Choosing one changes what you read on this page only — it is not saved on any session in your week, and it never changes what the routine prescribes. To keep a choice, make it on the session itself in My Week.
Brisk walking
Compared in the review
1 paper put it in this slot · dose in duration
What the review holds
Cycling
Compared in the review
4 papers put it in this slot (inferred by the extraction, not stated in the paper) · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
HIIT (generic)
Compared in the review
1 paper put it in this slot (inferred by the extraction, not stated in the paper) · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Moderate continuous (MICT)
Compared in the review
4 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Nordic walking
Compared in the review
5 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Swimming
Compared in the review
2 papers put it in this slot (inferred by the extraction, not stated in the paper) · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Walking
Compared in the review
7 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
3
Easy Run (Zone 2)
10 min easy cool-down
Bring the heart rate down gradually.
Slot: post-activity
Named by a Round-2 review (by reading)App-designed prescriptionthe finding states no duration for this.
5 options for this requirement
These are the practices the completed Round-2 reviews name for post-activity. The evidence rating on this routine belongs to the practice and its dose, not to any one of these. Choosing one changes what you read on this page only — it is not saved on any session in your week, and it never changes what the routine prescribes. To keep a choice, make it on the session itself in My Week.
Ballistic stretching
Compared in the review
1 paper put it in this slot (inferred by the extraction, not stated in the paper) · dose unit not stated
Evidence and how-to
Dynamic stretching
Compared in the review
3 papers put it in this slot · dose in sets × time
Cannot be used here: This step's dose is measured in duration and this option's in sets × time. Converting between them is not something the research says, so the swap is refused rather than converted.
Evidence and how-to
Foam rolling
Compared in the review
1 paper put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
PNF stretching
Compared in the review
3 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to
Static stretching
Compared in the review
8 papers put it in this slot · dose in duration
Evidence and how-to

Safety, and where each line comes from

1 reported by the review's sources13 product safeguard (app-authored)5 source silent

Each line below says where it comes from. “Reported by the review’s sources” is the source’s own words about adverse events or contraindications. “Product safeguard” is written by this app, not by the research. “Source silent” means the studies behind this routine report nothing on that point, which is not the same as saying it carries no risk.

Who should modify or avoid this

Reported by the review's sourcesAdults with an established aerobic base
SR18.4 · “whereas for novices the chosen model does not materially affect outcomes (Api 2022; Conlon 2016/2017).”
Product safeguard (app-authored)Demanding; keep to 1–2 sessions/week with easy days around
From this routine’s block record, written by this app.
Product safeguard (app-authored)Designed for generally healthy adults. A heart, lung or metabolic condition, or medication that affects heart rate, changes what is appropriate here.

Prerequisites

Product safeguard (app-authored)Written for advanced level. Equipment: none. Warm up before the working sets, and learn each movement at a light load or short range before adding effort.
Source silentThe sources behind this routine's finding report nothing on prerequisites or starting level.

Hazards and adverse events

Product safeguard (app-authored)Easy Run (Zone 2): If pace forces mouth-gulping breaths, slow down; build weekly mileage gradually.
From the exercise catalogue, written by this app.
Product safeguard (app-authored)Tempo / Threshold Run: Requires an aerobic base; hold effort steady rather than sprinting.
From the exercise catalogue, written by this app.
Source silentThe sources behind this routine's finding report no adverse events.

Progression and regression

Product safeguard (app-authored)Easy Run (Zone 2): regress with Walk-jog intervals; Shorter distance and progress with Long slow distance run; Tempo run.
From the exercise catalogue, written by this app.
Product safeguard (app-authored)Tempo / Threshold Run: regress with Shorten the tempo block; Break tempo into 2-3 shorter segments (cruise intervals) and progress with Extend tempo duration; Add threshold intervals.
From the exercise catalogue, written by this app.
Source silentThe sources behind this routine's finding report nothing on how to progress or regress it.

Stop conditions

Product safeguard (app-authored)Stop if you feel chest pain or pressure, faintness, unusual breathlessness for the effort, palpitations, or pain in a joint that changes how you move.
Source silentThe sources behind this routine's finding report no stop conditions.

When to seek supervision or clearance

Product safeguard (app-authored)Chest pain, pressure, or unusual shortness of breath during exertion
From this routine’s block record, written by this app.
Product safeguard (app-authored)Fainting, dizziness, or palpitations with exercise
From this routine’s block record, written by this app.
Product safeguard (app-authored)Known or suspected cardiovascular, metabolic, or renal disease without medical clearance
From this routine’s block record, written by this app.
Product safeguard (app-authored)Get clearance from a clinician before starting if you have a heart or lung condition, uncontrolled blood pressure, diabetes on medication, or symptoms on exertion; start at a lower intensity than the routine states if you are new to exercise.
Product safeguard (app-authored)Signs of a medical emergency (chest pain or pressure, trouble breathing, fainting, sudden weakness or numbness) mean 911 or your local emergency services; thoughts of self-harm or suicide mean the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. This app does not diagnose, treat or give personalised medical advice.
Source silentThe sources behind this routine's finding report nothing on supervision or clearance.

How to do it

This session sits under a finding about how endurance training is periodized and how its intensity is distributed, not about tempo work on its own: block periodization showed a reproducible small-to-moderate advantage over traditional periodization for VO2max (SMD 0.40) and maximal power output, and for distance running the review summary this routine was written from reports that pyramidal and polarized intensity distributions outperform threshold training. This routine is the threshold arm of that comparison - real work, ranked below those distributions for distance running - and its 25 minutes at threshold once or twice a week is a practical implementation the review summary this routine was written from does not validate as a protocol. For novices, the review summary this routine was written from also notes the periodization model chosen does not materially affect outcomes.

Threshold is comfortably hard at RPE 7: an even, controlled effort where speech drops to a few words. It is not a sprint and not a race pace.
Hold that effort flat for the whole block. If you cannot, split it - 2 x 12 minutes with 2 minutes easy between is the same session run as cruise intervals.
Warm up 10 minutes easy with a few strides beforehand, and cool down 10 minutes easy afterward rather than stopping at the end of the tempo.
This needs an established aerobic base underneath it. Keep it to one or two sessions a week with easy days either side; more threshold is not better, it just costs more recovery.
Run, bike, or rower all work - the effort defines the session, not the mode. Extend the tempo block's length gradually rather than adding minutes all at once.

20–40 min at threshold ('comfortably hard'), 1–2×/week

This routine's specific parameters are a practical implementation of the practice's general finding; the finding itself doesn't validate this exact protocol.

What the evidence says

The evidence is inherited from the practice this routine implements. Any duration is allowed; the label shows where you land against the studied dose.

This practice is one way to carry out what the sources on the concept entry (phys.cardio.intensity-distribution) studied: how endurance training intensity is distributed between easy, threshold and hard work, and how training is periodized. This practice is the threshold arm of that comparison. Kenneally 2017 (systematic review, 16 studies) reports pyramidal and polarized training as more effective than threshold training for running performance, though threshold is used by some of the “best marathon runners”. Casado 2022 (systematic review, 10 articles) reports that highly trained and elite distance runners typically follow a pyramidal distribution, with decreasing volume from zone 1 to zone 3. González-Ravé 2021 (systematic review, 9 studies) reports that sprint swimmers followed polarized or threshold distributions, middle-distance swimmers threshold or pyramidal, and long-distance swimmers pyramidal. The full account, source by source, is on the concept entry this practice links to (phys.cardio.intensity-distribution).

Key sources

randomised controlled trialPeriodization Strategies in Older Adults: Impact on Physical Function and Health.J. Conlon, R. Newton, J. Tufano et al. (2016) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 10.1249/mss.0000000000001053 · abstract only

design not recordedEffects of Two Different Training Periodization Models on Physical and Physiological Aspects of Elite Female Team Handball PlayersCarmen Manchado, J. Cortell-Tormo, J. Tortosa-Martínez (2018) · Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 10.1519/jsc.0000000000002259 · abstract only

randomised controlled trialBlock periodization of strength and endurance training is superior to traditional periodization in ice hockey playersB. Rønnestad, S. Øfsteng, S. Ellefsen (2018) · Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports · 10.1111/sms.13326 · abstract only

Each source is shown by its own study design.

19 sources: 1 meta-analysis, 4 narrative reviews, 1 non-randomised trial, 6 randomised controlled trials, 5 systematic reviews, 2 with design not recorded

Agreement: Direction recorded for 0 of 19 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
The claim's outcome: Outcome not yet recorded
Certainty: No source states a certainty rating.
Authors: Sources share authors: B. Rnnestad (first author of 3 sources); J. Conlon (first author of 2 sources); V. Issurin (first author of 3 sources); G. Haff (senior author of 2 sources); S. Ellefsen (senior author of 2 sources); V. Issurin (senior author of 3 sources).
How the sources were read: Some sources are based on abstracts, not full texts.

What each source measured and concluded (19)

randomised controlled trial · 2016

Conlon et al. (2016) — Periodization Strategies in Older Adults: Impact on Physical Function and Health.

What it measured: Physical function and health outcomes
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text

design not recorded · 2018

Manchado et al. (2018) — Effects of Two Different Training Periodization Models on Physical and Physiological Aspects of Elite Female Team Handball Players

What it measured: Physiological and physical handball performance factors (strength, power, sprint, VO2max, throwing velocity)
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text

randomised controlled trial · 2018

Rønnestad et al. (2018) — Block periodization of strength and endurance training is superior to traditional periodization in ice hockey players

What it measured: Strength (knee extension peak torque), power, and endurance (VO2max)
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text

meta-analysis · 2019

Mølmen et al. (2019) — Block periodization of endurance training – a systematic review and meta-analysis

What it measured: VO2max and maximal power output (Wmax); endurance performance
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text
What the review says it includes: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Studies and participants, as stated: N=20 studies (6 pooled for meta-analysis; from 2,905 screened)

systematic review · 2017

Kenneally et al. (2017) — The Effect of Periodization and Training Intensity Distribution on Middle- and Long-Distance Running Performance: A Systematic Review.

What it measured: Effect of training intensity distribution (pyramidal, polarized, threshold) on running performance
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text
What the review says it includes: Systematic review
Studies and participants, as stated: N=16 studies (6 observational, 3 case studies, 6 interventions, 1 review; from 493 articles)

randomised controlled trial · 2017

Conlon et al. (2017) — The efficacy of periodised resistance training on neuromuscular adaptation in older adults

What it measured: Neuromuscular adaptations (muscle CSA, strength, power, torque)
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text

randomised controlled trial · 2014

Bartolomei et al. (2014) — A Comparison of Traditional and Block Periodized Strength Training Programs in Trained Athletes

What it measured: Strength and power performance
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text

systematic review · 2021

González-Ravé et al. (2021) — Training Intensity Distribution, Training Volume, and Periodization Models in Elite Swimmers: A Systematic Review.

What it measured: Training intensity distribution, training volume, and periodization models
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text
What the review says it includes: Systematic review
Studies and participants, as stated: 9 studies (from 3487 identified); 3 intervention and 6 observational

randomised controlled trial · 2016

Rønnestad et al. (2016) — 5‐week block periodization increases aerobic power in elite cross‐country skiers

What it measured: Aerobic power indices (peak power output, power at 4 mmol/L lactate, VO2max)
How it was read: based on the abstract, not the full text

non-randomised trial · 2012

Painter et al. (2012) — Strength gains: block versus daily undulating periodization weight training among track and field athletes.

What it measured: Improvement in maximal strength and rate of force development.
How it measured it: 1-RM parallel squat and isometric midthigh pulls (MTPs) (objective).
How it was read: read in full text

randomised controlled trial · 2014

Rønnestad et al. (2014) — Block periodization of high‐intensity aerobic intervals provides superior training effects in trained cyclists

What it measured: Increase in VO2max, peak power output (Wmax), and power output at 2 mmol/L [la−].
How it measured it: VO2max (validated), Wmax (validated), power output at 2 mmol/L [la−] (validated).
Its conclusion, in its own words: “The present study suggests that block periodization of training provides superior adaptations to traditional organization during a 4‐week endurance training period, despite similar training volume and intensity.”
How it was read: read in full text

systematic review · 2025

Sahabuddin (2025) — Periode Pelatihan Fisik untuk Atlet Elit: Konsep Saat Ini dan Arah Masa Depan

What it measured: Enhancement of aerobic capacity and muscle strength.
How it measured it: VO2 max and muscle strength tests (objective).
How it was read: read in full text

systematic review · 2023

Galán-Rioja et al. (2023) — Training Periodization, Intensity Distribution, and Volume in Trained Cyclists: A Systematic Review.

What it measured: Improvement in VO2max, peak aerobic power, lactate thresholds, and ventilatory thresholds.
How it measured it: Objective physiological tests (e.g., VO2max tests, lactate threshold assessments).
How it was read: read in full text
What the review says it includes: Systematic review of 7 studies
Studies and participants, as stated: N=161 participants across 7 studies

systematic review · 2022

Casado et al. (2022) — Training Periodization, Methods, Intensity Distribution, and Volume in Highly Trained and Elite Distance Runners: A Systematic Review.

What it measured: Training intensity distribution (TID), volume, periodization, and methods; differences between event distances
How it was read: screened only, not extracted
What the review says it includes: Systematic review
Studies and participants, as stated: 10 articles included

narrative review · 2016

Issurin (2016) — Benefits and Limitations of Block Periodized Training Approaches to Athletes’ Preparation: A Review

What it measured: Benefits and limitations of block periodized (BP) training approaches
How it was read: screened only, not extracted

narrative review · 2022

Api et al. (2022) — COMPARISON OF PERIODIZATION MODELS: A CRITICAL REVIEW WITH PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

What it measured: Comparison of traditional, block and undulating periodization models
How it was read: screened only, not extracted

design not recorded · 2010

García-pallarés et al. (2010) — Performance changes in world-class kayakers following two different training periodization models

What it measured: Physiological, body composition and performance changes after traditional (TP) vs block (BP) periodization
How it was read: screened only, not extracted

narrative review · 2018

Issurin (2018) — Biological Background of Block Periodized Endurance Training: A Review

What it measured: Biological/molecular background and metabolic-performance effects of block periodized endurance training
How it was read: screened only, not extracted

narrative review · 2010

Issurin (2010) — New Horizons for the Methodology and Physiology of Training Periodization

What it measured: Methodology and physiology of training periodization; limitations of traditional periodization
How it was read: screened only, not extracted

Open the week builder