You should read the Bakken paper, and find out why threshold was selected as the intensity for these workouts. Sure, it isn't "magical", but it is a significant factor in developing distance running performance.
Running at other intensities, regardless of how much control one exerted, would not produce the same results.
He also goes into great detail as to why the doubling format was chosen (after lots of experimentation), as it was the best way to achieve higher volumes at this intensity, consistently.
It's overhyped because it wasn't as popular before, but now that select runners are having success with it people have convinced themselves that there's this new magical style of traning that will make them better or they're going to crush their PR's because they're getting in 3 more threshold miles a week. It's like quality vs quantity goes out the door.
You're forgetting something. Double treshold and the typical ingebrigtsen weeks with doubling each day (not unique of course, been done for decades) makes the athletes actually train as much as *most* should. You see several american runners saying they rarely double and have low milage. How could they compete with the doublers? Few can, most can't. Double treshold is almost guaranteed making you run more than Kyle Merber ever has. And that in a way that is way easier to have consistency, avoid overtraining and improve. Malmo did doubles decades ago, but for each Malmo there are many who go way too hard. Measuring lactate and keeping to the treshold philosophy avoids that.
Its not quality vs quantity, is laziness vs being an actual top athlete. Imagine telling someone youre a professional runner and only trains for 2 hours a day.
It's overhyped because it wasn't as popular before, but now that select runners are having success with it people have convinced themselves that there's this new magical style of traning that will make them better or they're going to crush their PR's because they're getting in 3 more threshold miles a week. It's like quality vs quantity goes out the door.
You're forgetting something. Double treshold and the typical ingebrigtsen weeks with doubling each day (not unique of course, been done for decades) makes the athletes actually train as much as *most* should. You see several american runners saying they rarely double and have low milage. How could they compete with the doublers? Few can, most can't. Double treshold is almost guaranteed making you run more than Kyle Merber ever has. And that in a way that is way easier to have consistency, avoid overtraining and improve. Malmo did doubles decades ago, but for each Malmo there are many who go way too hard. Measuring lactate and keeping to the treshold philosophy avoids that.
Its not quality vs quantity, is laziness vs being an actual top athlete. Imagine telling someone youre a professional runner and only trains for 2 hours a day.
1) You used Kyle Merber and Malmo for your point?
2) Double threshold doesn't imply doubling every day, but who could forgot doubling often might beneficial? Idiots.
3) Are the top american runners rarely doubling and doing low mileage???
4) You can measure lactate and keep to the threshold philosophy without doing doble threshold.
5) It is quality vs quantity. Cam Levins is famous for tripling, are doublers lazy? It's always a battle between stimulus, recovery, and health. There have been plenty of successful runners who don't double every day or double workouts.
They're not training more often, or for longer, or with greater intensity. They are running 100 to 120 miles a week in the base period, twice a day. Intensity of the double threshold sessions is carefully controlled by measuring lactate and is less intense than traditional track interval sessions. The careful control of intensity is what enables them to do double threshold sessions.
They're not training more often, or for longer, or with greater intensity. They are running 100 to 120 miles a week in the base period, twice a day. Intensity of the double threshold sessions is carefully controlled by measuring lactate and is less intense than traditional track interval sessions. The careful control of intensity is what enables them to do double threshold sessions.
So if they aren't increasing the number of sessions, or the mileage, or increasing the effort or the intensity (in fact you even suggest the intensity is less than traditional interval sessions) where is the advantage gained? If it isn't a change in training methods, how are athletes getting so much faster? (No, it isn't the shoes.) I think I can guess.
You're forgetting something. Double treshold and the typical ingebrigtsen weeks with doubling each day (not unique of course, been done for decades) makes the athletes actually train as much as *most* should. You see several american runners saying they rarely double and have low milage. How could they compete with the doublers? Few can, most can't. Double treshold is almost guaranteed making you run more than Kyle Merber ever has. And that in a way that is way easier to have consistency, avoid overtraining and improve. Malmo did doubles decades ago, but for each Malmo there are many who go way too hard. Measuring lactate and keeping to the treshold philosophy avoids that.
Its not quality vs quantity, is laziness vs being an actual top athlete. Imagine telling someone youre a professional runner and only trains for 2 hours a day.
1) You used Kyle Merber and Malmo for your point?
2) Double threshold doesn't imply doubling every day, but who could forgot doubling often might beneficial? Idiots.
3) Are the top american runners rarely doubling and doing low mileage???
4) You can measure lactate and keep to the threshold philosophy without doing doble threshold.
5) It is quality vs quantity. Cam Levins is famous for tripling, are doublers lazy? It's always a battle between stimulus, recovery, and health. There have been plenty of successful runners who don't double every day or double workouts.
Kyle Merber is a known name that was among the top 1500m runners in the US, and he did his first double after retiring. Malmo is an example to underline that doubling is obviously nothing new, and neither is two medium hard workouts a day. What is new is the way to do this as controlled as its beeing done at the moment, which reduces the amount of runners going way too hard. Few who hasnt measured lactate actually knows how easy low-treshold is, and if you want to do 4-5 treshold workouts a week and a hard workout, thats essential to avoid overtraining.
Low milage = 100 miles a week is not much with the new shoes, its not at all comparable to 100 miles in say 2015. Do less than 100 miles a week with new shoes for longer distances and you're absolutely doing low milage.
4) Of course you can, double isn't in itself MAGICAL. But the benefits are good, but they are all about long term benefits. Anyone thinking it will increase their aerobic capabilities hugely within a short time is delusional.
5) Obviously, the brits are a perfect example of that. The lazy Josh Kerr is one which is living and training under an American coach, and he has great times. But there is a way bigger difference between a full time athlete doing one short workout (saying short to not imply a regime like Warholm with one long workout a day is not a lot of training) a day for longer distance training when you're not working, that is not a lot of training. For everyone successfull not doubling, there are 10 more successfull doubling. This isn't sprints.
They're not training more often, or for longer, or with greater intensity. They are running 100 to 120 miles a week in the base period, twice a day. Intensity of the double threshold sessions is carefully controlled by measuring lactate and is less intense than traditional track interval sessions. The careful control of intensity is what enables them to do double threshold sessions.
So if they aren't increasing the number of sessions, or the mileage, or increasing the effort or the intensity (in fact you even suggest the intensity is less than traditional interval sessions) where is the advantage gained? If it isn't a change in training methods, how are athletes getting so much faster? (No, it isn't the shoes.) I think I can guess.
They are running higher milage than most 1500m runners, they have more effort at higher paces, they have more controlled (and therefore most likely less mistakes/overtraining) training. It is a change compared to say the American model of 2 aerobic workouts and a long run (I'm aware not everyone trains like this). The Ingebrigtsen for example barely has something you can call a long run if you compare it to their other workouts. Its slightly longer.
Whats the one word double tresholders credit for their success? Consistency.
No one ever did double threshold until a couple years ago then suddenly every single elite runner does it and that’s why times are so much faster. Definitely not the shoes.
So if they aren't increasing the number of sessions, or the mileage, or increasing the effort or the intensity (in fact you even suggest the intensity is less than traditional interval sessions) where is the advantage gained? If it isn't a change in training methods, how are athletes getting so much faster? (No, it isn't the shoes.) I think I can guess.
They are running higher milage than most 1500m runners, they have more effort at higher paces, they have more controlled (and therefore most likely less mistakes/overtraining) training. It is a change compared to say the American model of 2 aerobic workouts and a long run (I'm aware not everyone trains like this). The Ingebrigtsen for example barely has something you can call a long run if you compare it to their other workouts. Its slightly longer.
Whats the one word double tresholders credit for their success? Consistency.
That's a nice word, but it has been part of effective training for a long time. It is also necessarily subject to variation, depending on how the athlete feels. They aren't machines.
Modern training is hard work fine-tuned to the individual athlete - much as it always has been at the top. Of itself it doesn't explain the explosion in times and performances.