Well yes, but as others have mentioned on here (and I know "Double Threshold" has been discussed a lot already here over the months and years) is what our definition and implementation of it actually is:
I first read Bakken's threads on lactate meters about 20 years ago as a high school student athlete lurking on here. I read Canova's book in college. I grew up with Jack Daniels "Threshold Training" and 20-min Tempo Runs and VDOT tables when I read his first edition "Running Formula" by the age of 16.
But if we actually look at the "Norwegian model" or stuff from Bakken's blog we have to remember that a "Double Threshold day" actually was designed more like this:
AM: 5 x 6min (or 2km) Threshold session at 2-3mmol lactate on a short rest.
PM: 20x (45-sec to 60 sec) or 400m to 600m reps at 3-4mmol lactate values on a short rest.
I'm starting to now think that the whole "Double Threshold" is better for runners in the 1500m-10km race range rather than Marathoners (who already do a lot of aerobic development training). But then again Bakken was also pretty high volume....doing 180km a week (112 miles per week)...so there's that:
Thank you. I agree that this training is better for aerobic development for shorter distance runners.
The problem with this training is that 2-3 mmol lactate ends up being slower than marathon pace? And 3-4 mmol ends up being half-marathon pace?
So if the runner is doing his training and isn't also doing RACE PACE training, then they are just training to be slow
Not necessarily as I think that the 3-4mmol workout can be faster than Half Marathon Race pace because the intervals on that second session are quite short (45-seconds to 60-seconds). It could probably be faster than 10km race pace for some runners actually. Maybe "Critical Velocity" at around 12km-15km race pace? Depends on the athlete and the rest breaks....
It's like when you do something like 12-16 x 400m at 5km race pace (you get some Running Economy benefits/stimulus at basically "Vo2max Velocity") but it's not a "Vo2max workout" because if you give enough rest then lactate levels can actually remain pretty low for the overall workout.
As far as "Race Pace" goes (and an actual 5-Zone model of speed and intensity) I'd assume there are still some Strides and actual Anaerobic High Intensity Intervals (as well as Vo2max intervals and even Hills or what Bakken calls "The X Factor" built into the periodization of the training plan so much faster paces are hit at times instead of just the LT1-LT2 Threshold Training Double Days. But maybe those only make up 5% of weekly mileage on average....whereas the Threshold stuff can easily be 10-20% of weekly mileage.
What is interesting to me is that with all of Jakob's "double threshold workouts" he really didn't seem to like the Half Marathon distance that one time. However, it would be hard to be the best at 1500m,3km, 5km and up to 10km as well as the Half Marathon though...
Would guys like Salazar and Virgin have improved their 10000m times by a minute had they done double threshold workouts? My estimate is that D.T. workouts make no difference at all.
Maybe I'm old school, but for most runners (especially non-elites) I would not recommend "double threshold."
I think with supershoes/super spikes perhaps the training has evolved to allow more "double threshold" days more often...but I think it is also something for elites that might be on PEDs. Like "double threshold" would be a really good idea if one was on PEDs for sure.
For most people, it's a matter of getting up consistent higher mileage (higher volume) so they can simply just do a longer (single) Threshold or Tempo session in one go. Instead of 8 x 1km they can do 10 x 1km or instead of 4 x 1-mile they do 6 x 1-mile etc.
Maybe someone can fill me on the "the science" of why Double Threshold is "better" exactly? (or why you think so)?.......but basically I just see it right now along the lines of "crash training" or going for a "big super-compensation" (i.e. you train really hard sometimes, and you adapt to the newfound stress and you get better!).
The other concept/shift would be the idea of doing a higher % of your weekly volume at a "moderate intensity level" of 80-90% Max HR (Threshold to Tempo) instead of trying to hammer out more Vo2max or super high intensity training over 95%. So the "benefits" come more from dialing back from "Zone 5" or spiking 95% HR/effort (and over 4mmol values) for the sake of doing more volume of workouts between LT1-LT2 (Threshold to Tempo, lower lactate levels but higher relative volume). Training more "like a Marathoner" instead of a "1500m runner"....even if your target events are 1500m-10km.
But fitness and training gains usually come from a sequence of workouts over time ( a blend of Tempos, Long Runs, Strides, Vo2max, Weekly volume etc.) so generally no "single workout type" can be definitively credited for all the fitness gains. One single workout day (if it is too hard) can certainly break or injury you though....
Are you insinuating the Ingebrigtsens are on PEDs? Hobbs Kessler? Nordas? Almgren? George Mills? The Mike Smith group? Nuguse? According to your Strava, you have about six weeks experience with a lactate meter, so perhaps some epistemic humility is in order on this subject.
Maybe I'm old school, but for most runners (especially non-elites) I would not recommend "double threshold."
I think with supershoes/super spikes perhaps the training has evolved to allow more "double threshold" days more often...but I think it is also something for elites that might be on PEDs. Like "double threshold" would be a really good idea if one was on PEDs for sure.
For most people, it's a matter of getting up consistent higher mileage (higher volume) so they can simply just do a longer (single) Threshold or Tempo session in one go. Instead of 8 x 1km they can do 10 x 1km or instead of 4 x 1-mile they do 6 x 1-mile etc.
Maybe someone can fill me on the "the science" of why Double Threshold is "better" exactly? (or why you think so)?.......but basically I just see it right now along the lines of "crash training" or going for a "big super-compensation" (i.e. you train really hard sometimes, and you adapt to the newfound stress and you get better!).
The other concept/shift would be the idea of doing a higher % of your weekly volume at a "moderate intensity level" of 80-90% Max HR (Threshold to Tempo) instead of trying to hammer out more Vo2max or super high intensity training over 95%. So the "benefits" come more from dialing back from "Zone 5" or spiking 95% HR/effort (and over 4mmol values) for the sake of doing more volume of workouts between LT1-LT2 (Threshold to Tempo, lower lactate levels but higher relative volume). Training more "like a Marathoner" instead of a "1500m runner"....even if your target events are 1500m-10km.
But fitness and training gains usually come from a sequence of workouts over time ( a blend of Tempos, Long Runs, Strides, Vo2max, Weekly volume etc.) so generally no "single workout type" can be definitively credited for all the fitness gains. One single workout day (if it is too hard) can certainly break or injury you though....
Are you insinuating the Ingebrigtsens are on PEDs? Hobbs Kessler? Nordas? Almgren? George Mills? The Mike Smith group? Nuguse? According to your Strava, you have about six weeks experience with a lactate meter, so perhaps some epistemic humility is in order on this subject.
I didn't say any of that. That's not how "insinuations" work. Use some basic logic and think through this:
What I said was that if one was doping, then "Double Threshold workouts" would be a great thing do to imo. That doesn't logically imply that everyone who is doing "Double Threshold" is doping - and it also doesn't logically imply that everyone who isn't doing "Double Threshold" is clean....
If you're doping it's better to train extra hard and capitalize on "big days with more intensity" because what you're really doing is recovering faster and absorbing training at a faster and more efficient rate compared to your natural baseline. I also mentioned the "supershoe" effect...
Personally, yeah I haven't owned my own personal lactate meter for very long. I've been tested in the CU Boulder lab multiple times (with different protocols and studies) over the past decade and I've done a lot of lay study on the subject. Heck, I've been reading Bakken threads on here (as well as Canova) about Lactate/Threshold Training for the past 20 years. It's why I cited Bakken's blog. How long have you been running and coaching? Did I say something factually incorrect or false in any of my posts on this thread? (Because if I did, then please let me know and correct me)?