Who are the morans that are asking for a podcast? For what purpose? This whole thing can be condensed to two pdf pages. Or are your brains so ruined by the millions of podcasts out there that the only way you can acquire information is through a bass boosted microphone of some influencer?
This thread is 100 pages long, and everyone has asked questions etc. I am not sure that a podcast would add anything.
If you have read 100 pages then well done. I haven't managed it, but taken in the key bits. I know I for one would love something like the Nordas podcast , on conversations about running but with this Hobby jogger format. Would maybe it easier to digest, from start to finish. Just my preference, especially as I learn ten times faster listening to stuff than reading , where I just find I skip to much reading and you can format it linear start to finish in a new audio format. Not that this thread is bad, just could be condensed excellently if you ask me into audio format I also think would help grow it to a wider audience, especially if sirpoc84 is game.
Who are the morans that are asking for a podcast? For what purpose? This whole thing can be condensed to two pdf pages. Or are your brains so ruined by the millions of podcasts out there that the only way you can acquire information is through a bass boosted microphone of some influencer?
Lol you really think you can condense even the CTL and TSS fantastic explanations into two pages? Let alone how you carry out the actual training. I hope you provide your document so we can all lol at summary. This thread provide information I have not seen in running context almost ever in a clear way. I don't think ever LRC responded in overall positive way to thread ever bar few trolls.
There many good running podcasts out there or general fitness one that is better than a lot of book you can buy. Don't be influence by insta clowns talking nonsense. This thread is for those who want to learn understand and get ahead of curve. Why you think so popular?
Lol you really think you can condense even the CTL and TSS fantastic explanations into two pages?
Why would anyone do that? These are established concepts that you can look up any time. Do you need a podcast to rehash them for the hundredth time? This thread stopped providing new information after page 15, so yes, it can be condensed to two pdf pages. Don't know why you felt the need to circlejerk this thread to me in the rest of your post seeing as I like this thread. Don't know why brainlets like you insist on making it into a podcast though.
This thread is 100 pages long, and everyone has asked questions etc. I am not sure that a podcast would add anything.
Agreed.
Not sure a podcast would add much to this particular thread and that’s assuming competent people asking relevant questions, which is by no means the rule with half these podcasts floating around
All CTL is is an average of the TSS (workout dress scoring) over the past N days, usually 42.
TSS is just a scoring system that ranks workouts relative to an hour at MLSS.
It’s just a way to numerically describe your workouts and track stress and how much work to do today.
Basically, track the average stress over the past 6 weeks (CTL) and try to increase it at a slow and steady rate until you can’t handle the daily stress anymore. By planning workout TSS, you can control the stress increase (ramp rate-TSS/day increase) and walk the fine line of progressive overload without overdosing on workout stress.
All CTL is is an average of the TSS (workout dress scoring) over the past N days, usually 42.
TSS is just a scoring system that ranks workouts relative to an hour at MLSS.
It’s just a way to numerically describe your workouts and track stress and how much work to do today.
Basically, track the average stress over the past 6 weeks (CTL) and try to increase it at a slow and steady rate until you can’t handle the daily stress anymore. By planning workout TSS, you can control the stress increase (ramp rate-TSS/day increase) and walk the fine line of progressive overload without overdosing on workout stress.
Jake Wightman wins a brilliant 1500m gold at the World Athletics Championships - becoming the first British winner of the event since Steve Cram in 1983.====...
I wanted to share some personal results of the method after few months of testing.
A bit of context, I am 57 yo and obviously I am not in a phase where I can progress much, but my objective would be to be under 40 min at 60 yo for 10k and under 1h30 on the half. 25 years ago I used a traditional method of training like Tuesday short intervals, Thursday long intervals, and weekend a medium long run, and was happy of the results with a low milage. After 50 yo and many years without any serious training I started again to train and improve up to about 41-42 min for 10k. Then I tried the Easy Interval Method, it was nice for the training but the results in competition were disappointing. I then went to a more Canova inspired method and went back to my level before starting EIM.
Then, I read this thread, and thought why not try it (unlike people critizing without trying) as there was enough time before my first competition in March. The advantage for the evaluation of a training method is that I do a serie of 10k races that are more or less the same every year, so beside the weather change I can really compare the results.
First race beginning of March: I finish more than 1 min faster than last year (at 57 , on 10K it is very significant). Very happy with the result, and the race went very well, I felt comfortable. The fact that I could run in a small group was an advantage compared to the previous year, so I think let's see what it will be on next race.
The next race was yesterday. But the conditions were very different than last year. Last year the temperature was 9C (48F) and yesterday 24C (75F). Also yesterday it was the first day of the year that it was warm so no possible to get used to the warmth before. Because of this, I was not optimistic to do a good performance. Nevertheless, I finished 20 sec faster than last year when many people finished 1 min slower than last year. So, that confirms IMO the result from the first race.
Conclusion: it seems that the method works well for me, even at an old age with many years of training behind.
My training: I use the 3 following workouts: 10 x 3 min rest 1 min, 5 x 6 min rest 1min30, 3 x 10 min rest 2 min. 1 rest day per week on average (sometimes 2 and sometimes more when on holidays...) Usually I won't do 3 workouts every week, if optimal it will be more 5 workouts in 2 weeks.
I wanted to share some personal results of the method after few months of testing.
A bit of context, I am 57 yo and obviously I am not in a phase where I can progress much, but my objective would be to be under 40 min at 60 yo for 10k and under 1h30 on the half. 25 years ago I used a traditional method of training like Tuesday short intervals, Thursday long intervals, and weekend a medium long run, and was happy of the results with a low milage. After 50 yo and many years without any serious training I started again to train and improve up to about 41-42 min for 10k. Then I tried the Easy Interval Method, it was nice for the training but the results in competition were disappointing. I then went to a more Canova inspired method and went back to my level before starting EIM.
Then, I read this thread, and thought why not try it (unlike people critizing without trying) as there was enough time before my first competition in March. The advantage for the evaluation of a training method is that I do a serie of 10k races that are more or less the same every year, so beside the weather change I can really compare the results.
First race beginning of March: I finish more than 1 min faster than last year (at 57 , on 10K it is very significant). Very happy with the result, and the race went very well, I felt comfortable. The fact that I could run in a small group was an advantage compared to the previous year, so I think let's see what it will be on next race.
The next race was yesterday. But the conditions were very different than last year. Last year the temperature was 9C (48F) and yesterday 24C (75F). Also yesterday it was the first day of the year that it was warm so no possible to get used to the warmth before. Because of this, I was not optimistic to do a good performance. Nevertheless, I finished 20 sec faster than last year when many people finished 1 min slower than last year. So, that confirms IMO the result from the first race.
Conclusion: it seems that the method works well for me, even at an old age with many years of training behind.
My training: I use the 3 following workouts: 10 x 3 min rest 1 min, 5 x 6 min rest 1min30, 3 x 10 min rest 2 min. 1 rest day per week on average (sometimes 2 and sometimes more when on holidays...) Usually I won't do 3 workouts every week, if optimal it will be more 5 workouts in 2 weeks.
Thanks for this.
Do you use the same pace for the 3 different workouts? Do you do a long run? What is your pace on easy days?
I wanted to share some personal results of the method after few months of testing.
A bit of context, I am 57 yo and obviously I am not in a phase where I can progress much, but my objective would be to be under 40 min at 60 yo for 10k and under 1h30 on the half. 25 years ago I used a traditional method of training like Tuesday short intervals, Thursday long intervals, and weekend a medium long run, and was happy of the results with a low milage. After 50 yo and many years without any serious training I started again to train and improve up to about 41-42 min for 10k. Then I tried the Easy Interval Method, it was nice for the training but the results in competition were disappointing. I then went to a more Canova inspired method and went back to my level before starting EIM.
Then, I read this thread, and thought why not try it (unlike people critizing without trying) as there was enough time before my first competition in March. The advantage for the evaluation of a training method is that I do a serie of 10k races that are more or less the same every year, so beside the weather change I can really compare the results.
First race beginning of March: I finish more than 1 min faster than last year (at 57 , on 10K it is very significant). Very happy with the result, and the race went very well, I felt comfortable. The fact that I could run in a small group was an advantage compared to the previous year, so I think let's see what it will be on next race.
The next race was yesterday. But the conditions were very different than last year. Last year the temperature was 9C (48F) and yesterday 24C (75F). Also yesterday it was the first day of the year that it was warm so no possible to get used to the warmth before. Because of this, I was not optimistic to do a good performance. Nevertheless, I finished 20 sec faster than last year when many people finished 1 min slower than last year. So, that confirms IMO the result from the first race.
Conclusion: it seems that the method works well for me, even at an old age with many years of training behind.
My training: I use the 3 following workouts: 10 x 3 min rest 1 min, 5 x 6 min rest 1min30, 3 x 10 min rest 2 min. 1 rest day per week on average (sometimes 2 and sometimes more when on holidays...) Usually I won't do 3 workouts every week, if optimal it will be more 5 workouts in 2 weeks.
Thanks for this.
Do you use the same pace for the 3 different workouts? Do you do a long run? What is your pace on easy days?
I use the pace that was advised: a bit slower than HM for the 10', HM for 6', 15K for 3'. I have a tendency to go a bit too fast but the short rest keeps me in line.
Easy days are very easy (like 1min/km over Marathon pace). Sometimes (like once a week) I add some strides or very short hill sprints at the end of an easy run.
I do once a week either a medium long run (1h30) or long run (2h) but not more than 2h as I don't run marathons anymore. And that is slow pace as well, except if I try to combine it with like the 3 x 10 min. In this last case I just have a longer session with a 30 min warmup and 30 min cool down and then this replace the LR.
I use the pace that was advised: a bit slower than HM for the 10', HM for 6', 15K for 3'. I have a tendency to go a bit too fast but the short rest keeps me in line.
Easy days are very easy (like 1min/km over Marathon pace). Sometimes (like once a week) I add some strides or very short hill sprints at the end of an easy run.
I do once a week either a medium long run (1h30) or long run (2h) but not more than 2h as I don't run marathons anymore. And that is slow pace as well, except if I try to combine it with like the 3 x 10 min. In this last case I just have a longer session with a 30 min warmup and 30 min cool down and then this replace the LR.
Very very similar to what I have found works. Replicating the paces sirpoc84 suggested but in time rather than distance, which I think he also suggested if you are on the slower side. Amazing that basically those paces stand the test for most of us, kudos to the post on the very first page. For context, I have PB at every distance in the last 2 months, 5k to HM at the age of 51 on 7 months of this program. I jumped on her bandwagon early and don't regret it. No mixing up of anything for me, shamelessly just follow all of sirpoc weeks on Strava just adjusted for my slowness.
Not sure about sirpoc specifically, but one of spreadsheets in the strava group has a pace adjustment factor that could be used. Just have to pick a % that you feel is fair for your individual difference between super and traditional shoes
Ah yes that spreadsheet is awesome. I'm so sorry , I can't remember the guys name who made it. But it's brilliant. It's in the Strava group somewhere and yes, you are right, there's a few adjustment factors in it. IMO it's a must have tool, if you are really going to commit to this. The other one is Hard2find's incredible spreadsheet, which will help you plan out sessions etc. Both freely available. I hope the fox news guy posting yesterday is reading. Yes , free! Ha ha and those tools are probably better than 99% of stuff on the internet that the fitness community will try charge you a fortune for.
Not all runners I've met (in real life or online) have even heard of LetsRun so that could be another factor--this thread is well-known to us but maybe not to the entire running world. I don't see Runner's World delving into this type of training (either Jakob's true doubles with the meters or your modified 3x singles workouts).
I use the pace that was advised: a bit slower than HM for the 10', HM for 6', 15K for 3'. I have a tendency to go a bit too fast but the short rest keeps me in line.
Easy days are very easy (like 1min/km over Marathon pace). Sometimes (like once a week) I add some strides or very short hill sprints at the end of an easy run.
I do once a week either a medium long run (1h30) or long run (2h) but not more than 2h as I don't run marathons anymore. And that is slow pace as well, except if I try to combine it with like the 3 x 10 min. In this last case I just have a longer session with a 30 min warmup and 30 min cool down and then this replace the LR.
Very very similar to what I have found works. Replicating the paces sirpoc84 suggested but in time rather than distance, which I think he also suggested if you are on the slower side. Amazing that basically those paces stand the test for most of us, kudos to the post on the very first page. For context, I have PB at every distance in the last 2 months, 5k to HM at the age of 51 on 7 months of this program. I jumped on her bandwagon early and don't regret it. No mixing up of anything for me, shamelessly just follow all of sirpoc weeks on Strava just adjusted for my slowness.
I love the simplicity of it, and doing it by time is even better--you "feel" the pace and just stop when your time is up, rather than looking down at the watch (which I've often found slows you down anyway).
On 30 mpw how much volume should I be putting into these workouts? I did 18:14 this morning at parkrun. Workout during the week was 5x1k at 6:20 (final rep was a bit faster).
About 5 km worth of sub threshold volume per session at ~ 30 mpw.
Serious question. Does anyone just do all of their mileage (especially low mileage guys, under 15 miles per week) sub threshold since it's easy to recover from?
At under 15mpw, you might as well put it all on sub-T singles every other day. 3 or 4 days of small sub-T runs of 4 or 5 miles would work, but it depends on what your limiting factor to your mileage is. If the reason that you can’t run more than 15mpw is time, you should just do hard workouts. If it’s injury risk, you should be finding ways to cross train effectively. Other than these reasons, one must need to raise their mileage before starting to think about different training philosophies.
Minor update after 8 months of the world's most boring training plan: last summer I ran 5000m in 17:05 on the track and I recently ran 16:30 on the roads, despite doing very little running at quicker than 5:45 mile pace. Still feels weird, but it seems to be working. Interested to see if it translates to middle-distance races.
I run about 17:45 and do one interval session a week at 5:30-5:50 pace. Something basic like 6x800.
If I drop down to 6:10 pace as shown in the table below (for 17:45 5k) and do threshold intervals, aren't I just going to race slower? Or do I need to aim for a lot more volume to make up for the reduced pace?