Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

I don't really follow the model that is described in this thread.
However I think (provided you notice some improvements in your threshold workouts or in your races) just gradually doing your workouts faster will keep on providing the needed stimulus. so for example Sirpoc does more km per session just because his 10x1k or 6x1.6k has improved basically each month.
It is also a good point that as your aerobic capacity improve you should also be able to do longer (timewise) threshold workouts, so if you have time I guess you can go up to 11x1k , 12x1k etc.. Again I don't really follow that model but my usual 3x3k sesssion has now morphed into a 4x3k. But if you have only 1h to spend for each session, just doing them faster gradually like sirpoc does seem to be the way ?

I don't think there is a limit to how much threshold/sub threshold work can be beneficial for you but certainly if someone is able to reach 3x15km of threshold work per week consistently I think it means he is pretty fast and able to reach very good results in competition already.

I think they are training kristoffer the same way they trained the other brothers. In a study they were a part of conducted by their physiologist (Leif Inge Tjelta?) their father was quoted as saying they spent their younger years focused predominantly on their aerobic capacity with very limited anaerobic intervals/running. If you follow the development of KI, he has done the same, basically maximizing his MLSS/60 min/Half Marathon race pace and after now only having very slight improvements, he is incorporating the next step: anaerobic training. I think sirpoc (without the injury) may begin to realize he could also take this step if he wants his 5k to keep improving (not very necessary for the half marathon though, if that's his main focus). The important thing to notice is how long KI spent on his aerobic capacity before all of a sudden he was able to do some pretty intense training (I remember seeing something like 20x300m hills in the last few months).

Anyways, that's my 2 cents to keep the conversation going. I know it's not "threshold singles" focused, but I do think it applies to anyone who does this method and finds they stagnate after a while (I also think this is related to the idea of a lydiard base "as long as possible" before very intense training)

I think it's interesting how this works (replying to the post above). It kind of contradicts Bakken's blog, in which talks about how this type of system needs consistent training above LT to be successful.

Bakken is really just talking about pushing up threshold from below , which is what sirpoc / KI are doing. The beauty is we can follow both these guys on Strava and it's totally free. We should be worrying what they are doing, not what double systems Bakken recommends for elites or what Jakob is running on running twice a day. Unless you are elite yourself, which is virtually nobody on Letsrun.

If you look at sirpoc runs on Strava, we pretty much know what his LTHR is at this point. He's stimulating that from below and maybe by the end of the last rep is almost touching that. Maybe you only get 95% of the benefit of a threshold run, but the fact is as a hobby jogger he can then do that 3x a week because it is so planned and controlled despite clearly being a slave to a watch and boring. Maybe he could fit 2 full threshold runs in Daniels style, but he'd almost certainly be wrecked and overall he has got less stimulus. So it wouldn't make sense to do that. Long term the three slightly less intense runs are worth more than the two at a higher intensity. In my mind, this whole thing is basically as simple as that.

For those who are interested , I've been following this thread and the progress on Strava of others in the group closely, the key take from this is that those who understand what is going on here under the hood, have made fantastic progress. The problems seem to be where people tweak it a bit or don't quite understand it in the first place, maybe they do but also over complicate it. I'm one of the many who have had fantastic success on singles doing this, I have just come down from 37 to a low 34 on my first 10k of the season. I am 42 now so I assumed by PB days were firmly in the past, considering I've been running 10 years and that PB was 8 years ago.

The posts sirpoc posted on page 1 here I think stand up remarkably well, even probably nearly a year on. I don't really think he has even tweaked a huge amount himself. He is still doing the same thing, day in day out and if you look at his current workouts I'm sure there is a PB coming soon, especially at the longer distances if he has anything planned.

Great post, thank you. Makes sense and sums it up well. I will add my thoughts, definitely don't over complicate it. I did a marathon and finally dipped under 3 hours after years of trying and getting close but mostly failing spectacular. I pretty much followed this system except I stretched the long run to 2 hours and 2.5 hours in the final build up to my marathon. I think this is what sirpoc himself said he would do should he run one. The long run was still in the easy pace guide and I needed to cut the Monday easy run to just 35-40 mins. But even with this I was good to go sub threshold by the Tuesday. In the race at about 20 miles for the first time ever I still felt strong. The aerobic engine this system creates is nothing short of spectacular, for all distances if you can stick to it over a 6 month + period. I didn't get bored myself, but I am quite autistic so repetition is part of my life ☺️

Great to see this thread still going strong and still even today some lovely contributions.

Sirpoc I noticed today ran very fast reps, but seemed to be all sub threshold going by looking at the HR. 3:16 I think per 1k*10? Looks like a big breakthrough possibly incoming?

Saw this too. I wish sirpoc would set his workouts up on garmin beforehand though so it automatically laps, trying to workout how fast he is running everything is a total pain! (no hate hehe)

I think he doesn't have Strava premium so we can only see basic laps per 1km sadly. If he had premium we could see Garmin workout if he set up. I would think he does going on how controlled this is I am sure workout set up on Garmin.

I think pace 3:16 average for 10*1km on 60s rest is impossible though? Maybe someone can ask him direct. HR monitor broken? To me this seems like a big jump, 32:30 total? That is 1 min faster than his 10k PB , even with 60s rest I don't see how that can be sub threshold.

The "trick" to get the most effective results on low mileage one session days is to raise both the anaerob and aerob capacity at the same time.

If you’re on the computer (not phone app) you can see manual laps for anyone manually lapping, so you can get his interval splits there.

As another poster mentioned, you can see all the splits on desktop. Sirpoc typically does the first two a bit slower than gets down to threshold pace. Same on the mile reps. Even the 2 mile reps. He often finishes the last rep a bit faster. Sometimes splits will be all over the place but I am assuming that has to do with course/weather. The most recent k reps finished in 3:10. That is his 5k PR pace. When I ran under 15 minutes for 5k, I was running threshold around where Sirpoc is now, 3:15 per k pace (give or take) for 1k and mile reps. Either he is pushing things a bit too far or he has made a huge jump in fitness.

It looks like a lot of his runs are near the sea and has a lot of wind, so some laps might be up and down. I assume he is using the advantage of this system, which is you can adapt the sub threshold paces as you go, when you gain fitness, before you even have run a pb as you can compare the effort/lactate/pace/HR or whatever go previous attempts. This also means there are no surprises when racing. So I would be shocked if he doesn't already know he is probably in PB shape right now, especially for 10k and up. I know on LRC we laugh at prediction workouts, but if you can run 10*1k on 1 min rest and stay under Lthr even right up to the end in 3:16 average, you clearly are going to have a great shot at sub 33 for a 10k. Not that I'm saying de deliberate run a predictior, just showing you can have a good guess at what people will run within a small margin based on repeatability of this training.

NGL I saw this these linked in another thread and was pretty skeptical, but it really hasn't disappointed. Read if from start to finish over a few days and didn't regret it. Amazing. Really is. Glad to see it still has life in it. Also just joined the Strava group, looks a great addition to the thread.

I calculate that TID (Training Intensity Distribution) for the Norwegian Method is about:
65% Endurance (Recovery, Base, Moderate efforts) for the
35% Stamina (Tempo to VO2 max efforts) over 5 workouts
5% Speed (Mile pace or faster) for the X factor workouts

I think you can modify the method to those parameters for someone doing 50-70 MPW. The endurance component is very important in helping to establish the metabolic infrastructure for efficient aerobic and glycolytic processes. So to the extent that infrastructure is develop, your potential for effective lactate processing at high intensity efforts is compromised. So, I'm not sure you can continue to have an optimal rate development with this kind of programming without progressively higher volumes of aerobic development.

From what I understand of how the coaches in Norway are starting thier younger runners on this method, they don't start with doubles until it's necessary to manage the increased training volume. If you've read Bakken's post on the Norwegian Method, the doiuble threshold was in response to breaking up necessary threshold training volume in to manageable workouts. Thus instead of doing a 20k tempo runs, he did two 10k volume threshold intervals with a restricted range of pace effort. To my thinking, to scale the Norwegian Method you should be looking at the training pattern and adjust the programming accordingly.

I've only started to do it and have already noticed an improvement. I took 3 months off, started back up in January with EZ 3 miles in about 31 minutes at 160 HR. Incorporated workouts like 10x1000 and 3x2000 (then 3x3000) at sub-threshold pace (7:55-8:00, 30k pace) for some of them...2x a week, no doubles.

1:38:33 for 13.1 in 74'F heat, Cap City. Had battled some a health scare for a few weeks, lost some mileage, but then eased into the 1/2 and was in the consistent 7:15s before the last 3 miles (heat and hilly course) slowed me down to 7:38-7:40 pace. But throughout the race, at least the first 10 miles, it felt EZ to steady--this style of training WORKS!

This is legit! I had done 10x1000 a month ago, averaging about 4:35 per K, or around 46 high, with 60s rest between reps.

When I ran my 1/2 my 6-mile split was about 46:05, 10k was probably a minute slower (47-ish?), due to it being a hotter day than my track time trial and no rest!

I see your post as someone who is trying to help, but I don't think you've read the thread? This isn't about Bakken, Jakob or doubles. Everything you have said has been covered months and months ago.

Sirpoc almost a year ago laid out this method for 50-70 MPW as you say in your example (or maybe 5-8 hours is a better way to think of it) and adapted it. It has been working fantastically well already for hundreds of people. That's not an exaggeration when you consider the Strava group is already well over 300 people dedicated to this who a large percentage of are following this closely.

Glad you had a good race. Way to go. I think it’s a little early, though, for “this style of training WORKS” and “This is legit!”

You came out of a period of low fitness, so I’d expect you to see significant improvement by training in any number of ways. You trained in this way and then experienced a “health scare,” but you’re not attributing the health scare to this training (hope you’re OK!). Of course, that’s because one shouldn’t necessarily infer a causal relationship in that way.

Since you have some encouraging signs, if you like the training, it sounds reasonable to stick with it. I suppose any number of effects like faster/greater gains, better recovery, easier time sticking with the training week in and week out, etc. would be signs over the course of time that it’s working for you. “Over the course of time”? Let’s call that a year or so.

Again, nice job on your race. Congratulations.

That's fair, and I see I shouldn't have attributed it on such a small sample size. But I think I can see *HOW* it would work long-term. Will stick with it and model it based on time (rather than a set pace), ie run 4-6 min. reps versus shooting for 1k in x:xx time, etc.