I agree with this to an extent. I'm a coach with plenty of experience with younger athletes and it would be hard to take seriously for any respected coach something that didn't incorporate race pace work, whatever that distance might be.
Even for older or masters runners. As for sirpoc , I suspect there is more here going on than we are shown on the face, that is my gut reaction to this thread. I am happy to offer my coaching services as I think I could probably take him sub 15, if he incorporated a mixture of the threshold work and then some specific hills and drills. Right now, he lacks any real speed to hit those paces you need for sub 15, which would be a remarkable achievement. No magic coach here, just 40+ years of experience of knowing what takes a runner to the next level.
I think that probably on this method in thread most hobby joggers can get to 17-18 mins range for 5k just on this alone.. But I agree, go get any faster you need speed or sharpen workouts. You do need to know 5k pace to run a 5k . It is very specific event. It's why you see sub 17 guys, the fast masters athletes doing track workout. They know you need this to compete.
No, you don't need to 'know' 5k pace to run a 5k. That's totally ridiculous. There is no magic to 5k pace. The magic comes to play on race day in any event, when your legs are rested and your mind is sharp, you find a good group and things like that. Believe it or not, one can race faster than one trains.
Also, what is so 'very' specific about this event, the 5k? It's as specific as a 10k or a 3k is.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
I think that probably on this method in thread most hobby joggers can get to 17-18 mins range for 5k just on this alone.. But I agree, go get any faster you need speed or sharpen workouts. You do need to know 5k pace to run a 5k . It is very specific event. It's why you see sub 17 guys, the fast masters athletes doing track workout. They know you need this to compete.
Are people even reading this thread? Seriously, that is a genuine question. Anyone can go on Strava to the Norwegian group and follow what sirpoc is doing. He just ran 15:40. I have his training on my feeds every single day. He does no strides, no hills, no 5k pace work. None. I don't understand what is hard to accept or understand about this? It's like this has been somehow built into this mystery or myth or that something is being hidden.
I am a master also on the British Masters scene. The 5k national masters road championship is usually won in a low 15. It was 15:19 I think last year. I placed in the top 30, in something like a mid to high 16. Sirpoc would lap me in a 5k , or close to it, on the track. If he continues to progress at the same rate, there's a good chance he could win the road 5k masters national champs or at least get top 5. Must be all that 5k work I'm doing that helps me almost get lapped versus what he is doing.
I have been running 20+ years since cross country in school on cold winter afternoons in the north of England. I've had dozens of coaches who think they know everything about running. I can tell you now I would probably recommend what sirpoc is doing to what 99% of so called paid or professional coaches would prescribe. I certainly know how I will structure my training next year based on this thread.
Sirpoc is amazing and will answer questions and/clarify things. Even for slower runners like 20-23 5kers, he says it will benefit them.
I'm surprised more running sites like reddit, dyestat, etc. haven't picked this up. RW has done a few pieces on it, to their credit, and so has Roche (Outside Runner?) and some of the trail folks.
Question for the group. I’ve been following the schedule below and wondering whether I’m making a mistake by only doing 3 min reps. The 3 min reps are going well but is there a need to switch things up? I’m currently in 19:36 shape for 5K.
Question for the group. I’ve been following the schedule below and wondering whether I’m making a mistake by only doing 3 min reps. The 3 min reps are going well but is there a need to switch things up? I’m currently in 19:36 shape for 5K.
M: 6 x 3 min @ 6:45 pace
T: 40 min easy (9:20 pace)
W: 6 x 3 min @ 6:45 pace
R: 40 min easy (9:20 pace)
F: 6 x 3 min @ 6:45 pace
Sa: 60 min easy (LR) @ 9:20 pace
Su: Off
As a starter, I would increase the volume of easy running. 40 mins is very little, and 60 mins is not really a long run.
Are people even reading this thread? Seriously, that is a genuine question. Anyone can go on Strava to the Norwegian group and follow what sirpoc is doing. He just ran 15:40. I have his training on my feeds every single day. He does no strides, no hills, no 5k pace work. None. I don't understand what is hard to accept or understand about this? It's like this has been somehow built into this mystery or myth or that something is being hidden.
I am a master also on the British Masters scene. The 5k national masters road championship is usually won in a low 15. It was 15:19 I think last year. I placed in the top 30, in something like a mid to high 16. Sirpoc would lap me in a 5k , or close to it, on the track. If he continues to progress at the same rate, there's a good chance he could win the road 5k masters national champs or at least get top 5. Must be all that 5k work I'm doing that helps me almost get lapped versus what he is doing.
I have been running 20+ years since cross country in school on cold winter afternoons in the north of England. I've had dozens of coaches who think they know everything about running. I can tell you now I would probably recommend what sirpoc is doing to what 99% of so called paid or professional coaches would prescribe. I certainly know how I will structure my training next year based on this thread.
Most impressive thing is lack of true speed or periodization. Just plug and chug T. Maybe elements of strides and hills more helpful for shorter distances but surely sirpoc could run good 1500 off of just threshold. But think most coaches would worry not having athletes do pace work like this thinking "if haven't done it in practice, how can they do it in race?" I'm someone who take confidence from paces hit in workouts so, as appealing as training is, it is bit scary to think of not hitting race pace leading into key races and using like security blanket to calm nerves about how will feel.
Also not sure if anyone has done periodized version of this training? Have thought for myself running mid distance with 5k max race distance could use this kind of training for summer/fall base then switch up to adding hills, strides in winter. Finally move to race pace stuff in spring. Maybe defeats purpose of long term gains but seems that threshold block from July-November could provide good aerobic base moving into faster stuff. Makes training more conventional but think big takeaway could be running much more controlled effort regularly rather than having big "hero" workouts.
Are people even reading this thread? Seriously, that is a genuine question. Anyone can go on Strava to the Norwegian group and follow what sirpoc is doing. He just ran 15:40. I have his training on my feeds every single day. He does no strides, no hills, no 5k pace work. None. I don't understand what is hard to accept or understand about this? It's like this has been somehow built into this mystery or myth or that something is being hidden.
I am a master also on the British Masters scene. The 5k national masters road championship is usually won in a low 15. It was 15:19 I think last year. I placed in the top 30, in something like a mid to high 16. Sirpoc would lap me in a 5k , or close to it, on the track. If he continues to progress at the same rate, there's a good chance he could win the road 5k masters national champs or at least get top 5. Must be all that 5k work I'm doing that helps me almost get lapped versus what he is doing.
I have been running 20+ years since cross country in school on cold winter afternoons in the north of England. I've had dozens of coaches who think they know everything about running. I can tell you now I would probably recommend what sirpoc is doing to what 99% of so called paid or professional coaches would prescribe. I certainly know how I will structure my training next year based on this thread.
Agree with a lot of this. Mainly road based master here as well. I don't think people are quite grasping how good 15:40 / 32:23 is for a master in their 40s. Yes of course there are faster, but the absolutely vast majority are going to get absolutely nowhere near this. Not only that, it's a pretty unique training to be at such a high vet level coupled with not running for long as well as an absolutely vast improvement over the last 18 months. Think of all the train wreck "sub 16 journey" or the like threads of older runners, where nobody even gets near and ends up retired in a year.
I am planning to try this training approach this summer/fall. I apologize if this was addressed elsewhere in the thread, but since it is quite long will just ask here: For those using this method, is it important that the long run be separate from the 3 workouts, or can the long run and a workout be combined as one? For instance, is it OK to do a 12M run with 3 x 2M @30k pace w/2m jogging rest in the middle, or is it better to do an easy 12M with the the 3 x 2M as a stand along workout the next day or the day prior?
I am planning to try this training approach this summer/fall. I apologize if this was addressed elsewhere in the thread, but since it is quite long will just ask here: For those using this method, is it important that the long run be separate from the 3 workouts, or can the long run and a workout be combined as one? For instance, is it OK to do a 12M run with 3 x 2M @30k pace w/2m jogging rest in the middle, or is it better to do an easy 12M with the the 3 x 2M as a stand along workout the next day or the day prior?
Just my opinion. If you use an 8-day week, sure, you can include a quality workout with your long run. Otherwise, with a 7-day week, you would get QEQEQEQQ (Quality/Easy). No recovery day between one week and the other.
I am planning to try this training approach this summer/fall. I apologize if this was addressed elsewhere in the thread, but since it is quite long will just ask here: For those using this method, is it important that the long run be separate from the 3 workouts, or can the long run and a workout be combined as one? For instance, is it OK to do a 12M run with 3 x 2M @30k pace w/2m jogging rest in the middle, or is it better to do an easy 12M with the the 3 x 2M as a stand along workout the next day or the day prior?
Just my opinion. If you use an 8-day week, sure, you can include a quality workout with your long run. Otherwise, with a 7-day week, you would get QEQEQEQQ (Quality/Easy). No recovery day between one week and the other.
I think he meant the long run being the 3rd quality workout by incorporating the threshold into it but I could be wrong of course.
Are people even reading this thread? Seriously, that is a genuine question. Anyone can go on Strava to the Norwegian group and follow what sirpoc is doing. He just ran 15:40. I have his training on my feeds every single day. He does no strides, no hills, no 5k pace work. None. I don't understand what is hard to accept or understand about this? It's like this has been somehow built into this mystery or myth or that something is being hidden.
I am a master also on the British Masters scene. The 5k national masters road championship is usually won in a low 15. It was 15:19 I think last year. I placed in the top 30, in something like a mid to high 16. Sirpoc would lap me in a 5k , or close to it, on the track. If he continues to progress at the same rate, there's a good chance he could win the road 5k masters national champs or at least get top 5. Must be all that 5k work I'm doing that helps me almost get lapped versus what he is doing.
I have been running 20+ years since cross country in school on cold winter afternoons in the north of England. I've had dozens of coaches who think they know everything about running. I can tell you now I would probably recommend what sirpoc is doing to what 99% of so called paid or professional coaches would prescribe. I certainly know how I will structure my training next year based on this thread.
Most impressive thing is lack of true speed or periodization. Just plug and chug T. Maybe elements of strides and hills more helpful for shorter distances but surely sirpoc could run good 1500 off of just threshold. But think most coaches would worry not having athletes do pace work like this thinking "if haven't done it in practice, how can they do it in race?" I'm someone who take confidence from paces hit in workouts so, as appealing as training is, it is bit scary to think of not hitting race pace leading into key races and using like security blanket to calm nerves about how will feel.
Also not sure if anyone has done periodized version of this training? Have thought for myself running mid distance with 5k max race distance could use this kind of training for summer/fall base then switch up to adding hills, strides in winter. Finally move to race pace stuff in spring. Maybe defeats purpose of long term gains but seems that threshold block from July-November could provide good aerobic base moving into faster stuff. Makes training more conventional but think big takeaway could be running much more controlled effort regularly rather than having big "hero" workouts.
MoVB
I believe Marius Bakken did the periodized version of this training.
To give a proper answer to this question I'd want more information about your reasoning for wanting to make the change, your short/long term goals, your weekly schedule, and your training/injury histories, because all of those things factor when tweaking elements of this system.
But my personal opinion is to avoid tweaking, at least at first, because so much of the beauty/point of the Sirpoc method comes from applying the tested structure: E Q E Q E Q E(LR), which is designed to maximize weekly load within a time constrained period in an infinitely repeatable way, while minimizing injury risk.
If you want to deviate from this structure by condensing the schedule, then you're necessarily going to end up doing one of two things:
1. Increasing your load for a given day above what is recommended and introducing risk; or
2. Sacrificing weekly load by cutting back on either the LR or the Q or both
Neither is optimal, so if you have the logistical ability to run 7 days a week, my advice is to just run the 7 days a week as prescribed. It's a great bang for your buck / value approach, which again is the entire point of this training.
If you're scared about running 7 days because you've historically gotten hurt without a rest day, consider trying this system within prescribed paces for a week or two and see how you feel -- my prediction is you won't have any desire to rest on the seventh day.
If you logistically can't run 7 days and need to chop something, in the absence of more info I'd probably cut out the long run and keep a full third Q session as programmed. Eventually once you know the system and your limits you can try to work in more volume onto the E days to open up more intervals on the Q days.
But again, the long run is part of this method's special sauce, both in terms of benefits produced in isolation and also in terms of its supportive ability to unlock additional intervals. So if you can keep it, I'd do that.
Most impressive thing is lack of true speed or periodization. Just plug and chug T. Maybe elements of strides and hills more helpful for shorter distances but surely sirpoc could run good 1500 off of just threshold. But think most coaches would worry not having athletes do pace work like this thinking "if haven't done it in practice, how can they do it in race?" I'm someone who take confidence from paces hit in workouts so, as appealing as training is, it is bit scary to think of not hitting race pace leading into key races and using like security blanket to calm nerves about how will feel.
Also not sure if anyone has done periodized version of this training? Have thought for myself running mid distance with 5k max race distance could use this kind of training for summer/fall base then switch up to adding hills, strides in winter. Finally move to race pace stuff in spring. Maybe defeats purpose of long term gains but seems that threshold block from July-November could provide good aerobic base moving into faster stuff. Makes training more conventional but think big takeaway could be running much more controlled effort regularly rather than having big "hero" workouts.
MoVB
There's no speed or periodization in the training, but my experience has been that both come naturally through racing. You can always race a bit more to get that specific pace experience. Though I hit a 1500m PB on the second attempt this year so maybe it's not needed.
To give a proper answer to this question I'd want more information about your reasoning for wanting to make the change, your short/long term goals, your weekly schedule, and your training/injury histories, because all of those things factor when tweaking elements of this system.
But my personal opinion is to avoid tweaking, at least at first, because so much of the beauty/point of the Sirpoc method comes from applying the tested structure: E Q E Q E Q E(LR), which is designed to maximize weekly load within a time constrained period in an infinitely repeatable way, while minimizing injury risk.
If you want to deviate from this structure by condensing the schedule, then you're necessarily going to end up doing one of two things:
1. Increasing your load for a given day above what is recommended and introducing risk; or
2. Sacrificing weekly load by cutting back on either the LR or the Q or both
Neither is optimal, so if you have the logistical ability to run 7 days a week, my advice is to just run the 7 days a week as prescribed. It's a great bang for your buck / value approach, which again is the entire point of this training.
If you're scared about running 7 days because you've historically gotten hurt without a rest day, consider trying this system within prescribed paces for a week or two and see how you feel -- my prediction is you won't have any desire to rest on the seventh day.
If you logistically can't run 7 days and need to chop something, in the absence of more info I'd probably cut out the long run and keep a full third Q session as programmed. Eventually once you know the system and your limits you can try to work in more volume onto the E days to open up more intervals on the Q days.
But again, the long run is part of this method's special sauce, both in terms of benefits produced in isolation and also in terms of its supportive ability to unlock additional intervals. So if you can keep it, I'd do that.
This is a great post and one that most people should take on board. I tried this training and to tweak a few things and it just didn't work out over 2-3 months. I started again as laid out, after another 3 months really started to get the benefit. If you look at sirpoc, he has basically changed nothing in terms of weekly make up, only some increased time. That tells you all you need to know and has stuck to the 7 day schedule and he's STILL improving.
I'm in the Strava group myself, it's actually great, fantastic adult discussions like the old days of LR. One thing I notice, the people who have not had success of which there are some , or the few people who have dug themselves into big holes, are the ones who have changed a lot, to the point you couldn't even say it resembles this method. I won't pick on anyone, but there was even a guy with a lactate meter who managed to dig themselves a big hole.
The only thing anyone might need to change, is the paces sirpoc put up. Especially if you are starting out and it feels too hard, it probably is. Even if you are within the guide. I've seen sirpoc post, the guide and paces applied to him and we're only a rough area. Although they seem to fit decent for most people, if you are really in aerobically developed, start off slower. I did this, within a month or so I almost now sit absolutely smack bang in the middle of the guide paced.
Even then, this post I am replying to hits the nail on the head. Stick to the 7 day schedule unless you absolutely can't, for some reason. I always thought I couldn't run 7 days, now after 3 months of this I can't imagine not running all 7 days.
To give a proper answer to this question I'd want more information about your reasoning for wanting to make the change, your short/long term goals, your weekly schedule, and your training/injury histories, because all of those things factor when tweaking elements of this system.
But my personal opinion is to avoid tweaking, at least at first, because so much of the beauty/point of the Sirpoc method comes from applying the tested structure: E Q E Q E Q E(LR), which is designed to maximize weekly load within a time constrained period in an infinitely repeatable way, while minimizing injury risk.
If you want to deviate from this structure by condensing the schedule, then you're necessarily going to end up doing one of two things:
1. Increasing your load for a given day above what is recommended and introducing risk; or
2. Sacrificing weekly load by cutting back on either the LR or the Q or both
Neither is optimal, so if you have the logistical ability to run 7 days a week, my advice is to just run the 7 days a week as prescribed. It's a great bang for your buck / value approach, which again is the entire point of this training.
If you're scared about running 7 days because you've historically gotten hurt without a rest day, consider trying this system within prescribed paces for a week or two and see how you feel -- my prediction is you won't have any desire to rest on the seventh day.
If you logistically can't run 7 days and need to chop something, in the absence of more info I'd probably cut out the long run and keep a full third Q session as programmed. Eventually once you know the system and your limits you can try to work in more volume onto the E days to open up more intervals on the Q days.
But again, the long run is part of this method's special sauce, both in terms of benefits produced in isolation and also in terms of its supportive ability to unlock additional intervals. So if you can keep it, I'd do that.
This is a great post and one that most people should take on board. I tried this training and to tweak a few things and it just didn't work out over 2-3 months. I started again as laid out, after another 3 months really started to get the benefit. If you look at sirpoc, he has basically changed nothing in terms of weekly make up, only some increased time. That tells you all you need to know and has stuck to the 7 day schedule and he's STILL improving.
I'm in the Strava group myself, it's actually great, fantastic adult discussions like the old days of LR. One thing I notice, the people who have not had success of which there are some , or the few people who have dug themselves into big holes, are the ones who have changed a lot, to the point you couldn't even say it resembles this method. I won't pick on anyone, but there was even a guy with a lactate meter who managed to dig themselves a big hole.
The only thing anyone might need to change, is the paces sirpoc put up. Especially if you are starting out and it feels too hard, it probably is. Even if you are within the guide. I've seen sirpoc post, the guide and paces applied to him and we're only a rough area. Although they seem to fit decent for most people, if you are really in aerobically developed, start off slower. I did this, within a month or so I almost now sit absolutely smack bang in the middle of the guide paced.
Even then, this post I am replying to hits the nail on the head. Stick to the 7 day schedule unless you absolutely can't, for some reason. I always thought I couldn't run 7 days, now after 3 months of this I can't imagine not running all 7 days.
Thank you again. It seems to good to be true but more and more comments/posts in the singles thread are showing it works! I think runners are naturally hesitant b/c it goes against JD and Pfitz, et al. to a degree. (To be fair those guys recommend intervals and LT at some point).
There may be people who want to rest one day a week, I think the logical modification would be: Q, E, Q, E, Q, LR.
I'm not so sure. A long run increases the day's load by ~20+ points of TSS over a regular E run, and that's following a peak-stress Q day, and will be followed by another peak-stress Q day, so I think if load management/resting is truly a requirement, I'd probably err on the side of keeping it E and trying to distribute that load over 3 days, over time, to more safely build the load into the week, and make sure the runner continues to feel like they can handle it.
And then I think, over time, they'll probably find themselves feeling strong enough to train on that 7th day anyway, which would be the optimal outcome because it represents a more significant increase in weekly TSS.
If cutting the day is just for time or convenience and the athlete is reasonably trained then yeah, I think that's a scenario where I'd default to keeping the LR in there and cutting the E.
Maybe this is an overcautious approach, but to me the devilish thing about this system is that it's extremely simple as long as you follow the rules exactly, but that means understanding exactly how the rules apply to your body, and it also means that you're flirting with the edge pretty much the whole time by design.