Total rest time is also different (10 x 1 min rest vs 3 x 1 min rest, eg). Not saying you are wrong regarding TSS (I have no clue), but too me it seems clear that pace does not equal intensity.
You're absolutely right. Intensity, which in the Norwegian model is measured by lactate levels, can be the same even if the pace is completely different.
The advantage to using some kind of data outside of pure pace is to verify, or at least semi-accurately guesstimate, where your LT2 is. Once you know that, you can jump into a 3 ST session workload immediately, no real need to build up to it like you would a real workout.
The disadvantage to using pace based off a race result is that bodies are different and there’s a chance you may hit LT2 before that pace (a number of people have reported that in the Strava group).
To me, the worst case scenario would be spending weeks/months building up to repeats that are too fast to be sustainable but not realizing it because you don’t have a sense for the RPE and you think this is supposed to feel harder than it is, then eventually realizing things aren’t working and having to spend even more time resting and/or dialing it back.
It can’t be stressed enough — overwork is easy to do if you don’t know what we’re doing, because we’re literally talking about a difference of seconds per KM per repeat, and it can really sneak up on you, even intra-workout.
If you must freestyle, then I would take some time to read the descriptions of RPE shared by people who have been doing this a while and confirmed their impressions with measurements. There’s a thread in the Strava group and a few comments in this one as well.
Well said! Best case scenario is to get a lactate meter and do a ramp test to understand where values should be at the end of a workout.
The piece I feel is overlooked is the amount of time at sub t. It seems like most people on the Strava group are jumping right into 25% of weekly time. It may be wise to start at 20% and see how you respond. If you're at 6hr weekly, 8x 3min will give you most of the stimulus needed (20%). It's the last 2 reps/ 6 min where you're most likely to tip over. In the big picture it's the 3rd quality workout with a 'long run' that creates the load over time and 20% will get you there with less risk.
I'm starting at 20% of time because I'm coming back from injury and faster running is more likely to irritate my hip. After reading others' experiences, it seems like some time at 20% sub t volume may be helpful because it is such a tight rope act. It's nice to give yourself room to grow as well.
10x3 will take 40 mins whereas 3x10 will take 33min. Also you are running the 10x3 faster so perhaps more chance of injury/over-training and they are less event specific if say training for 5k.
I'm not saying which is better, just stating the differences.
10x3 will take 40 mins whereas 3x10 will take 33min. Also you are running the 10x3 faster so perhaps more chance of injury/over-training and they are less event specific if say training for 5k.
I'm not saying which is better, just stating the differences.
I’m doing this training right now and what you’re saying does not align with my experience. 10 x 3 and 3 x 10 are the same “time in zone.” Like sirpoc, I don’t jog for 1-2 min between the reps. I walk. That interval or recovery period doesn’t add to the load or stress of the workout. If anything, I feel that the 3 x 10 min @ 25K-30K pace is more stressful than the 10 x 3 min @ 15K pace because you don’t get a minute rest after 3 minutes. From an RPE standpoint, the 3 x 10 min feels a lot harder. But I’m including it in the rotation (10 x 3, 5 x 6 min, 3 x 10 min) because that’s what sirpoc does and I’m trying not to deviate from what has clearly been shown to work.
10x3 will take 40 mins whereas 3x10 will take 33min. Also you are running the 10x3 faster so perhaps more chance of injury/over-training and they are less event specific if say training for 5k.
I'm not saying which is better, just stating the differences.
I’m doing this training right now and what you’re saying does not align with my experience. 10 x 3 and 3 x 10 are the same “time in zone.” Like sirpoc, I don’t jog for 1-2 min between the reps. I walk. That interval or recovery period doesn’t add to the load or stress of the workout. If anything, I feel that the 3 x 10 min @ 25K-30K pace is more stressful than the 10 x 3 min @ 15K pace because you don’t get a minute rest after 3 minutes. From an RPE standpoint, the 3 x 10 min feels a lot harder. But I’m including it in the rotation (10 x 3, 5 x 6 min, 3 x 10 min) because that’s what sirpoc does and I’m trying not to deviate from what has clearly been shown to work.
I think he's just stating the total time it takes to do the workout. Not anything about what to do in the recovery.
Sometimes it just makes sense to do something because it works, not always understanding the exact reason why. But also, there is probably more to training than just TSS/CTL, and being able to hold reps longer probably has value, as does being able to accumulate volume at a slightly faster pace. So therefore, you mix it up a little.
In the works... 5 hours of YouTube videos going over stress scores, training loads, critical speed, lactate curves, and how to synthesize all that data. Following that, for those that make it through, a 1 hour conversation with sirpoc. Feels like an appropriate 5:1 work to recovery ratio LOL
10x3 at MY 25k power scores 50 points for 40 mins. So 1.25 points per minute
3x10 at MT 15k power scores 45 points for 33mins. So 1.36 points per minute.
10x3 takes longer to execute and scores more overall points, but like you experience, 3x10 is a harder workout (slightly) as you accumulate points quicker.
Disclaimer this time, does it matter?? I Just want to show how the maths for points scoring works.
10x3 at MY 25k power scores 50 points for 40 mins. So 1.25 points per minute
3x10 at MT 15k power scores 45 points for 33mins. So 1.36 points per minute.
10x3 takes longer to execute and scores more overall points, but like you experience, 3x10 is a harder workout (slightly) as you accumulate points quicker.
Disclaimer this time, does it matter?? I Just want to show how the maths for points scoring works.
What are you %CP for your paces? I already broke Stryds scoring down in my post and your RSS/time would be the same as me, only the paces differ.
10x3 at MY 25k power scores 50 points for 40 mins. So 1.25 points per minute
3x10 at MT 15k power scores 45 points for 33mins. So 1.36 points per minute.
10x3 takes longer to execute and scores more overall points, but like you experience, 3x10 is a harder workout (slightly) as you accumulate points quicker.
Disclaimer this time, does it matter?? I Just want to show how the maths for points scoring works.
I just don’t understand why you are factoring in the recovery period. 10 x 3 min is 30 min of work, not 40 min.
10x3 at MY 25k power scores 50 points for 40 mins. So 1.25 points per minute
3x10 at MT 15k power scores 45 points for 33mins. So 1.36 points per minute.
10x3 takes longer to execute and scores more overall points, but like you experience, 3x10 is a harder workout (slightly) as you accumulate points quicker.
Disclaimer this time, does it matter?? I Just want to show how the maths for points scoring works.
I just don’t understand why you are factoring in the recovery period. 10 x 3 min is 30 min of work, not 40 min.
Well since this is for the time-limited athlete, the total time spent training is an important thing to consider.
Well since this is for the time-limited athlete, the total time spent training is an important thing to consider.
The issue I’m bringing up is whether the training load is the same, not how quickly I can get back home from the workout. The 1 minute I spend between 3 min reps is not adding to my overall training load is it? I’m just standing around and catching my breath as my heart rate comes down. Then, off with the next one.
I used 94% for the 3x10 and 97% for the 10x3. These are ESTIMATES for me as I've not run those distances or use those distances. My power curve is very flat so again, estimates.
'The 1 minute I spend between 3 min reps is not adding to my overall training load is it?'
No, but it's allowing you to do the next rep at a higher training load.
Peekay is interpreting this correctly. This is about time crunched training and mathematically in your example it is more time efficient to do 3x10's rather than 10x3's.
I am not saying you should do one rather than another, only trying to illustrate how I interpret the model to work.
I used 94% for the 3x10 and 97% for the 10x3. These are ESTIMATES for me as I've not run those distances or use those distances. My power curve is very flat so again, estimates.
Cool, thanks. We're just talking about scoring/planning right now, but in reality, running those paces should result in the same RSS. It's better to talk in %CP as that's universal (Hi Lexel) and your 12K, HM, etc. paces are individual, but tied to some %CP.
I just did a couple sims for those workouts. There's about a 10% difference in stress with the faster, shorter reps. It may have an effect over the long term.
The advantage to using some kind of data outside of pure pace is to verify, or at least semi-accurately guesstimate, where your LT2 is. Once you know that, you can jump into a 3 ST session workload immediately, no real need to build up to it like you would a real workout.
The disadvantage to using pace based off a race result is that bodies are different and there’s a chance you may hit LT2 before that pace (a number of people have reported that in the Strava group).
To me, the worst case scenario would be spending weeks/months building up to repeats that are too fast to be sustainable but not realizing it because you don’t have a sense for the RPE and you think this is supposed to feel harder than it is, then eventually realizing things aren’t working and having to spend even more time resting and/or dialing it back.
It can’t be stressed enough — overwork is easy to do if you don’t know what we’re doing, because we’re literally talking about a difference of seconds per KM per repeat, and it can really sneak up on you, even intra-workout.
If you must freestyle, then I would take some time to read the descriptions of RPE shared by people who have been doing this a while and confirmed their impressions with measurements. There’s a thread in the Strava group and a few comments in this one as well.
Well said! Best case scenario is to get a lactate meter and do a ramp test to understand where values should be at the end of a workout.
The piece I feel is overlooked is the amount of time at sub t. It seems like most people on the Strava group are jumping right into 25% of weekly time. It may be wise to start at 20% and see how you respond. If you're at 6hr weekly, 8x 3min will give you most of the stimulus needed (20%). It's the last 2 reps/ 6 min where you're most likely to tip over. In the big picture it's the 3rd quality workout with a 'long run' that creates the load over time and 20% will get you there with less risk.
I'm starting at 20% of time because I'm coming back from injury and faster running is more likely to irritate my hip. After reading others' experiences, it seems like some time at 20% sub t volume may be helpful because it is such a tight rope act. It's nice to give yourself room to grow as well.
Appreciate both responses! Having Strava group + thread as reference points is great resource. Also not sure who made VDOT based spreadsheet but it is a huge help! Only issue I can see for myself is usual problem I have with VDOT where my short distance VDOT much higher than it is for longer stuff, so will probably use 5k time or something to gauge results to get more in-line with effort. Going to be very conscious of effort in buildup as am aerobically weaker runner more used to traditional 800/1500 training. Even if method doesn't necessarily work best for me, should be fun to try and good way to get mileage and threshold work which I need to work on. Will probably race a few casual 5ks and maybe 10k but nothing serious this summer/spring so not too worried if I don't get training exactly right.
This is about time crunched training and mathematically in your example it is more time efficient to do 3x10's rather than 10x3's.
Yes, this is about being time efficient. However, in this example, 7 min is not going to make or break you. What I’d like to determine is whether the training load is the same between workouts. If I am more fast-twitch oriented (as I suspect I am) I can recover more easily from 10 x 3 min, although the pace is a bit faster. I feel much better during and after the 3 min reps.
However, there must be a reason why sirpoc doesn’t just do 10 x 3 min Tue/Thu/Sat. Is it to avoid boredom? Is it because he’d miss out on a physiological adaptation that the 10 min reps give you that the 3 min reps won’t give you?
Would this be safer/more sustainable? How much adaptation is coming from the pace difference?
If you do the workouts at the same pace and with the same work:rest ratio for the intervals, then the scores will be identical.
As far as what's most sustainable...I have no idea and it's entirely individual and will need trial and error or iterative training to determine. I'm waiting to see good data sets from people who do this for 12+ months to get a range of values. Like any other training, ramp rate becomes a thing long term.
Would this be safer/more sustainable? How much adaptation is coming from the pace difference?
If you do the workouts at the same pace and with the same work:rest ratio for the intervals, then the scores will be identical.
As far as what's most sustainable...I have no idea and it's entirely individual and will need trial and error or iterative training to determine. I'm waiting to see good data sets from people who do this for 12+ months to get a range of values. Like any other training, ramp rate becomes a thing long term.
The recoveries do not affect the TSS at all.
10x3min at a X pace/power with 1 min rest
10x3min at X pace/power with 2 min rest
10x3min at X pace/power with 20min rest
30min at X pace/power with 0 rest
15min at X pace/power in am + 15min at X pace/power in pm
All of the above have the exact same TSS. Obviously these workouts would not be the same difficulty. But they would have the same TSS because the duration and the fraction of threshold pace/critical power is the same for all of them.
I think some of you don't understand math very well. The formula uses duration of the run and the fraction of threshold pace/critical power that the workout was run at. If the duration and the percent of threshold are the same, then the score is the same. If the duration is the same but the percent of threshold is different, then the workout with the higher percent of threshold will yield a higher score. Any time not running is not counted.
You need to understand that the score does not tell you how effective a workout is. It is just a way to approximate the stress of the workout.
