Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Sirpoc does 60s for k reps, 90s for miles, 2:00 for 2 miles. Some people do 60s for the mile reps as well. It doesn’t make a huge difference but play around with it and see what works best for you.

If you’re doing 400s then it’s 30 seconds. I think sirpoc takes 2 min between the 3200 reps. Everything else, 1 minute.

I think this is what I've read as well. In theory these are what paces should be based on recent times.

1:38:33 13.1M on 4/27 (use time/effort more than exact pace).

25x400 at CV (1:45-1:48, or 7:04-7:14/mi) w/30s rest (I don't do these, but just here for the record if I did--it seems too short of a rep).

10x1k at 12-15k (4:31-4:35, or 7:16-7:21/mi) w/60s rest = start off with 10x3 mins, if time is better than pace, etc.
6x1600 at 10M (7:21, or 7:24/mi) w/60s rest = start off with 6x5 or 6x6 mins
5x2k at HM-25k (9:20-9:27, or 7:32-7:36/mi) w/60s rest = start off with 3x10 mins
3x3k at 25k-30k (14:11-14:21, or 7:36-7:42/mi) w/60s rest = start off with 2x15 mins

Interesting for me as only recent 10k I ran in Oct of last year was similar but has had me curious because this spring have done much faster shorter distance races and wasn't sure if those were good markers for this type of training. When plugging in VDOT into spreadsheet from recent (last month) 5:22 mile time trial, paces seemed faster than I would consider manageable. Haven't actually plugged them into workouts yet as just getting back from two weeks off but dilemma was whether to use stronger shorter distance race time as base or weaker long distance race times? Have always been a weaker aerobic runner so even drop off between 5k vs 10k is pretty dramatic and usually something noticed doing tempo reps.

MoVB

I literally just asked him this on his Strava run this morning, where he was doing 1600s. He told me 90s, but more out of practicality based on his route. Yes, 2' recovery for 3200s but, again, partly out of practicality for road crossings on his route. Basically use a window of what you need to be recovered enough, not only for the workout you're in, but week-in and week-out.

If using VDOT, I would use an effort of 40+ minutes to select VDOT for this type of training.

Instead of VDOT, you could use CV with your mile to 5k/10k times to get an idea of where you should run your intervals.

After reading through the entire thread and joining the Strava group, I decided to do an audio summary of this method of training for The Running Shorts Podcast. I know it’s not as exciting as getting to hear from the man himself but I’ll leave the interviewing to someone more skilled than me, with a better voice, and with a more technical/professional setup.

At age 39, Sirpoc’s story has directly impacted and inspired me and it’s great to see so many others having success with it too. Thank you sirpoc and thank you LR community.

podcasts.apple.com

‎The Running Shorts Podcast: The Norwegian Method for Amateur Runners on Apple Podcasts

‎Show The Running Shorts Podcast, Ep The Norwegian Method for Amateur Runners - Jun 7, 2024

Link:podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-runn...

It's funny....this method is just a rational method of training. You identify current fitness using some repeatable way, track training stress, and adjust paces based on feel. It's how anyone should approach any style of training...not just subthreshold.

You can start any athlete at XX CTL and smartly build CTL to some future XX while managing fatigue. You can even easily design workouts to follow some progression to keep fatigue low during training.

The old way of shoehorning yourself into some regimented canned plan is just silly.

Hi my friend. I think this pod is quite nice. You so yourself disservice. Personally I think a good follow up would be to speak to the man himself. Now 40 and I just saw on Strava he has been selected for his country for 10k masters. That is very impressive for a tough age group. This isn't just like worlds where anyone can turn up . You have to earn it. If not yourself, I would love to hear the sirpoc story from start to finish . Maybe it is lame. But he has certainly inspire me to do more and show anything is possible even from low start point. The personal story alone is interesting, but add that to stumble on a good method i think very interesting guest for many podcasts.

+1 to that. LRC is a lame a toxic place 99% of the time. But truth said, this thread has provided a great inspiration for so many people. You only have to look not just here but well over 400 people now from this thread on the Strava group. It's pretty cool. Whether the British dude likes it or not, it basically has come down to sirpoc and spiralled from there. It's a really interesting story and deserves the publiioit gets and I'm sure will really blow up in the future. Especially when you consider the guy isn't actually here to sell us anything. HOF first ballot thread and showing now signs of slowing down.

Maybe it wouldn’t work for a variety of reasons, but has anybody just tried tracking TSS with number of heartbeats in a workout?

Want to reiterate that on first page sirpoc mentions training helped him get from 18:50s down to sub 17:30. Was July of 2023 and now he's run 15:40s and Masters 10k selection! Not even sure if training will be my cup of tea personally but thread and Strava group are incredible resources. Probably only issue with thread is at this point has ballooned to hundreds of pages/thousands of posts and too much to read all through. Know I am guilty of asking/reposting things here clogging it up but really appreciate people asking and answering questions. First 20 pages were goldmine when I first found!

MoVB

Anecdotal I know but a lot of 30-45 y/os are in this thread (I am 40). I think it's a great way to train long-term as you get older, regardless of times. It will keep you at least healthy without overcooking yourself AND keep you enjoying the sport.

At the end of the day that's really the end goal for most...

Cheers

Jeff, nothing inherently wrong with using TRIMP, I've always said pick to one tracking metric and stick with it. At the end of the day, TSS is only an updated model of the same principle. However, I do stand by the fact that if possible, pace I still feel is the best metric here. This is, however, full of limitations. In the sense that some people might not have access to a flat route, a track, or even the same route week to week. Everything has it's limitations with the lack of available reliable power. This is the big issue, on the bike, literally ignoring all over factors. I'll know I can pretty much always hit my sweetspot power target for the session. Whilst stuff like pace, HR etc might be different, I never even tracked or looked at them, let alone worried about them. Power is power in a simplistic point of view and it made my training on the bike versus running now so much easier to the point it's almost frustrating, despite using basically the same method, with everything just dialled back a notch to account for the genuine beating and impact strain running puts on the body.

I speak to Jiggy and Shirtboy on a regular basis, we all have different needs for how we account for our training loads. What works for me here on the south coast of England, would be laughable to Jiggy for example. Ultimately though, we are all roughly on the same straight and page for where we are trying to get.

Some of my stuff has been pinned down as some sort of training bible, which I never intended. People making Strava groups, podcasts etc, it was only my posting on a whim and then it has almost embarrassingly spiralled from there.

I will definitely stick to what I have said before though, you only need one metric that you can continually use and track for load consistency, over and over repeatably. If that's TRIMP and it works and is understandable for you, that's all that matters. Just going on my own data, HR based TSS seems to look a little better than TRIMP, but it's splitting hairs.

Coggan has vanished now and he doesn't need me to big him up or defend him, but despite even TSS and CTL being a concept going back a generation now , nobody has come up with something better. If anyone ever comes up with a better model, it could well be someone from this thread one day and my money is on Hard2find!

Yeah, I was just kidding about the blasphemy stuff 😇. I have years of "TRIMP" based CTL data (automatically calculated but which I had really never paid attention to until recently) so, like you, I can look back and see "when I was in THIS shape I was TRIMPing at THIS level." So, absolutely, pick your metric and stick with it.

Hard2Find lives in a hot summer climate like I do. So I'm holding out for a better model with wet bulb temperature adjustments 🙄. That shouldn't be too hard.💪

Ha ha no problem mate. It wasn't necessarily directed at you. More of a general post. As I have seen people posting stuff like "but sirpoc says you must do it like this". Which, hopefully isn't the case . Or I at least didn't mean that to be the result. Ultimately and simplistically, we are just looking to increase load as much as we can without breaking down. I still think that probably this is the best way for most people, but there's also adaptations I've seen that I know have worked for others, but I know wouldn't work for me and vice versa.

One thing I will add, a lot of people don't have good data. This really is a problem if you want to go back and look at patterns. All of this talk and metrics, load and how much you can accumulate, it's only useful if you actually know your current fitness on a semi regular basis. It relies on honesty, which we often don't like as we don't like to believe we are on "only" a certain shape when we feel we should be faster etc. I've spoken to a lot of people now and this is the a absolute biggest problem I run into, which then also leads to them running way too fast on workouts and easy runs. Anyway, sorry I digress as it sort of links in and thought I would mention it whilst I'm on one of my frequently rare trips to the thread.

This thread isn't about your useless method. Reported.