Assuming someone already has a good idea of what paces/efforts they should be training at from lactate, VDOT, breathing, etc, what specific improvements to training can be informed by knowing VO2max and CR? I'm not asking about the things we do with these aspects of physiology in mind, rather specific interventions that are made significantly more effective thanks to measuring VO2max/CR.
My current assessment is that the training needs of any of us non-elite athlete are obvious enough without VO2max/CR information that testing for these is a waste of time, energy, and money. A key theme of this tread is minimizing the waste of our limited resources on less helpful aspects of training so that we can make the most of what we can give to training.
If there's something I'm missing here I'd be keen to learn about it.
You haven't missed a thing dude. You have totally, 100% understood what the thread is about. I've enjoyed your contributions and put them up there with the top long term contributions. It's lexel , who has missed the point as ever. He wants you to try to understand things that he thinks are clever and will make you faster. Spoiler, 1. He is not clever in the slightest, in fact one of the last intelligent posters as he doesn't even understand the jargon he posts 2. He has no idea how to train. He has never broken 20 himself and as far as I know, hasn't run in a long time. The remarkable thing is we have complete tools like lexel, JS and Coggan post, yet still we have fantastic new contributions, the thread lives on and refuses to die.
I appreciate that haha. I don't think I've missed anything, but certainly want to remain open-minded. The framing of my last response is both to give lexel the opportunity to provide a practical answer and to generally point things back to real world training. I've certainly been guilty of getting lost in physiological jargon plenty of times so I try not to judge anyone too much for that.
My own experience with training hard and running fast has tended to show that simple works better most of the time and any deep dive into the weeds ultimately just points back to pretty basic stuff we already know we should be doing. It's disappointing that so much of the information out there tries to push recreational runners towards increasing (and imo counterproductive) complexity. The trick is figuring out the right execution of "simple" and I appreciate this thread because it formalizes simplicity in a way thats actually practical for the average person.
It's true when I say no runners ever went backwards coached by me. They all improved fast being sprinters, middle distancers , long distancers or ultra runners. This is 100% true and confirmed by one my best friends here mr Ghost 1 who has seen the coaching threads I still have left as a proof of what I have told here is 100% the truth.
This is 100% false and easy to verify. Sammy Nyokaye got slower, Letlhogonolo got slower. Slava got injured, Phil bombed. Go away. You are not wanted here.
Now... can I adopt any of the training in this thread to improve further? I'm 36 and get tired fairly easily, which is partly why I dropped the mileage and I no longer do a long run. I've done parkrun 3 times in the past month, running 17:40s, and I don't really feel any fitness benefit from it. The improvement seems to have come from the threshold session coupled with more overall recovery.
It's probably not fair that your question got so many downvotes. I think it may be because you are the only one who can answer your question.
Could adopting this method help you improve?
The answer honestly is "Try it out and see." It's not hard. E, Sub-T, E, Sub-T, E, Sub-T, Long(er). Lots of folks here use this general rhythm—adapted to the sweetspot of their current mileage and fitness—and have seen injury-free improvement. You might, too. If it doesn't suit you, you can just stop. After 3000+ posts, there's not much else to say.
No, I ain't. I am just genuinely intrigued by his data.
his cadence is not unheard of. I know a lot of Japanese marathoners have a similar cadence, but they're really compact like 5*4 and less than 90lbs which doesn't seem to be the case for Sirpoc. And with Sirpoc's cycling credentials, his legs should also be fairly strong (dude blasted a 40+k in an hour for God's sake!), so strength shouldn't be the problem. I wonder how his cadence could possibly that high (or his stride length be that short). Did he run like that when young?
That said. I would rather be the one who has a ridiculous cadence with a 31 mins 10k PB at 40 than a young guy who runs like Bekele with a 5k PB of 18 mins.
This thread is honestly getting a bit too long with all that junk above so i assume you haven't read the whole thing. Sirpoc and KI basically have the opposite cadence (190-200spm vs 150-160spm respectively), and they have very similar race results. Therefore cadence probably is not a big deal in this system.
Thanks mate! Yep I agree with your advice and I’m in the process of transitioning to 3 subTs/3 easy.
I’m going to cautiously build in that 3rd SubT starting with like 3km of work.
I’ve still been impressed with the results I’ve seen off 2 subTs/2 easy (1 longer) compared to what I was doing previously: 1 hard interval/1 longer tempo/2 easy. Got me from an 18:52 to a 18:22 at 81kg whilst fitting in my gym work and keeping my strength high.
Thanks mate! Yep I agree with your advice and I’m in the process of transitioning to 3 subTs/3 easy.
I’m going to cautiously build in that 3rd SubT starting with like 3km of work.
I’ve still been impressed with the results I’ve seen off 2 subTs/2 easy (1 longer) compared to what I was doing previously: 1 hard interval/1 longer tempo/2 easy. Got me from an 18:52 to a 18:22 at 81kg whilst fitting in my gym work and keeping my strength high.
If all you can run is 18:20 on 2 workouts a week then give it up.
If all you can run is 18:20 on 2 workouts a week then give it up.
Couldn't agree more. Sirpoc should have just quit when he was running 19 flat on a classic Daniels plan and 2 workouts a week. He had no future as a masters runner, wasting his time to be honest.
2-3 lt / sub treshold runs and 2-3 easy runs per week ?
Sub treshold pace is 1 hour race pace ?
About 30 min of work at that pace ?
Not quite. To follow this approach, you want to maximize the amount of sub-threshold work you do each week, and the best way for many people to do that is with 3 sub-threshold runs (broken up into intervals with 1-2 minute rests) and 3 (very) easy runs (and an easy long run).
There's a whole discussion of what sub-threshold pace is, and how it corresponds to other things. For me, I'm starting on the slow side, 5-15 seconds/mile slower than my theoretical 1-hour pace. Emphasize the "sub" in sub-threshold.
30 minutes is what some people do. Can you? I can't now, but I hope to get there. Other people can do more. Start with less and build up as you can. It's not about hitting some pre-determined target on Day 1.
(Corrections from more knowledgeable people are welcome.)
2-3 lt / sub treshold runs and 2-3 easy runs per week ?
Sub treshold pace is 1 hour race pace ?
About 30 min of work at that pace ?
They key here is to remember sub threshold is a state, not pace. This is where most people are getting confused, much like clown Jan.
To produce the desired lactate over half an hour's worth of work, for example, you will be running a lot faster in 10*3 min blocks and slower in 3*10 min blocks. But as has been talked about, in general if you dial it in right, you will be generating the same amount of lactate. 3 times a week, rest of the running easy. 25% of time on feet max for workouts. Follow that as a general guide, you will almost certainly get better. Others have dialled in the final bits, to really take them to the next level. But even on basics, the vast majority of people have improved and probably you only need to worry about the absolute basics for the first half a year. Yes, half a year. This is a long term commitment. But the rewards are there.
The paces provided early on stand the test of time for a good percentage of people. Obviously, not for all. It's a guide. Tweaking here and there. But there's plenty of people where those paces have worked quite early, giving yourself a buffer either side a few seconds.
This thread has probably proven the best one size fits all approach for hobby joggers to date. Hence is popularity.
It's good to see alot runners improve with this low mileage " measuring blood lactate sub threshold method". 🙏👋
.......but one thing I have noticed is some runners who takes on the method complains they did ' too hard workouts before'. To me , when I read their former training, it's obvious they did their maxVO2, LT, tempos and even their easy steady runs in the wrong way.
If we look at the elite runners and sub elite we of course clearly see there is no one runner just manage to reach and hold on to that level without maxVO2 ( and faster repetitions at the shorter distances), not even the Ingebrigtsens manage without them.
What I mean with this I tell then? Well, the sub threshold low mileage method works very good up to a given level when a plateau most truly will come and impossible to reach the individual optimal performance without implementing maxVO2 workouts that will complement the sub thresholds to be faster at same former effort.
To sum up what I told in this comment I'm glad to see many runners improve with this method 😀, but I'm convinced out from my long experience they really need to implement maxVO2 and ' traditional LT work( around 4.0 mmol) to improve further and reach their highest possible results. 🇸🇪🧙🏼♂️🇸🇪
So every 3rd day that's 5 workouts in 2 weeks for me.
One more question in the original Norway method they replaced every 3rd workout with an X workout (200m hills) ? Did anyone try that ?
A handful of people have replaced the third sub-T day with hills. Typically, these people have done a block of this method (3 sub-T, 3 easy, one easy long) before swapping the third sub-T for the hills. Anecdotally, these people haven’t seen the benefit from swapping in the hills. They usually just go back to the 3 sub-T. I’m not sure why they aren’t seeing the benefit from the hills, even with shorter races. Usually people add the hills because they’re racing 800s or miles or 3ks. I’d be interested to hear more about people’s experience with the hills. Perhaps they aren’t getting the dosage correct. Maybe it’s something else entirely.
2-3 lt / sub treshold runs and 2-3 easy runs per week ?
Sub treshold pace is 1 hour race pace ?
About 30 min of work at that pace ?
They key here is to remember sub threshold is a state, not pace. This is where most people are getting confused, much like clown Jan.
To produce the desired lactate over half an hour's worth of work, for example, you will be running a lot faster in 10*3 min blocks and slower in 3*10 min blocks. But as has been talked about, in general if you dial it in right, you will be generating the same amount of lactate. 3 times a week, rest of the running easy. 25% of time on feet max for workouts. Follow that as a general guide, you will almost certainly get better. Others have dialled in the final bits, to really take them to the next level. But even on basics, the vast majority of people have improved and probably you only need to worry about the absolute basics for the first half a year. Yes, half a year. This is a long term commitment. But the rewards are there.
The paces provided early on stand the test of time for a good percentage of people. Obviously, not for all. It's a guide. Tweaking here and there. But there's plenty of people where those paces have worked quite early, giving yourself a buffer either side a few seconds.
This thread has probably proven the best one size fits all approach for hobby joggers to date. Hence is popularity.
You are totally wrong of course. Sub threshold is defined as an individual PACE within the range of lactate level lower than the 'traditional' LT at around 4.0 mmol.You can not get away with saying " It's a state, not a pace" . Of course it's an individual pace even if that pace varies as long as it still is sub threshold.
Besides, it should be much more interesting and civiliced to discuss training with you and similar people here without those negative offending attributes as " clown" , "idiot" , " lier" etc.This site had gone back to a much more respected reputation if people could discuss and give their opinions without getting offended. That's my opinion.You should respect others opinions to contribute to a more friendly discussion climate here. And I friendly finish this comment by saying I don't agree with you this would be the best 'size fits all' approach for hobby joggers.