They are only US colleges athletes, I wouldn’t worry as they are completely unaware and ignorant of life after school, let alone being 30 years older
Exactly this. There are very few masters 40+ runners running sub 16 let alone sub 15:30. That's far more impressive and in a lower percentage than college kids in their prime with no jobs, kids, work running sub 15 or even faster, in my opinion.
Add me to the list who has found this thread and who has had their running live changed by it. Came across it a while back on advanced running on Reddit of all places!
I'm following 1:1 basically with sirpoc , scaled down to 5.5 hours and am 22 weeks in and just took 7 minutes off my HM , from 1:33 to 1:26. So obviously I'm not fast, but for real I had tried everything to break 1:30 and have been running for 7 years, im now 39. This is the first training plan really that has given me the structure or consistency to really understand my training but also see the breakthrough and progression.
This is what continues to be so mind-blowing. I don't think people realize how difficult it is to make substantial improvement after 7 years of serious running, especially if you're nearing 40 or older. Dropping 7 minutes off a HM PR at that point off of 22 weeks of training is insane.
This is what continues to be so mind-blowing. I don't think people realize how difficult it is to make substantial improvement after 7 years of serious running, especially if you're nearing 40 or older. Dropping 7 minutes off a HM PR at that point off of 22 weeks of training is insane.
What does your 5K PR progression look like?
I can't speak for the person you replied to, but I would say I am in a similar situation. Running 6 years.
I am 42 and have followed the sirpoc™ method (hope the trolls enjoy that one!) for 41 weeks and counting now. I got on this thread early as it sounded too good to be true but there was enough testimony for me to give it a shot.
I'm training 6.5 hours a week, also adapted it like the dude to scale down. Schedule mostly looks the same as his, but I am using time with 10*3, 5*6 and 3*10. I will add, I have added in strides on two of the four easy days. Whether that is important or not, I don't believe so. I tweaked a hamstring playing cricket and left the strides out for 7 weeks in the middle and I still did a big PB at 5k at the end of that time. Easy runs, I used the guide suggested and just have HR on my heat unit and make sure I don't go over 70% max HR. Don't pay attention to anything else.
For reference, I have never been able to get to 6 hours training, I've always broken down way before getting to that point. Similar experience to everyone else? I can maybe follow a Daniel's plan for 12-15 weeks and then it just all seems to fall apart. There's often some aggressive easy running or speedwork that just finishes me off. If I was younger, I suspect I could handle this type of training more This method, I haven't had a break and still going strong and feel fresher. Sirpoc said something that stuck with me on Strava. "There is nothing inherently magic about sub threshold" .
I think this is the key to understanding it. It's basically given us all a perfect balance between getting enough stimulus without feeling too overloaded or breaking down. This as a consequence let's training load keep rising and rising probably past where most of us have ever got to before.
This is my 5k Progression: I have tried to race/parkrun/time trial once a month.
January (just before I started): 20:13
February : 20:19 (this was a couple of weeks or so in)
March: 20:13 (I think this was maybe 6-7 weeks in)
April: 19:56
May: 19:45 (lifetime pb 19:31)
June: Too hot
July: 18:56 (biggest jump even with the gap and lifetime pb)
August : 18:44
September: No 5k but ran a HM PB of 1:24:02
October: 18:15 and scraped home at the end of last week in 2:57:58 for the FM. My 8th full, previous best was 3:10:44 and more out of line with my 5k at the time.
My big take is that I am significantly aerobically stronger training like this, in fact hugely so. Picking off the easy gains time and time again. I doubt I will change anything up for now as I'm convinced there is still some untapped aerobic engine to release. Ultimately, this is why for the hobby jogger level this is probably the best as it allows for the consistency to untap that aerobic engine which is definitely your biggest value for money yoi can spend your training on.
Anyway I've lurker here for a long time and have lurked on the excellent Strava group and just thought since it's been close to a year , at least one person might benefit from my thoughts! Before anyone adds anything, I'm not fast and this isn't a humble brag post! I just hope it helps someone else if they are on the fence about if this is for them or too good to be true. All the same worries I had!
Going from 20:13 to 18:15 at 42 after 6 years of running is even more impressive than the HM example.
My take from all of this thread is without wanting to come on here and sound like Coggan with specificity earlier in the thread......"consistency, consistency consistency" is the key here.
This is not super hard, but it's also not easy either. It's that margin in between where you are doing more and increasing overall strain and load, but it's never too much that to becomes too much or you break down. Ultimately, this is where the average HJ'r fails and then the cycle repeats.
I think that's why on the thread and on the big Strava group we see the ones who have had the biggest success are the ones who have stuck to it as close as possible and not tried to get greedy for want of a better phrase and push it on with vo2 work, hills , 300s on the track. Suddenly then, there becomes a question of "is this sustainable?" Or it certainly becomes more difficult to stick to the 7 days schedule laid out here.
I do believe there is a large chunk of 18-22 min runners who have probably stalled and this would be a way to almost cheat and increase load. Don't forget, sirpoc himself i believe spoke about frustrations of no longer being able to push past a mid to high 18 without feeling beat up or breaking down and got stuck in the same vicious cycle we probably are all familiar with to a point. Ultimately that is what can or will happen when you are trying to force and push speed when you have this large aerobic void.
Yeah, not sure you read the post. That's not his progress in 6 years LOL. He's been RUNNING 6 years. He/she LITERALLY posted his 5k progression for us to see
I do now lactate guided sub CV/CP (critical velocity/critical power) reps, trying to be in a certain lactate range after the last rep. I increase the intensity of the reps for the next sessions only If lactate was below a certain value. Similar to Marius Bakken, but i measure lactate only at the end of the last rep. As a fast twitcher i managed now to do 3 quality sessions per week, with a trick. Total rep volume is always 30 minutes, which seems to work well.
Some things are worth to be tried out.
Some questions to be answered for me are:
- do i stagnate ? (so far not)
- when i do stagnate?
- is there an optimum rep intensity?
- is there an optimum rep duration? (that could be, because it influences the number of recovery intervals)
Going from 20:13 to 18:15 at 42 after 6 years of running is even more impressive than the HM example.
My take from all of this thread is without wanting to come on here and sound like Coggan with specificity earlier in the thread......"consistency, consistency consistency" is the key here.
This is not super hard, but it's also not easy either. It's that margin in between where you are doing more and increasing overall strain and load, but it's never too much that to becomes too much or you break down. Ultimately, this is where the average HJ'r fails and then the cycle repeats.
I think that's why on the thread and on the big Strava group we see the ones who have had the biggest success are the ones who have stuck to it as close as possible and not tried to get greedy for want of a better phrase and push it on with vo2 work, hills , 300s on the track. Suddenly then, there becomes a question of "is this sustainable?" Or it certainly becomes more difficult to stick to the 7 days schedule laid out here.
I do believe there is a large chunk of 18-22 min runners who have probably stalled and this would be a way to almost cheat and increase load. Don't forget, sirpoc himself i believe spoke about frustrations of no longer being able to push past a mid to high 18 without feeling beat up or breaking down and got stuck in the same vicious cycle we probably are all familiar with to a point. Ultimately that is what can or will happen when you are trying to force and push speed when you have this large aerobic void.
Lexel, by sub-CV do you mean 10km pace? CV is ~8km pace iirc.
I’n an FT and gave this a try (I have a lactate meter) and I found that my paces simultaneously were quite slow relative to the guide and I was getting very fatigued after about a month or so.
I’m sure someone will respond “slow down”, but you need to create load somehow and the trick of this method is to use paces close to threshold to get a bump in CTL. I think this is why Marius himself said that more typical training works better for FTs.
So lexel comes back, basically copies sirpoc/KI and throws in a bit of Bakken, having previously told us this training was trash and we should all be running 12 CV time trials a week.
Then proceeds to tell us how he's discovered a revolution sub threshold method as per thread and wants us to praise him for discovering what we all knew or tried to tell him 3000 posts ago.
The man is delusional. Shame he's back. What's next, Coggan?
Lexel, by sub-CV do you mean 10km pace? CV is ~8km pace iirc.
I’n an FT and gave this a try (I have a lactate meter) and I found that my paces simultaneously were quite slow relative to the guide and I was getting very fatigued after about a month or so.
I’m sure someone will respond “slow down”, but you need to create load somehow and the trick of this method is to use paces close to threshold to get a bump in CTL. I think this is why Marius himself said that more typical training works better for FTs.
Sub CV means below (slower than) CV. As MLSS is related to CV ,i use 90 to95 % of CV as a first starting point for the first rep session. After the first rep session, the measured lactate value dictates the intensity for the next rep session. And so forth.
There are more than 20 methodes to calculate LT2, thats a problem. CV ist better.
However, only a measured lactate value at the end of the last rep provides an information about the internal muscular load ...
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
Sub CV means below (slower than) CV. As MLSS is related to CV ,i use 90 to95 % of CV as a first starting point for the first rep session. After the first rep session, the measured lactate value dictates the intensity for the next rep session. And so forth.
There are more than 20 methodes to calculate LT2, thats a problem. CV ist better.
However, only a measured lactate value at the end of the last rep provides an information about the internal muscular load ...
Lexel, you just type words. I don't even think you know what you mean, most of the time. Good to see you training like this thread suggested all along though and having success.
Maybe you will break 20 finally? Fellow slowpoke here.
Lexel, you just type words. I don't even think you know what you mean, most of the time. Good to see you training like this thread suggested all along though and having success.
Maybe you will break 20 finally? Fellow slowpoke here.
Mock lexel all you want but it clear he has more knowledge in his head than the whole rest of thread combine. We need more lexel in depth posts.
So lexel comes back, basically copies sirpoc/KI and throws in a bit of Bakken, having previously told us this training was trash and we should all be running 12 CV time trials a week.
Then proceeds to tell us how he's discovered a revolution sub threshold method as per thread and wants us to praise him for discovering what we all knew or tried to tell him 3000 posts ago.
The man is delusional. Shame he's back. What's next, Coggan?
Don't be silly, Coggan already invented this method in the 60s.
Next lexel will tell us he's found a new revolutionary method called sub marathon-pace.
I do now lactate guided sub CV/CP (critical velocity/critical power) reps, trying to be in a certain lactate range after the last rep. I increase the intensity of the reps for the next sessions only If lactate was below a certain value. Similar to Marius Bakken, but i measure lactate only at the end of the last rep. As a fast twitcher i managed now to do 3 quality sessions per week, with a trick. Total rep volume is always 30 minutes, which seems to work well.
Some things are worth to be tried out.
Some questions to be answered for me are:
- do i stagnate ? (so far not)
- when i do stagnate?
- is there an optimum rep intensity?
- is there an optimum rep duration? (that could be, because it influences the number of recovery intervals)
Another question could be: Is there an optimal race duration?
Seriously, you can overdo it. How about just doing tempo runs according to the golden rule of "comfortably hard" and gradually increasing the duration? Countless people have done this successfully, even elite runners.
Any random guy posting their experience with this method is a better contribution to this thread than anything you've ever written here. Even that one guy who keeps making sirpoopy posts has completely and unequivocally outcontributed you. Let that sink in.