Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Yeah good luck with that. Shows you Coggan had a lot of these parasites nailed. You can't really do this without sirpoc. In fact, I would say it's impossible.

• The method and his regular person story is interchangeable at this point. Heck, I have about 0% chance of running a 2:24 marathon on my first attempt in my 40s, but hey at least I believe I could when I follow his starting point to now.

• Guys like Matt Fitzgerald with his article a few days ago, have proven if you don't get it, you don't get it.

• I am willing to bet given sirpoc's track record when it comes to ambitions he sets that this will be more than a "pamphlet" as you describe it.

I am willing to put money on if you gave a book he lays out whilst keeping faithful to the principles in this thread, to 100 random runners who train 5-8 hours a week and they stuck to it, at least 70-80 would improve a good amount over a 6-12 month period, in spite of how long they had been running for.

I think you are trolling here, but well done. I laughed hard at “fellow sports scientist”.

It’s hard to know what’s been the bigger boost to Coggans popularity on this thread, his takedown of lexel or his hilariously accurate description of MF.

I'm not a #sportsscientist.

Fitzgerald isn't a scientist of any stripe.

As I have indicated before, I don't believe that "intensity discipline" is critical - simply going by perceived exertion is at least good enough (in fact, best).

With that said, consistency is king, so you do have to be honest with yourself on any given day to avoid overcooking things, and setting yourself backwards.

Being able to "back it up", both during repeated efforts in training (e.g., 2 x 20 min intervals) and day after day/week after week is an important indicator.

It's very clear Matt Fitzgerald doesn't understand what NSM is all about.

- he suggest trying it for four weeks : it's clear you need at least two months

- he suggests adding VO2 max workouts: the whole point of NSM is NOT to do VO2max workouts

- worst mistake: the workout paces are completely wrong - way too fast, while NSM is all about intensity control.

On the latter note:

I don't believe that it takes that long for any physiological adaptations induced by lots of "sweetspot" intervals (which is what "NSW" is) to take place. That's simply not how the body works.

Rather, I believe that it is greater fatigue induced by the increase in training load (which is the point of the whole approach, whether or not you attempt to quantify the latter using, e.g., CTL) that "masks" the increase in fitness, preventing you from fully expressing your performance potential. As adaptations continue to take place/as you accommodate to the increased demands, the fatigue begins to dissipate, leading to what appears to be a sudden breakthrough.

Not sure that this matters from a practical perspective, but to me the distinction (or nuance) seems important.

Is it just me or does it seem like Matt has a bunch of accounts on here?

Guess the winking emoji didn’t have the effect you’d been hoping for.

That's a great insight and hadn't occured to me until now.

The fatigue from this method is more subtle than that from VO2max work.

Just when I thought this thread couldn't keep on giving, it's also confirmed Matt Fitzgerald is a charlatan and posts using a bunch of different anonymous accounts. Brilliant!

What is Matt’s post there everyone is referring too?

Bill Oreilly has best sellers on History wtf are you talking about?

If you derive credibility from sales youre pretty hopeless

dumbest take in the thread yet

dude is a better Chris Carmichael thats it

For those tracking intervals by heart rate, would that be average or max?