If more and more realize this training works, regardless of speed/talent, it could go viral. You could have C25k beginners going from say, a 35-min. 5k to 22-23-min. 5k in 10 mos. to a year or so (not the best example but whatever), using the same scale-up principles, in addition to the lactrace calendar, intervals.icu and other tools.
I don’t get it. This training is noting revolutionary in the least. Anyone who can read PMC and understand ramp rate can mimic this. It’s just controlled progression. People here act like this is something new.
I don’t get it. This training is noting revolutionary in the least. Anyone who can read PMC and understand ramp rate can mimic this. It’s just controlled progression. People here act like this is something new.
I don't think it's anything new in isolation of all the pieces, but I've certainly not trained in a way that has ever allowed me to progress like this. It's a total mixture of things.
Accounting for load in a way that's repeatable. Sure, maybe there's flaws in the rTSS model but does it really matter when we train the same?
Consistency and lack of periodization apart from the marathon, also unique to running (maybe not cycling so much these days).
The lack of what this method DOESN'T deliberately is quite stark and bold. For those of us who have stuck to it the closest, seems to be a positive.
Learning about pacing. Probably the most overlooked about all the things sirpoc has said. Again, if you look at those who are also really doing well relative to their previous running, they now have this nailed down in races.
Lack of risk. The build and fatigue management is key. Low risk, but you don't need see guys getting injured when training like this. Go on Strava, there's so many guys in the group day to day, week to week just absolutely doing the same thing almost over and over yet still getting faster.
There's more really small pieces. But I think the ones above if you took any of those out, you would lose something.
The downside for me is the lack of variation can be boring. But, doing well in races in comparison to before as a masters runner makes it worth it.
Personally I hope this method, especially for older guys like me stays a secret, as I have a vast advantage now over the guys I used to train and race with, none of who are willing to believe in this method as they are engrained into thinking you have to do what as runners we have always been told!
If Grandma's guy is here, would be really interesting to see how and what sirpoc came up with for him. Especially considering how he has been a college runner in the past. I know I was fast in college in spite of my training, rather than because. I just happened to be one of the ones lucky enough to survive it, in the 1990s! Whether Grandma's guy has an opinion on how this type of training feels overall, versus other ways. For me it's how much fresher I am, week to week.
I don't think it's anything new in isolation of all the pieces, but I've certainly not trained in a way that has ever allowed me to progress like this. It's a total mixture of things.
Accounting for load in a way that's repeatable. Sure, maybe there's flaws in the rTSS model but does it really matter when we train the same?
Consistency and lack of periodization apart from the marathon, also unique to running (maybe not cycling so much these days).
The lack of what this method DOESN'T deliberately is quite stark and bold. For those of us who have stuck to it the closest, seems to be a positive.
Learning about pacing. Probably the most overlooked about all the things sirpoc has said. Again, if you look at those who are also really doing well relative to their previous running, they now have this nailed down in races.
Lack of risk. The build and fatigue management is key. Low risk, but you don't need see guys getting injured when training like this. Go on Strava, there's so many guys in the group day to day, week to week just absolutely doing the same thing almost over and over yet still getting faster.
There's more really small pieces. But I think the ones above if you took any of those out, you would lose something.
The downside for me is the lack of variation can be boring. But, doing well in races in comparison to before as a masters runner makes it worth it.
Personally I hope this method, especially for older guys like me stays a secret, as I have a vast advantage now over the guys I used to train and race with, none of who are willing to believe in this method as they are engrained into thinking you have to do what as runners we have always been told!
If Grandma's guy is here, would be really interesting to see how and what sirpoc came up with for him. Especially considering how he has been a college runner in the past. I know I was fast in college in spite of my training, rather than because. I just happened to be one of the ones lucky enough to survive it, in the 1990s! Whether Grandma's guy has an opinion on how this type of training feels overall, versus other ways. For me it's how much fresher I am, week to week.
Great post. I'll be honest and hold my hands up. I tried to change way too much first time I came across this thread and it didn't work. Second time around, sticking to the plan sirpoc laid out, I've just broken my 10k PB by 90 seconds and 5k by 40.
I went back and read lots of the early posts. Everything laid out has a reason. Sirpoc84 I think does himself a disservice, he's obviously not an academic but likely is a genius in working things out on a practical level. I used to cycle and I don't think people understand he was OK power wise, but not elite but had worked out how to make himself faster was the things he could control, aerodynamics of time trials. Like here, you can see from his really early posts 2 years ago how he is looking to control as many of the variables as possible in running. Like poster says above, once you start messing with what he wanted to control , you lose sight of what you are trying to achieve perhaps.
I think the huge aspect people are overlooking here when they glance at this thread, is unlike a lot of hobby plans, this is built from the ground up, rather than scaling down from elites. The focus is on the understanding of what we need to make us better, rather than what we think we need based on what we see or hear Jakob etc doing.
I don't think it's anything new in isolation of all the pieces, but I've certainly not trained in a way that has ever allowed me to progress like this. It's a total mixture of things.
Accounting for load in a way that's repeatable. Sure, maybe there's flaws in the rTSS model but does it really matter when we train the same?
Consistency and lack of periodization apart from the marathon, also unique to running (maybe not cycling so much these days).
The lack of what this method DOESN'T deliberately is quite stark and bold. For those of us who have stuck to it the closest, seems to be a positive.
Learning about pacing. Probably the most overlooked about all the things sirpoc has said. Again, if you look at those who are also really doing well relative to their previous running, they now have this nailed down in races.
Lack of risk. The build and fatigue management is key. Low risk, but you don't need see guys getting injured when training like this. Go on Strava, there's so many guys in the group day to day, week to week just absolutely doing the same thing almost over and over yet still getting faster.
There's more really small pieces. But I think the ones above if you took any of those out, you would lose something.
The downside for me is the lack of variation can be boring. But, doing well in races in comparison to before as a masters runner makes it worth it.
Personally I hope this method, especially for older guys like me stays a secret, as I have a vast advantage now over the guys I used to train and race with, none of who are willing to believe in this method as they are engrained into thinking you have to do what as runners we have always been told!
If Grandma's guy is here, would be really interesting to see how and what sirpoc came up with for him. Especially considering how he has been a college runner in the past. I know I was fast in college in spite of my training, rather than because. I just happened to be one of the ones lucky enough to survive it, in the 1990s! Whether Grandma's guy has an opinion on how this type of training feels overall, versus other ways. For me it's how much fresher I am, week to week.
Great post. I'll be honest and hold my hands up. I tried to change way too much first time I came across this thread and it didn't work. Second time around, sticking to the plan sirpoc laid out, I've just broken my 10k PB by 90 seconds and 5k by 40.
I went back and read lots of the early posts. Everything laid out has a reason. Sirpoc84 I think does himself a disservice, he's obviously not an academic but likely is a genius in working things out on a practical level. I used to cycle and I don't think people understand he was OK power wise, but not elite but had worked out how to make himself faster was the things he could control, aerodynamics of time trials. Like here, you can see from his really early posts 2 years ago how he is looking to control as many of the variables as possible in running. Like poster says above, once you start messing with what he wanted to control , you lose sight of what you are trying to achieve perhaps.
I think the huge aspect people are overlooking here when they glance at this thread, is unlike a lot of hobby plans, this is built from the ground up, rather than scaling down from elites. The focus is on the understanding of what we need to make us better, rather than what we think we need based on what we see or hear Jakob etc doing.
I think the last part is extremely important. All training plans for non elites are scaled down elite programs, with all components that the elites use, but as a hobby runner you will probably be better off to focus on what gives the biggest bang for the bucks, and that is patient aerobic development with moderate mileage and as much sub threshold as you can safely manage.
I think the last part is extremely important. All training plans for non elites are scaled down elite programs, with all components that the elites use, but as a hobby runner you will probably be better off to focus on what gives the biggest bang for the bucks, and that is patient aerobic development with moderate mileage and as much sub threshold as you can safely manage.
I'll add my own thumbs up to this.
I've been training various ways now for longer than I can remember, but this is more or less the first and only time I have felt like "wow this training has been designed by someone like me and it makes sense".
By the way, not that I'm suddenly going to be as fast or likely many of us than sirpoc himself, but he totally and categorically understands not only what gives you the best value for money training but also the limitations of being a hobby athlete and having other factors in your life going on, something elites tend to deal with only on a more minimal basis.
It's been said many times but I don't think it can be said enough. Whilst there is obviously no one size fits all training, this is as close as you'll get that it's probably the logical starting point for just about everyone under 7 hours a week.
I think focusing on all the details as a couple of the posters said above, is what gives it the X factor in terms of rather than just running below threshold 3 times a week and leaving it at that. Of course, even if you just did that, it's likely better than what you are currently doing. But incorporating everything from top to bottom will make you even better. Can't wait for a book to come out with what I am sure for sirpoc will be sharing even the small, finer details. Maybe things that just make up a fraction of a % here or there but stuff I am sure he is doing.
I think the last part is extremely important. All training plans for non elites are scaled down elite programs, with all components that the elites use, but as a hobby runner you will probably be better off to focus on what gives the biggest bang for the bucks, and that is patient aerobic development with moderate mileage and as much sub threshold as you can safely manage.
I'll add my own thumbs up to this.
I've been training various ways now for longer than I can remember, but this is more or less the first and only time I have felt like "wow this training has been designed by someone like me and it makes sense".
By the way, not that I'm suddenly going to be as fast or likely many of us than sirpoc himself, but he totally and categorically understands not only what gives you the best value for money training but also the limitations of being a hobby athlete and having other factors in your life going on, something elites tend to deal with only on a more minimal basis.
It's been said many times but I don't think it can be said enough. Whilst there is obviously no one size fits all training, this is as close as you'll get that it's probably the logical starting point for just about everyone under 7 hours a week.
I think focusing on all the details as a couple of the posters said above, is what gives it the X factor in terms of rather than just running below threshold 3 times a week and leaving it at that. Of course, even if you just did that, it's likely better than what you are currently doing. But incorporating everything from top to bottom will make you even better. Can't wait for a book to come out with what I am sure for sirpoc will be sharing even the small, finer details. Maybe things that just make up a fraction of a % here or there but stuff I am sure he is doing.
I hope he gets published, or he can self-pub on amazon.com or amazon.co.uk :) There are so many routes nowadays to get published. I know at least a few would buy the book.
I don't think it's anything new in isolation of all the pieces, but I've certainly not trained in a way that has ever allowed me to progress like this. It's a total mixture of things.
Accounting for load in a way that's repeatable. Sure, maybe there's flaws in the rTSS model but does it really matter when we train the same?
Consistency and lack of periodization apart from the marathon, also unique to running (maybe not cycling so much these days).
The lack of what this method DOESN'T deliberately is quite stark and bold. For those of us who have stuck to it the closest, seems to be a positive.
Learning about pacing. Probably the most overlooked about all the things sirpoc has said. Again, if you look at those who are also really doing well relative to their previous running, they now have this nailed down in races.
Lack of risk. The build and fatigue management is key. Low risk, but you don't need see guys getting injured when training like this. Go on Strava, there's so many guys in the group day to day, week to week just absolutely doing the same thing almost over and over yet still getting faster.
There's more really small pieces. But I think the ones above if you took any of those out, you would lose something.
The downside for me is the lack of variation can be boring. But, doing well in races in comparison to before as a masters runner makes it worth it.
Personally I hope this method, especially for older guys like me stays a secret, as I have a vast advantage now over the guys I used to train and race with, none of who are willing to believe in this method as they are engrained into thinking you have to do what as runners we have always been told!
If Grandma's guy is here, would be really interesting to see how and what sirpoc came up with for him. Especially considering how he has been a college runner in the past. I know I was fast in college in spite of my training, rather than because. I just happened to be one of the ones lucky enough to survive it, in the 1990s! Whether Grandma's guy has an opinion on how this type of training feels overall, versus other ways. For me it's how much fresher I am, week to week.
lol, everyone thinks this is revolutionary because most people have zero idea how to actually train. Most of you all just run one race (or not even that) and then follow some canned training plan. And then you all wonder why your training doesn’t work because you’re trying to shoehorn yourself into someone else’s training framework.
What Sirpoc is doing is quite easy…evaluate fitness, add testing load slowly, reevaluate fitness, repeat. There are training books from the 1960s I have that describe the exact method of rational training.
hardly anyone here knows how to profile themselves as an athlete nor do they understand what threshold actually. Also, stress scoring is like basic stuff.
Hopefully he posts his marathon build on reddit/r/artc or r/advancedrunning. I'm curious how much the HM or M variation on the classic sirpoc 3-3-1 deviates.
The guys training is all on Strava. His account is open and anyone can view. There are a few runs with comments by Sirpoc so maybe he has been on the subT train for a while? I think his PB was about 2:40 prior to this block
Here is a quick overview of his build from 10th March onwards - I didnt have a lot of time so hopefully everything is here
Week of 10/03/2025 – Mileage: 104.9, Long run: 26.11km, Workouts: 3 x 3k, 5 x 2k, 10 x 1k Week of 17/03/2025 – Mileage: 101.3, Long run: 22.7km, Workouts: 3 x 3k, 5 x 2k, 10 x 1k Week of 24/03/2025 – Mileage: 100.4, Long run: 24.32km, Workouts: 3 x 3k, 3 x 2k, 10k race (31:59) Week of 31/03/2025 – Mileage: 108.6, Long run: 22.07km, Workouts: 4 x 3k, 5 x 2k, 10 x 1k Week of 07/04/2025 – Mileage: 101.6, Long run: 26.07km, Workouts: 4 x 3k, 5 x 2k Week of 14/04/2025 – Mileage: 108.8, Long run: 27.09km, Workouts: 4 x 3.2k, 5 x 2k, 10 x 1k Week of 21/04/2025 – Mileage: 100.9, Long run: 27.44km, Workouts: 3 x 3.2k, 10 x 1k Week of 28/04/2025 – Mileage: 110.2, Long run: 27.51km, Workouts: 3 x 5k, 6 x 1.6k Week of 05/05/2025 – Mileage: 111.1, Long run: 27.39km, Workouts: 4 x 5k, 6 x 1k, 4-mile race (20:14) Week of 12/05/2025 – Mileage: 113.2, Long run: 32.25km, Workouts: 3 x 3k, 3 x 5k, 3 x 3k Week of 19/05/2025 – Mileage: 101.2, Long run: 31.38km, Workouts: 5 x 7min, 6 x 1k, 5 x 5k (in long run) Week of 26/05/2025 – Mileage: 105.4, Long run: 25.02km, Workouts: 10k @ MP, 3 x 5k Week of 02/06/2025 – Mileage: 105.0, Long run: 25.09km, Workouts: 3 x 5k, 5 x 2k, 10k @ MP (in long run) Week of 09/06/2025 – Mileage: 93.3, Long run: 28.7km, Workouts: 24k progression (8k @ 92% MP, 8k @ 93% MP, 8k @ MP), 8 x 1k, 3 x 3k (in 22k run) Week of 16/06/2025 – Mileage: 82.1, Long run: 42.35km, Workouts: 1 x 5k, 1 x 5k, Grandma’s Marathon
Apparently original goal was 2:25 potentially 2:22 but not great conditions
Thanks!! Modifying the lower mileage Norwegian approach to higher mileage!
I think the huge aspect people are overlooking here when they glance at this thread, is unlike a lot of hobby plans, this is built from the ground up, rather than scaling down from elites. The focus is on the understanding of what we need to make us better, rather than what we think we need based on what we see or hear Jakob etc doing.
You’re missing the point completely. Canned plans are not really based on elite training. Canned plans have a set ramp rate and intensity. If your body doesn’t adapt to the canned plans intensity increases, then you burn out (hi Jack Daniel’s plans). If the canned plans does not provide enough stimulus, you don’t improve performance. You have to be able to identify both scenarios.
Building a training plan from the ground up using rational training principles is basic stuff. Tracking stress and adjusting training based on realtime feedback is like “Intro to fitness training” level stuff.
I don't think it's anything new in isolation of all the pieces, but I've certainly not trained in a way that has ever allowed me to progress like this. It's a total mixture of things.
Accounting for load in a way that's repeatable. Sure, maybe there's flaws in the rTSS model but does it really matter when we train the same?
Consistency and lack of periodization apart from the marathon, also unique to running (maybe not cycling so much these days).
The lack of what this method DOESN'T deliberately is quite stark and bold. For those of us who have stuck to it the closest, seems to be a positive.
Learning about pacing. Probably the most overlooked about all the things sirpoc has said. Again, if you look at those who are also really doing well relative to their previous running, they now have this nailed down in races.
Lack of risk. The build and fatigue management is key. Low risk, but you don't need see guys getting injured when training like this. Go on Strava, there's so many guys in the group day to day, week to week just absolutely doing the same thing almost over and over yet still getting faster.
There's more really small pieces. But I think the ones above if you took any of those out, you would lose something.
The downside for me is the lack of variation can be boring. But, doing well in races in comparison to before as a masters runner makes it worth it.
Personally I hope this method, especially for older guys like me stays a secret, as I have a vast advantage now over the guys I used to train and race with, none of who are willing to believe in this method as they are engrained into thinking you have to do what as runners we have always been told!
If Grandma's guy is here, would be really interesting to see how and what sirpoc came up with for him. Especially considering how he has been a college runner in the past. I know I was fast in college in spite of my training, rather than because. I just happened to be one of the ones lucky enough to survive it, in the 1990s! Whether Grandma's guy has an opinion on how this type of training feels overall, versus other ways. For me it's how much fresher I am, week to week.
lol, everyone thinks this is revolutionary because most people have zero idea how to actually train. Most of you all just run one race (or not even that) and then follow some canned training plan. And then you all wonder why your training doesn’t work because you’re trying to shoehorn yourself into someone else’s training framework.
What Sirpoc is doing is quite easy…evaluate fitness, add testing load slowly, reevaluate fitness, repeat. There are training books from the 1960s I have that describe the exact method of rational training.
hardly anyone here knows how to profile themselves as an athlete nor do they understand what threshold actually. Also, stress scoring is like basic stuff.
what books? Even without actual citations, I can get onboard with your statement that "adding testing load" is not a novel idea, but I'd be curious if any of your cited sources discuss the same principle that using easy runs and subT provide the best stimulation for improvement and injury risk for the average runner.
what books? Even without actual citations, I can get onboard with your statement that "adding testing load" is not a novel idea, but I'd be curious if any of your cited sources discuss the same principle that using easy runs and subT provide the best stimulation for improvement and injury risk for the average runner.
Training Lactate Pulse Rate by Janssen, works by Astrand, and other foundation work.
You say easy runs and subT. That nomenclature is more modern and you won’t see it exactly in the text. Look at Lydiard and his training philosophy
More training is always more fitness until it isn’t. The art of training is being able to identify if your athlete is over or under training and adjust.
The best training stimulus FOR YOU is to identify the maximum sustained ramp rate you can handle for increasing chronic training load and build from there.
Ah yes, the "everything is Lydiard" canard...surely anyone who has actually read Lydiard's books would realize that Lydiard would balk at eschewing "marathon conditioning" for year-round intervals, and would also balk at complete avoidance of intense interval sessions, true long runs, and sharpening workouts (not to mention "hill-springing"!).
Ah yes, the "everything is Lydiard" canard...surely anyone who has actually read Lydiard's books would realize that Lydiard would balk at eschewing "marathon conditioning" for year-round intervals, and would also balk at complete avoidance of intense interval sessions, true long runs, and sharpening workouts (not to mention "hill-springing"!).
You’re also missing the point. You don’t need to do anything other than progressively increase stress to continue to improve fitness (until natural limits are met). You all are lost in the sauce with modern training. Go back to the foundational work.
Becoming stale is completely misunderstood by everyone. You become stale fitnesswise from poor fatigue management, not from lack of stimulus. You can start the road to overtraining on the very first day, and it could be so minimal that you won’t notice until 3 months later when you can’t figure out why your race times have stagnated. That’s the key to this method. Identifying a datum for scoring and slowing increased load to avoid negative fatigue effects.
You don’t need a single interval workout to reach max fitness. You don’t need a single hill. You need to fun faster over time, that’s all. And you do that by training your body consistently and then keeping accumulated fatigue at a manageable level.
Ah yes, the "everything is Lydiard" canard...surely anyone who has actually read Lydiard's books would realize that Lydiard would balk at eschewing "marathon conditioning" for year-round intervals, and would also balk at complete avoidance of intense interval sessions, true long runs, and sharpening workouts (not to mention "hill-springing"!).
You’re also missing the point. You don’t need to do anything other than progressively increase stress to continue to improve fitness (until natural limits are met). You all are lost in the sauce with modern training. Go back to the foundational work.
Becoming stale is completely misunderstood by everyone. You become stale fitnesswise from poor fatigue management, not from lack of stimulus. You can start the road to overtraining on the very first day, and it could be so minimal that you won’t notice until 3 months later when you can’t figure out why your race times have stagnated. That’s the key to this method. Identifying a datum for scoring and slowing increased load to avoid negative fatigue effects.
You don’t need a single interval workout to reach max fitness. You don’t need a single hill. You need to fun faster over time, that’s all. And you do that by training your body consistently and then keeping accumulated fatigue at a manageable level.
You didn’t answer his comment at all. What you say may be true, but it has no relevance to whether Lydiard would balk at this.
You didn’t answer his comment at all. What you say may be true, but it has no relevance to whether Lydiard would balk at this.
What did he state? He mentioned a bunch of sharpen techniques Lydiard would employ. He only stated that Lydiard would balk at things. That’s fine.
But Lydiard would agree with the base style of training and building general fitness. Lydiard does have good points about hills for strength,etc, but those are ancillary to the primary goal of building aerobic fitness. Easy and subt running is baking the cake. Everything else is decoration.
lol, everyone thinks this is revolutionary because most people have zero idea how to actually train. Most of you all just run one race (or not even that) and then follow some canned training plan. And then you all wonder why your training doesn’t work because you’re trying to shoehorn yourself into someone else’s training framework.
What Sirpoc is doing is quite easy…evaluate fitness, add testing load slowly, reevaluate fitness, repeat. There are training books from the 1960s I have that describe the exact method of rational training.
hardly anyone here knows how to profile themselves as an athlete nor do they understand what threshold actually. Also, stress scoring is like basic stuff.
First time poster, long time lurker to the thread.
I get you wanting to be devil's advocate, this is LRC after all. But I think you have missed the mark here. I've been around the block a while, most coaches and training plans try to shoehorn everyone into a training program of someone else. I mean, most training is pretty much the same for the most part.
I think this is where I agree wholeheartedly with another poster today, as a starting point to make your own training better, this is almost certainly the best starting point. Enough time has gone on and enough success to tell us that for a amateur, there's probably no better starting point than buying into what sirpoc has done.
I have never read a book like this, never read an approach to running focusing in on all the details at the same time and having a clear focus and goal of why we are doing what we are doing.
Not only that, I think sirpoc himself has even been very humble to say this is just a way, rather than 'the' way to train. It anything I think he undersells his ability to put a program together, that whilst I don't think anyone would argue is novel in isolation, has a clear philosophy from start to finish and for the modern runner, certainly this method goes a long way to un do the absolute mess training made of itself in the late 90s and early 00s.
Personally, I can't wait for the book and am almost certain it'll be a hit. If nothing else, the dude is so damn likeable. I mean in the age of influencers being very annoying , I've pretty much never heard a bad word said about the guy.
By the way I have a whole catalogue of books from the 60-70s. Whilst you are not wrong, there is absolutely nothing that lays it out as well as this. Nothing. Which is the other value of this thread and potential final book/bible on the matter, it is meant to be easy and laid out that it gets a wide proportion of the popular faster, whilst actually having an understanding and grasp of what they are doing and their own destiny. A lot of what was written back then was pretty vague and open to interpretation.
lol, everyone thinks this is revolutionary because most people have zero idea how to actually train. Most of you all just run one race (or not even that) and then follow some canned training plan. And then you all wonder why your training doesn’t work because you’re trying to shoehorn yourself into someone else’s training framework.
What Sirpoc is doing is quite easy…evaluate fitness, add testing load slowly, reevaluate fitness, repeat. There are training books from the 1960s I have that describe the exact method of rational training.
hardly anyone here knows how to profile themselves as an athlete nor do they understand what threshold actually. Also, stress scoring is like basic stuff.
First time poster, long time lurker to the thread.
I get you wanting to be devil's advocate, this is LRC after all. But I think you have missed the mark here. I've been around the block a while, most coaches and training plans try to shoehorn everyone into a training program of someone else. I mean, most training is pretty much the same for the most part.
I think this is where I agree wholeheartedly with another poster today, as a starting point to make your own training better, this is almost certainly the best starting point. Enough time has gone on and enough success to tell us that for a amateur, there's probably no better starting point than buying into what sirpoc has done.
I have never read a book like this, never read an approach to running focusing in on all the details at the same time and having a clear focus and goal of why we are doing what we are doing.
Not only that, I think sirpoc himself has even been very humble to say this is just a way, rather than 'the' way to train. It anything I think he undersells his ability to put a program together, that whilst I don't think anyone would argue is novel in isolation, has a clear philosophy from start to finish and for the modern runner, certainly this method goes a long way to un do the absolute mess training made of itself in the late 90s and early 00s.
Personally, I can't wait for the book and am almost certain it'll be a hit. If nothing else, the dude is so damn likeable. I mean in the age of influencers being very annoying , I've pretty much never heard a bad word said about the guy.
By the way I have a whole catalogue of books from the 60-70s. Whilst you are not wrong, there is absolutely nothing that lays it out as well as this. Nothing. Which is the other value of this thread and potential final book/bible on the matter, it is meant to be easy and laid out that it gets a wide proportion of the popular faster, whilst actually having an understanding and grasp of what they are doing and their own destiny. A lot of what was written back then was pretty vague and open to interpretation.
Similar to you, I've lurked for a while and have just now wanted to jump into the conversation.
I don't have a catalogue of books from the 60s-70s, hence my earlier comment. I was merely trying to poke at the fact that while training philosophy is great and all, practically outlined plans probably help the average hobby jogger more. Wompppers seems critical of canned plans to begin with... and seems to think that every runner has the desire to read a bunch of books and create customized training plans themselves. I don't buy it.
If NSM is just a canned version of some old training principles with modern language, which seems to be this guy's opinion, at least it provides people with a plug and play tool to improve and stay healthy without a focus on the boom and bust cycle of other plans.
I wouldn't consider myself lost in the sauce but I have found myself asking: If this is so simple and so derivative, why haven't a bunch of coaches come out and said that Sirpoc is carbon copying their methodology? Why haven't people provided links to canned plans that already use this framework?
I think the problem is that, when it comes to training, runners are generally even more lost in the weeds than cyclists. This, what should be common sense/straightforward application of training principles seems revolutionary, even when it isn't.