Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Because even if you lay out every detail, most people still don’t understand the “why” and will not understand how to follow the recipe. It’s human nature.

"Okay, here we go, if you want to try the method that's worked so well for so many, all you have to do is... This."

"Got it. This. Wait. Can I add That?"

"You could do That but then you wouldn't be able to do This as effectively, I don't think. It mightn't even be This anymore if you add That, to be honest."

"But I've always done That!"

"Has That worked for you?"

"Not particularly but I love That so much... This sounds good but... I'll miss That!"

"Okay keep doing That, then. Maybe This isn't for you!"

"But I really want to do This. People seem to be doing really well off This. Why can't I add That?"

"Again, you can if you like, but you won't really technically even be doing This anymore if you add That. This will become something Else."

"Okay okay alright. I'm going to do This."

"Wonderful!"

"...but it'll be my version of This, with added That."

"...Alright, fill your boots."

[six months later] "Hey everyone, This didn't work for me, don't listen to anyone who tells you to do This!"

I haven't seen this massively mentioned, but do we think confirmation bias is in play here? Also, I would like to see another marathon to prove this wasn't a flash in the pan and just a good day.

We only really know this works for a case study #1. What if he just got good anyway? I mean in my opinion there is a good chance he could have ran a better marathon and would be faster in a 5k had he followed a more traditional plan. I just don't think we have considered he might be holding himself back.

Cue the troll comments, but this is a legit question in my mind.

Plus we only have his word he really has stuck to just this training. You'll be surprised what people lie about for adulation and attention. Maybe jealous of influencers?

There are multiple case studies. At least 3 have been mentioned recently on this thread alone.

Sirpoc and others mentioned on this thread have open Strava accounts anyone can view.

Could Sirpoc have ran a faster marathon or 5k on a different programme? Who knows? Would he have been able to run 7 days a week for roughly 3 years with no injuries? Doubtful

The Strava group (amongst the crap) and the Reddit group have multiple other case studies

So, you want him to go back to a way of training that he didn't progress on? Yeah, that makes sense. Do all this work to improve, then go back to why you failed in the first place. AWESOME PLAN.

Also, you think this is a case study of one? Yeah OK. You think that might have been covered if it was? I would guestimate thousands, yes thousands of people have tried this at this point. Of which, I am willing to bet for a large majority of, improved. How much they improved, doesn't seem to be a huge pattern. The closer to the textbook program though, the more consistent the progress seems. Why that is, I am not qualified to say.

As for the last point, I think it's the opposite. Sirpoc in fact seems to go out of his way to NOT take praise, centre stage. Unfortunately, that's a by product of his success and all his posts. He is the method, whether he likes it or not. But it's forced upon him, rather than the other way around. The fact the guy doesn't have a YouTube channel and trying to sell us merch, tells you this is very much the case, rather than looking for attention. I'm many ways it's part of the charm. I don't know the guy, but I suspect from reading between the lines he would rather be down the pub on a summer's day, then in the spot he is in.

Try this.

Use a field method to determine threshold. Not estimate it, feel it.

Then, you need to really do a good job of quantifying your past 3-6 months of training to get an idea of current long and short term fatigue (fatigue masks fitness) so you can seed your performance manager chart. The PMC only accounts for training stress (and it’s still only a model), so you need to account for life stress some other way.

Once you have your PMC, threshold, and scoring system set, you can either plan workouts to estimate scores, or look at past workouts to get an idea of how you need to set your progression to add more work each week while maintaining a ramp rate you can handle. This is the iterative part and you can only tell how the numbers scale to your feeling. If you’re more sluggish and tired, or napping when you didn’t nap before, maybe you’re going to hard. Just be mindful.

For your subT progressions, I wouldn’t even do short intervals. I would do 10-15 minute blocks at the lower end of threshold RPE and work on extending the blocks while controlling ramp rate in PMC. What paces you run are based on how you feel. If you know where threshold is, you know how to stay under it. I believe most people can do an hour at threshold, even untrained. Most just haven’t recognized the feeling yet and will run too hard.

You gotta have computer tools and gadgets to do this easily, in my opinion. Sure, you could do this by feel and a stopwatch, but that’s a skill that most will never have.

For someone who disapproves of this method you seem to spend a lot of time on this thread

Why?

I don’t disapprove at all. I actually employ this method. I’m just criticizing the fact that many think the idea is revolutionary when it’s just basic data collection and interpretation.

Go to any engineering office and they will tell you how to design something based on performance spec. You collect samples of your material that is goi g to be used in design (analogous to time trials or races), develop models to describe the material test data (PMC, scoring, etc), and then you design your thing (training plan), test it and break it many times, and then build something that is highly probably to work.

Your way of communication is poor. Your posts don't make too much sense and you analogys quite frankly suck. Just get a new username and start again. The really strange thing is you seem to be posting info you are parroting back, as if it hasn't been talked about before. Lexel makes more sense than you do, although I've started to enjoy the new more less serious lexel lately.

What does your typical training week look like?

It's insane the amount of people that want to add their own twist to the method. Trying to impov, and just wing some weird sessions. A lot of people, for some reason just love adding sub-T to long runs. Or wanting to run the easier runs faster because it feels so slow. No one seems to just want to follow a strict, same schedule every week program.

Some of it I understand. There was someone on here who loves biking, and was trying to figure out how to integrate some cross training. That at least makes sense. But there are definitely plenty of folks who are just either bad at following instructions, or just resist it for whatever reason.

I have relatives who are doctors, and they see the exact same thing with their patients. They tell their patients to X, Y, and Z, and the patients come up with every reason they can to modify, rather than follow, the instructions.

If he did, he would simply be quoting me, because I have been saying that for about two decades. (It was a counterargument on Slowtwitch to the claim of a now-prominent triathlon coach who would often say that "more is always more").

Ok maybe I’m quoting the wrong person here. But I thought Sirpoc agreed with you that on that front, more or less.

I endorse this message.

I'm going to be honest, that sounds like an awful way to train. It might work for some people, but from my perspective it sounds like the worst possible combination of subjective analysis and gadget-based data. So you're never really learning "kung fu" (i.e., the ability to run appropriate paces by feel) and you're never fully committed to a data-driven model.

I know the Norwegian method described and debated in this thread wouldn't work for me, mostly because I don't have the right mindset. Some people respond really well to a rigidly-structured plan with hard pace limits. Personally I'm skeptical of such plans because it never forces you to learn the "go for broke" attitude that you need to compete and win. I think it's the difference between a training king/time-trial mindset vs. that of a racer. If you never push yourself in lower stakes workouts, how are you going to answer the bell when the stakes are high?

But again, we're all experiments of one.

What do you mean by a racer and when the stakes are high? This part often confuses me. Unless we are at a high level and in a tactical race, shouldn't we just all be pacing it like a time trial? I think I sort of know what you mean and I guess you are running at an elite level, or it just doesn't make sense to me.

I'm a little confused by this as well. What do you mean by racer? The only reason I say I'm confused, maybe it's just me but I've considered the one thing key more than anything from sirpoc open data, is how insanely good he is at racing? Like honestly, it's absolutely ridiculous his ability to perform almost to his maximum ability in every race. I certainly don't see him not being able to race properly. As I say, it's probably one of the things he should be most known for in my opinion.