Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

shirtboy2022 wrote:

Training Lore wrote:

'flushing'?

I asked AI to explain, what Marius meant by that term but got no response. Please clarify.

between you and Xel ffs

put your skirts on and Coggan can walk you around the block a couple more times

Link:www.runnersworld.com/advanced/a2083308...

the internet is hard. soon AI will replace SOME of us

atoponce wrote:

I would guess so wrote:

I realize one can accumulate only so much training stress, but I’m not sure why you’d generally treat that (as at least implied) as an either-or.

I'm not suggesting that at all. …

Training Lore wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

between you and Xel ffs

put your skirts on and Coggan can walk you around the block a couple more times

Link:www.runnersworld.com/advanced/a2083308...

the internet is hard. soon AI will replace SOME of us

So do think Coggan will concur?

And will he give a physiological term for what Bakken described as flushing?

Would it be The Cori cycle?

yayayaya wrote:

Probably asked before but the thread is so huge it's hard to search.

Where are we on cross training under this method? Given that the easy runs are super easy so that you are recovered for the next subT session, could you safely replace with bike/elliptical?

Weekly schedule -> 10x3min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Zwift Bike, 5 x 6min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Elliptical, 3 x 10min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Bike, Long Run.

Obviously it's only 4 runs overall but given that the easy runs in this method are so slow and kind of useless, surely an equivalent HR zone x-training method could work?

What are the downsides to this concept?

shirtboy2022 wrote:

yayayaya wrote:

Probably asked before but the thread is so huge it's hard to search.

Where are we on cross training under this method? Given that the easy runs are super easy so that you are recovered for the next subT session, could you safely replace with bike/elliptical?

Weekly schedule -> 10x3min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Zwift Bike, 5 x 6min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Elliptical, 3 x 10min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Bike, Long Run.

Obviously it's only 4 runs overall but given that the easy runs in this method are so slow and kind of useless, surely an equivalent HR zone x-training method could work?

What are the downsides to this concept?

sounds like a lot of quality to me

is this really your schedule??

I R8 Trolls wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

sounds like a lot of quality to me

is this really your schedule??

How is this any more quality than the original method? He’s just suggesting replacing easy runs with either an hour bike or an hour elliptical in zone 2.

FWIW, I have been doing this, except instead of Z2, I do a quality ride, typically an hour sweetspot on Zwift. I find sweetspot on the bike to be taxing mentally but not especially taxing physically. Alternating quality runs and quality rides for about 6 weeks now without hitting any kind of injury or fatigue walls. CTL is at an all time high. Haven’t raced yet to see where I’m at, but will report back eventually.

I R8 Trolls wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

Is this a serious question?

lets us hear your results!

totally open to changing my mind but 6 days of ‘quality’ a week seems like a stretch, regardless of the division

my best was around 4 (2 sub t run, 2 Z2 bike) calling that ‘4 quality ‘, but im open to the possibilities cycling provides

100% serious. Maybe we’re using zone 2 differently but to me, Zone 2 is “easy”equivalent. In fact, I think it’s even called “easy” on Garmin. For me, a 35 year old man with an approx 187 max HR, it’s 110-130 BPM. So, why would one hour of zone 2 on Zwift be more quality work than the sirpoc prescribed one hour easy run?

yep, I will report back with results when I have tried it for longer.

yayayaya wrote:

Probably asked before but the thread is so huge it's hard to search.

Where are we on cross training under this method? Given that the easy runs are super easy so that you are recovered for the next subT session, could you safely replace with bike/elliptical?

Weekly schedule -> 10x3min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Zwift Bike, 5 x 6min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Elliptical, 3 x 10min SubT, 1 Hour Z2 Bike, Long Run.

Obviously it's only 4 runs overall but given that the easy runs in this method are so slow and kind of useless, surely an equivalent HR zone x-training method could work?

What are the downsides to this concept?

shirtboy2022 wrote:

I R8 Trolls wrote:

100% serious. Maybe we’re using zone 2 differently but to me, Zone 2 is “easy”equivalent. In fact, I think it’s even called “easy” on Garmin. For me, a 35 year old man with an approx 187 max HR, it’s 110-130 BPM. So, why would one hour of zone 2 on Zwift be more quality work than the sirpoc prescribed one hour easy run?

yep, I will report back with results when I have tried it for longer.

Makes a lot more sense now: i wouldn’t characterize that as a Z2 ride.
We have probably the same Max HR, but unless youve either never cycled or have a ridiculously underdeveloped aerobic system, that’s an easy ride to me.

Still interested in your results regardless!

shirtboy2022 wrote:

Training Lore wrote:

So do think Coggan will concur?

And will he give a physiological term for what Bakken described as flushing?

Would it be The Cori cycle?

cute turn from your small language model AI search

the premise here is you don’t know what elite Norwegian runners think, not really important what AC thinks about this;the point in invoking him is you’ve idiots have run a number of physiological concepts at him and been taken to the woodshed

this is Bakken not Thor Hushov

shirtboy2022 wrote:

Training Lore wrote:

'flushing'?

I asked AI to explain, what Marius meant by that term but got no response. Please clarify.

between you and Xel ffs

put your skirts on and Coggan can walk you around the block a couple more times

Link:www.runnersworld.com/advanced/a2083308...

the internet is hard. soon AI will replace SOME of us

Andrew Coggan wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

between you and Xel ffs

put your skirts on and Coggan can walk you around the block a couple more times

Link:www.runnersworld.com/advanced/a2083308...

the internet is hard. soon AI will replace SOME of us

Dang you, you made me follow a link.

In cycling, such workouts are referred to as "over-unders". Like a zillion other things you could do, they can be good training, but there's absolutely nothing special about such sessions. In particular, there is no evidence that they enhance lactate clearance ("flushing") to a greater degree than steady state sessions at the same average intensity. Furthermore, even if they did it wouldn't really matter, since accumulation of lactate doesn't contribute to fatigue in the first place.

TLDR: one more example of people who don't really understand exercise physiology making sh*t up to justify how they like to train.

Andrew Coggan wrote:

accumulation of lactate doesn't contribute to fatigue

Training Lore wrote:

Andrew Coggan wrote:

Dang you, you made me follow a link.

In cycling, such workouts are referred to as "over-unders". Like a zillion other things you could do, they can be good training, but there's absolutely nothing special about such sessions. In particular, there is no evidence that they enhance lactate clearance ("flushing") to a greater degree than steady state sessions at the same average intensity. Furthermore, even if they did it wouldn't really matter, since accumulation of lactate doesn't contribute to fatigue in the first place.

TLDR: one more example of people who don't really understand exercise physiology making sh*t up to justify how they like to train.

The best part was when shmartboy said you were going to walk me around the block a few times.

He funny.

Andrew Coggan wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

between you and Xel ffs

put your skirts on and Coggan can walk you around the block a couple more times

Link:www.runnersworld.com/advanced/a2083308...

the internet is hard. soon AI will replace SOME of us

Dang you, you made me follow a link.

In cycling, such workouts are referred to as "over-unders". Like a zillion other things you could do, they can be good training, but there's absolutely nothing special about such sessions. In particular, there is no evidence that they enhance lactate clearance ("flushing") to a greater degree than steady state sessions at the same average intensity. Furthermore, even if they did it wouldn't really matter, since accumulation of lactate doesn't contribute to fatigue in the first place.

TLDR: one more example of people who don't really understand exercise physiology making sh*t up to justify how they like to train.