Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

sirpoc84 wrote:

That is probably me 🙈 hard to hide on the internet these days. Probably should have got a new running username. I could push the limits of cycling as an amateur;

1. Because you don't need much time to time trial. It's much like the time per week you need to train for 5-10k running.

2. Cyclists didn't really know how to train properly 10 years ago, so I had a big advantage even though naturally I'm average aerobically. I got to my maximum potential, a lot of guys the way they trained were nowhere near it, but they were way more gifted than me.

3. I understood that reducing CDA would make you waaaaaaaaay faster than any I icing on the cake training could do. Again, I believe everyone has caught up. But I still notice I have a few course records ha ha

I just like to share what I have learned over time and help people improve. I'm not a good runner. I'm not really in amazing shape anymore. My weight is what it is, doesn't go up or down but it's not optimal for running. But I do know what has changed how I feel, train and compete and running. I've definitely got faster. I'm pretty average but if I can get to sub 17 I will be happy, I think 16:45 might be about my absolute max potential at my age, weight and time I have to train. I don't have the cda advantage in running ha ha

I haven't read Friels book for a while, it's actually really good the HR training one. But my experience playing around with this system, is that "super threshold" zone as he calls it really taxes you quickly . It doesn't really add much more on in terms of bang for your buck in TSS but you really feel it the next day, even if you don't go far into it. I experimented with this with some 5x2k reps. I deliberately went over when I was in testing phase and had the lactate meter, on the last rep. It was only one rep of the 5 at the end, but I really did feel way more trashed agree and felt horrific the next day on the easy run. So it is playing with fire in a way, but as I said if you know what you are doing or are over cautious and just make sure you go a bit under, it's all good.

sirpoc84 wrote:

lexel wrote:

Thank you for outlining your concept again in very detail.

Interestingly i had the same idea several weeks ago, trying to optimize the maximum training load/week, but i used the TRIMP system. Also here a longer duration around 60min threshold/week gave a better result = higher load per week. It seems to be better to have a higher duration below THR, as to have a shorter duration above it. I am more and more convinced that this is the better (and safer) concept , even there is still a lot of dicussion on this.

Yes for sure. Time crunched cyclists who Time Trial have done this for a long time. I just never tried it for running initially, to my mistake, because guys would tell me "how you gonna run a 5k if you never do 5k pace". I stupidly listened. I wish I had stuck to my guns initially, as my gut reaction to running was TSS was TSS, which creates CTL (to use the terms I'm familiar with from training peaks) which is what creates fitness. For the individual, you can create a training score and to within maybe 98% your fitness will be the same.

As an extreme, I could probably achieve similar with running twice as much a week, but all easy pace with maybe one tempo run. But that would take double the amount of hours. But in terms of training load/CTL, would be the same. Id probably still be the same in a 5k. This is why you hear stories of guys running insane hours a week, mostly all easy (training for an ultra maybe) but then setting PBS all over the place in shorter distances.

sirpoc84 wrote:

Google brought me here wrote:

Really good read, was googling running TSS and brought me here.. I think I know who sirpoc is?. He used to post on cycling forums and was way ahead of his time when it came to the stuff to do with CDA about time trialing? The times he did of time crunched training and marginal gains were insane. If it's the same person? 😕 Theres so many running or tri podcasts out there , if anyone has one I'd love to hear someone get him on there. I'm sure he will keep improving.

This running approach is kind of what I am looking for, something that will push up my threshold from below and stop them injuries. At or just above threshold in that "super" threshold zone than Friel prescribes just beats me up too much.

I haven't read Friels book for a while, it's actually really good the HR training one. But my experience playing around with this system, is that "super threshold" zone as he calls it really taxes you quickly . It doesn't really add much more on in terms of bang for your buck in TSS but you really feel it the next day, even if you don't go far into it. I experimented with this with some 5x2k reps. I deliberately went over when I was in testing phase and had the lactate meter, on the last rep. It was only one rep of the 5 at the end, but I really did feel way more trashed agree and felt horrific the next day on the easy run. So it is playing with fire in a way, but as I said if you know what you are doing or are over cautious and just make sure you go a bit under, it's all good.

jiggymeister wrote:

unbelief wrote:

if you cant do 20x400 w/:30r @ 10k-8k pace and cant stay under 4.0 mmol then its not your 10k-8k pace

This is great thread, thanks to everyone who added valuable input.

Now regarding the statement I quoted above, I beg to differ:

I have been dabbling with a lactate meter (Lactate Plus) for the past few months. In my personal experience, you definitely can do much less than 20x400 w/30" @ 10K pace and be well over 4.0 mmol/L.

Context:

I have run a 37:45 10K last April which is 3:46/km pace or 1:30.4 per 400m.

I've been upping my mileage since that, now running my third week of 100 km (62 miles). I've been doing mostly one LT session to not over-stress my self too much since I was not used to this mileage. I have bumped it up to two sessions by last week.

I introduced a 10x400m w/30" rest last week as a second LT session. Given that the rest is very short, I only managed to take two lactate readings (After 4th and 10th reps). Here are my splits for the 400's:

1) 01:34.1

2) 01:29.4

3) 01:33.8

4) 01:29.1 = 4.8 mmol/L

5) 01:33.7

6) 01:31.7

7) 01:34.7

8) 01:30.8

9) 01:34.3

10) 01:32.1 = 4.9 mmol/L

As you can see, all except one rep were slower than 10K pace, yet I was well above 4.0 mmol/L.

Where is the catch?

I have run my 10K race in a temperate climate, where-as my current training is taking place in brutally humid and hot conditions. This goes to say that lactate is dynamic and context dependent. A blanket, absolute statement such as the one quoted above is misleading.

Now when I run similar pace on the treadmill it is a different story, even for 10 minute reps, I'm under 3 mmol/L for most of my reps, albeit them being a bit slower. (I have a Runn Optical Sensor which measures the true belt speed, so I trust the splits).

shirtboy2022 wrote:

jiggymeister wrote:

This is great thread, thanks to everyone who added valuable input.

Now regarding the statement I quoted above, I beg to differ:

I have been dabbling with a lactate meter (Lactate Plus) for the past few months. In my personal experience, you definitely can do much less than 20x400 w/30" @ 10K pace and be well over 4.0 mmol/L.

Context:

I have run a 37:45 10K last April which is 3:46/km pace or 1:30.4 per 400m.

I've been upping my mileage since that, now running my third week of 100 km (62 miles). I've been doing mostly one LT session to not over-stress my self too much since I was not used to this mileage. I have bumped it up to two sessions by last week.

I introduced a 10x400m w/30" rest last week as a second LT session. Given that the rest is very short, I only managed to take two lactate readings (After 4th and 10th reps). Here are my splits for the 400's:

1) 01:34.1

2) 01:29.4

3) 01:33.8

4) 01:29.1 = 4.8 mmol/L

5) 01:33.7

6) 01:31.7

7) 01:34.7

8) 01:30.8

9) 01:34.3

10) 01:32.1 = 4.9 mmol/L

As you can see, all except one rep were slower than 10K pace, yet I was well above 4.0 mmol/L.

Where is the catch?

I have run my 10K race in a temperate climate, where-as my current training is taking place in brutally humid and hot conditions. This goes to say that lactate is dynamic and context dependent. A blanket, absolute statement such as the one quoted above is misleading.

Now when I run similar pace on the treadmill it is a different story, even for 10 minute reps, I'm under 3 mmol/L for most of my reps, albeit them being a bit slower. (I have a Runn Optical Sensor which measures the true belt speed, so I trust the splits).

We have to make some assumptions here. Cant control for every possible variable, but yes, when you are talking about lactate it is somewhat dynamic.

As to your particular workout, sweat contamination is one very real possibility.
Heat and humidity will impact the # for sure. Not sure where youre taking the sample from, Lactate Plus needs a bigger volume of blood which many times gives the opportunity for more sweat contamination in the sample itself. Obviously the ear lobe is almost out of the question when doing it yourself, but if youre not really cleansing the site with at least some wet paper towel and then drying, you are going to get higher than normal readings if sweat is getting in the sample.

It's always harder outside with unstable environmental variables.

Also, that 10k time is from April. Not sure what your training has been on the top end since then. Less efficiency in the form of less strides/no speed work is certainly going to add to the stress this end of the 'threshold' scale is going to produce.

shirtboy2022 wrote:

jiggy

We have to make some assumptions here. Cant control for every possible variable, but yes, when you are talking about lactate it is somewhat dynamic.

As to your particular workout, sweat contamination is one very real possibility.
Heat and humidity will impact the # for sure. Not sure where youre taking the sample from, Lactate Plus needs a bigger volume of blood which many times gives the opportunity for more sweat contamination in the sample itself. Obviously the ear lobe is almost out of the question when doing it yourself, but if youre not really cleansing the site with at least some wet paper towel and then drying, you are going to get higher than normal readings if sweat is getting in the sample.

It's always harder outside with unstable environmental variables.

Also, that 10k time is from April. Not sure what your training has been on the top end since then. Less efficiency in the form of less strides/no speed work is certainly going to add to the stress this end of the 'threshold' scale is going to produce.

shirtboy2022 wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

I would suggest trying :80 on/:40 off on the treadmill and just jump to the sides for the standing rest. Try that for 10 mph and see what your results are. That gives you a 2:1 ratio which is about right.

Part of it might be pacing as well. And id say dont even bother testing before 8/10 reps. You are going to need to take a little longer break to get the test done adequately. If you were trying to do the 20, you are really doing a 2x10x400 workout with 1:00R/2:00R between sets for the lactate test. :60 seconds for a test can even be rushing it sometimes, especially if you are drenched.

You can see at least the deviation is consistent. Sweat could produce a 1.0 mmol deviation here, seen it many times when the site isnt clean or you wind up touching your finger and not letting the tip just hit the blood sample itself, so its very possible you could be at around 4.0 at least for your workouts.

With the Lactate Plus you might want to try taking the sample with your finger above the strip rather than the meter above your finger. Ive noticed that helping the results with that meter. The meter is also in a better position because its a little bulkier and sometimes is ackward coming at the sample from the strip down to the finger.

jiggymeister wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

I would suggest trying :80 on/:40 off on the treadmill and just jump to the sides for the standing rest. Try that for 10 mph and see what your results are. That gives you a 2:1 ratio which is about right.

Part of it might be pacing as well. And id say dont even bother testing before 8/10 reps. You are going to need to take a little longer break to get the test done adequately. If you were trying to do the 20, you are really doing a 2x10x400 workout with 1:00R/2:00R between sets for the lactate test. :60 seconds for a test can even be rushing it sometimes, especially if you are drenched.

You can see at least the deviation is consistent. Sweat could produce a 1.0 mmol deviation here, seen it many times when the site isnt clean or you wind up touching your finger and not letting the tip just hit the blood sample itself, so its very possible you could be at around 4.0 at least for your workouts.

With the Lactate Plus you might want to try taking the sample with your finger above the strip rather than the meter above your finger. Ive noticed that helping the results with that meter. The meter is also in a better position because its a little bulkier and sometimes is ackward coming at the sample from the strip down to the finger.

I mean, I love data and experimenting so I can definitely do that for the sake of comparison.

I re-did the 400's yesterday on the track (13x400) but was disappointed to find out that I had forgotten to take the lancets with me. I would have loved to see what my lactate numbers were yesterday.

I want to do the 400's outdoors because it is just about the only LT work I could do outdoors at the moment if I was to run at a decent pace and not accumulate much lactate given how humid and hot it is outdoors at the moment. All longer reps are run indoors on a treadmill.

jiggymeister wrote:

This is great thread, thanks to everyone who added valuable input.

Now regarding the statement I quoted above, I beg to differ:

I have been dabbling with a lactate meter (Lactate Plus) for the past few months. In my personal experience, you definitely can do much less than 20x400 w/30" @ 10K pace and be well over 4.0 mmol/L.

Context:

I have run a 37:45 10K last April which is 3:46/km pace or 1:30.4 per 400m.

I've been upping my mileage since that, now running my third week of 100 km (62 miles). I've been doing mostly one LT session to not over-stress my self too much since I was not used to this mileage. I have bumped it up to two sessions by last week.

I introduced a 10x400m w/30" rest last week as a second LT session. Given that the rest is very short, I only managed to take two lactate readings (After 4th and 10th reps). Here are my splits for the 400's:

1) 01:34.1

2) 01:29.4

3) 01:33.8

4) 01:29.1 = 4.8 mmol/L

5) 01:33.7

6) 01:31.7

7) 01:34.7

8) 01:30.8

9) 01:34.3

10) 01:32.1 = 4.9 mmol/L

As you can see, all except one rep were slower than 10K pace, yet I was well above 4.0 mmol/L.

Where is the catch?

I have run my 10K race in a temperate climate, where-as my current training is taking place in brutally humid and hot conditions. This goes to say that lactate is dynamic and context dependent. A blanket, absolute statement such as the one quoted above is misleading.

Now when I run similar pace on the treadmill it is a different story, even for 10 minute reps, I'm under 3 mmol/L for most of my reps, albeit them being a bit slower. (I have a Runn Optical Sensor which measures the true belt speed, so I trust the splits).

sirpoc84 wrote:

shirtboy2022 wrote:

To your previous observations about Ingeb's older brother, he rarely does the 400s since he's mostly focusing on HM type races, so you could easily drop the X factor workout and replace with 3-4x3000m in your buildup if you are a more HM type focus athlete.

20-25 x 400 could be more of a focus is your race distance is 5K.

The hills, the trackwork, and even the 400s are designed for primarily 1500m guys.

If you are not looking to be needing a ton of speed 2k-3k repeats might be a better bread and better distance for your goals

I could definitely drop the 400s. But I don't have many sessions on rotation and it can get quite boring, so I do it every other week it tends to work out. Interestingly I did try 20x500 as I saw the older brother did that, but my lactate was always too high. However , I messed up as I realised he gave himself 40 seconds not 30. I might try it again, but I don't have any lactate strips left on the meter I borrowed and they are quite expensive 😂