Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Good post, no sarcasm, but it sounds like we have to take a Maffetone-like approach to a degree on the EZ run days in NSM. Am I wrong? Please correct me if so.

Fundamentally, no one's holding a gun to anyone's head to make them follow this program. People are strict because it's a program to put one at the local maxima for the given hours trained, but it's quite easy to fall off if you overdo it. I don't care if you want to run 10k pace for the k's instead of following the paces, but I'm 99% sure it's not going to work for you if you do. If you still want to do that, that's fine, but don't blame NSA for not working. You're doing something else and going to get the results you get but coming back saying "I did NSA and it didn't work for me!" is pointless.

Second, it's not the end of the world to go a bit outside of the parameters every once and a while. I do. I adjust around it to keep my CTL about the same overall - if I go to a club run faster than usual, ok, fine, then the next workout needs to be a bit slower until I'm back to normal CTL. Maybe I run 15:30 instead of 15:20 in the long-term because of it. Not the end of the world, I'm ok with that. I drink, ah, maybe a few beers here and there and that's also probably costing me seconds too. I'm a hobby jogger, not a pro. I like feeling like I reasonably maximize my results in the time spent, not perfectly maximize.

This might sound contradictory to the first point. I don't see it that way. I'm still trying to follow the overall structure and maximize my CTL. I think NSA is the most efficient way to do that. Occasionally, I do things a bit outside of NSA that on balance reduce my CTL vs a stricter interpretation. But I'm not trying to fundamentally change the program and recognize these deviations may cost me a bit, I just find the trade off worthwhile and make sure they're sufficiently minor to maintain the sustainability of the program.

I've seen that heat is a huge factor in what determines easy pace, at least for me. I can do my easy runs at around 7:40-7:50 in decent weather and never hit 70% HR, but when it becomes hot and humid (I live in the Midwest, so this has been recently almost all the time) I'd say HR can go up by like 10-15 bpm trying to run the same pace which definitely puts me over.

I use pace like sirpoc to calculate CTL but use LTHR as a guide in workouts, so is the answer to do more easy mileage and sub T to counteract the loss of load from slowing down?

Any form of effective training is going to be quite rigid in the sense that you need to make the right execution of training pretty much every day. You can manage that decision making more intuitively on a day to day basis (i.e. adjusting workouts on the fly, running a rolling workout schedule, etc) or outsource it to the plan itself with a more careful but specific prescription. I'd argue that the overall rigidity is going to be the same in the big picture, it's just happening at different abstraction layers in the training plan. Different aptitudes and lifestyles will suit different training styles, but an problem arises in that most people do not have the knowledge and experience to intuitively make good decisions on a day to day basis.

I don't view Sirpoc's system as anti-individualization, quite the opposite actually. By controlling so many variables of training it provides an great starting point for productive self-experimentation, but only if you actually follow the system first to establish a proper starting point AND when making changes put in the same level of thought that Sirpoc applied to create the thing in the first place. The criticism of those that "fail" the program isn't really for not following the exact program, but rather disregarding the logic of the program and doing dumb training. I'm sure the community around this will be stoked whenever people demonstrate successful modifications.

The fun issue is understandable but also a bit of a skill issue. There's an enjoyable meditative aspect to repetitive training once you develop the right headspace. There's a lot of variety in workouts that you can create with different interval schemes while still keeping the overall effort appropriate. You can make a point of exploring different routes on easy days. If you're running buddies are going to drop you for going 15s/km too slow you need to find better friends or get fitter.

There we have it, you don’t find it fun and think it’s rigid. Yet the biggest reason for the trolls is the ego of running slowly on strava.

its a framework, more of a framework than any other plan out there. No one calls out the old run here or there but where people misunderstand the principle and consistently deviate, then say they are not improving it a terrible plan.

Doing a long run with you mates at below LT1 but faster than 70% MHR, no a issue, doing it every week for months and you next workout will be tougher to hit the ideal pace so slow it down then.

Doing a workout with your mates, one run above LT2, who cares the next recovery day you go slower. Doing every workout above LT2 for months, increased injury risk and potential lack of improvement.

Doing only two workouts a week with balls to the wall / see god hard effort and straight tempo because that’s what I’ve always done with my mates, it’s fine every so often, but every week you are following Daniels.

You know, the other option is to ask your mates to run your workout pace, whether a subT effort or easy run instead of running their workout/easy pace, just saying

Not really, it more than easy is meant to be easy, whether one day your pace is 8min because you feel fresh or another it’s 9:30min but the last workout or high temp, it’s about truly backing off the pace rather than trying to push the pace. It’s not about hitting the 70% MHR it’s ok to run at anything under it

These two statements are massively contradictory. Every single run of NSA is individualised.

It takes a certain type of person to want to run 7 days a week every week, let alone do 3 workouts every week.

If you're taking huge chunks off your times then maybe it's OK, but I couldn't justify it to try and get from say 17:30 to 16:50. There must be easier ways. Plus I can't run 7 days without breaking down. The runs would have to be 3-4 miles tops.

I’ve also had a similar experience with NSA. In the two weeks I tried it I didn’t feel like I was making any progress because it was too easy. Instead, I decided to switch to a more VO2 Max centered program. I’ve started running 3-4 VO2 Max sessions a week and have seen really good progress. Well actually, I haven’t improved my times yet, but once I recover from my shin splints and mild stress fracture I know I’ll be due for a big pr because I’ve been working so hard. I think Sirpoc pays a German Shepard to run his sub T intervals, while the real Sirpoc runs VO2 Work so he can actually get better. Remember, to improve you MUST run at the pace that you race at.

Your suspicion that Sirpoc employs a German Shepherd to undertake his threshold runs is, I must say, entirely accurate. Residing as I do in his British village, I have personally observed him doubled over in a state of utter exhaustion following bouts of VO2 Max intervals, whilst a German Shepherd, elegantly equipped with a Garmin, glides past at a comfortable sub-threshold pace. Moreover, it is murmured amongst certain circles that Sirpoc is presently endeavouring to acquire a young Kenyan or Ethiopian child, whom he intends to cultivate from an early age with rigorous VO2 Max conditioning, all the while perpetuating the narrative that he himself is merely “doing sweetspot.”

While eating a Mars bar.

Ha! Good catch.

In some ways though, NSA is quite hard. No, you're not running your 6 x 800m or 5 x 1k @5k pace and a 30 minute tempo each once weekly, but all said and done, that's under an hour of hard work per week. With NSA you're doing 80-100 minutes of hard-ish work and it takes over 3 of your days, instead of 2.

But wait there's more! Because you're doing 3 weekly workouts, you now have to run your easy and long runs at a painfully slow pace.

If anything, folks are underestimating the difficulty of managing this approach. Which is why so many are trying to tweak this to their preferences.

Yes, his TT cyclist background surely has nothing to do with it. Just like you should ignore that the other guy's last name is Ingebrigtsen.

You mean with your current training you can’t run 7 days a week.

Though you are clearly not interested in running 7 days a week your inability to be able to run if you wish is a limitation of your current training.

NSA method does not mandate your run 7 days a week just how you could do it. I think most people on the Strava group are doing 4-6 days

Yeah his marathon pace is about 1.125 times slower than Clayton Young’s, yet his easy run pace is more like 1.06 times slower, which is a pretty bit discrepancy in my opinion—based off 1.125 he would be like 7:40 in freedom units, maybe 7:30 if you take into account altitude and ignore wind. I think Clayton Young is probably pretty average for a pro on easy run pace, and he has a buffer from taking a day off every week. John Korir is an extreme example of slow easy days: he goes like 9 flat multiple times a week and no faster than 7 flat even though he’s a 2:03 runner. Linkletter probably trains the most like Sirpoc and goes like 7:20-7:30. The inverse of Korir or Linkletter would be Rupp and Farah, and like Graham Blanks. Rupp and Farah were on a lot of drugs, so you have to discount them, and Blanks, even though he’s often named as an extreme example on the side of quicker easy runs, doesn’t even go that hard relative to Sirpoc—the equivilant if you divide Blanks’ by Sirpoc’s 5k would be 7 flat, which is pretty close to what Sirpoc does anyways. What I’m trying to say is that I think Sirpoc should consider slowing down his easy days. I think there are very few (if any) times an amateur should be working harder than the pros, and easy days definitely aren’t one of them. Even though the percentage of his heart rate max might support him maintaining that speed, I think there are some things in running that can’t be measured by analytics and can only be felt; I’ve often felt the need to slow down or go particularly slow on easy runs to spare my legs even though my heart rate was well within the recommended range. I wonder if this method over prioritizes analytics at times, even though they can obviously be very useful.

Those guys are running 14 hours / week, sirpoc is running 7...

Sirpoc is in his 40s and has a full time job. This method is supposed to have very-easy easy runs and Sirpoc is probably just doing easy easy runs. He is going almost as fast relatively as someone who is mentioned as an extreme outlier in pro running on easy run pace.

Also it’s more like 8.5 and 13. And if it was worth it from a general training perspective to go faster these guys would be doing it. It’s only like a 5 minute difference over an entire run so I don’t think time management really comes into play.