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.
Actually sirpoc averaged 7h20m from aug '23 to aug '24 and he almost never went over 8hr before this year...
I've been following this thread for months now even though I don't employ the NSA method. While I understand and appreciate the concept behind it (maximizing your efforts within a limited amount of time in order to more consistently train and build aerobic capacity) and can recognize the thought/experimentation that went into it, I think what turns most people off is the rigidity of the training.
When someone "fails" you see the apostles come out of the woodwork: "He ran his Wednesday easy run pace :30/km too fast." "He tried to push the pace on 1k in July." etc. It's never the fault of the program, it's always because the athlete didn't follow it properly. Even if they used the calculators and followed it to the letter, there's always something to nitpick.
Life, especially for us middle age hobby joggers, is never perfect. And every athlete is different. One of the biggest complaints about coaching in Letsrun threads is that it's never individualized enough. And now here's a program that throws all individuality out the window. And again, I get that certain basic concepts are universal. I really do. But this adherence to the belief of "this is the plan, and if you're not able to follow it verbatim, you're doomed to failure" is almost a matter of faith within the NSA community. At least it appears so from a longtime lurker.
Finally, and this is more a personal preference/observation, it just doesn't seem fun. Running is supposed to be a fun activity. Shuffling along on easy runs and running precise sessions three times a week isn't my idea of fun. What happens when your running buddies want to meet up? "Sorry guys, my easy pace is :15/km slower than yours, I'll see you at the parking lot later!"
I liken it to cooking. NSA is using and scale and a spreadsheet to measure out all of your food during a week, making sure that your marco proportions are perfect, your vitamin consumption is ideal, and your caloric intake is precisely aligned to your output. Metabolically it might be correct, but it takes all the fun and passion out of it. But again, I recognize everyone is different, and this might be the journey some enjoy. But when you read critiques of the NSA program, just remember we're all different.
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.
I’d be curious to hear from Sirpoc about his most recent injury. I was surprised to see that he had something flare-up. He manages his load so meticulously and increases quite slowly over time. What does he think is the reason for the injury?
I’d be curious to hear from Sirpoc about his most recent injury. I was surprised to see that he had something flare-up. He manages his load so meticulously and increases quite slowly over time. What does he think is the reason for the injury?
He mentioned in his Strava that he thinks it’s probably from lifting stuff at his manual work job
I tried searching through all 326 pages but couldn’t find it. Anyone here experience the “threshold lock” feeling after doing this kind of training, where in a race setting it feels really difficult to run any harder than threshold? Say in a 5k or something
if specificity doesn't really matter, does biking sub-t have benefits for runners? say im injured and need to bike, can I realistically hope to continue improving while training on a bike?
Somewhat in the past. Not great feeling like you’re redlining 800m in. I do 2x200 around mile pace with 90-100 sec in between as part of my cool down from workouts 1-2 times per week. Functionally long strides. Doesn’t feel like it impacts me from a load perspective in the least or impairs other training, it’s quite controlled, and HR usually barely responds. And it’s improved my turnover and subjective ease getting to race pace. I also do about 400 m 5-10 min before races at around the 1k pace or a bit faster.
I tried searching through all 326 pages but couldn’t find it. Anyone here experience the “threshold lock” feeling after doing this kind of training, where in a race setting it feels really difficult to run any harder than threshold? Say in a 5k or something
Did you have that? I've only done one 5k since I started NSA. I ran the 5k in week 7 of NSA. No issues with "threshold lock" in that race. To put numbers to it, I was doing my 1000 repeats in the 3:50's. In the 5k I ran in the 3:30's. There was an 18:00 pacer in the race, and I put my focus on sticking with him. The pace didn't feel like redlining at all.
In my sub T sessions, I consciously keep my pace and heart rate restricted. There are times it's tempting to speed it up, but I know that's just gonna hurt me for the next session. So I don't. In a race those restrictions come right off. The competitive spirit takes over.
I tried searching through all 326 pages but couldn’t find it. Anyone here experience the “threshold lock” feeling after doing this kind of training, where in a race setting it feels really difficult to run any harder than threshold? Say in a 5k or something
It doesn't matter which plan you follow if you're looking for a sub 20 min 5k you will not run that fast, that long in your training.
Races are always about a shot in the dark, they're about desire as well as fitness. We've all had races when we've wondered after a few KM if we can keep this up for 10k or a HM. You need to grit the teeth and get stuck in and that isn't taught in any plan
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.
I actually agree with this to an extent. Others have said it, but you actually need to understand what you are doing and more importantly why. The runaway nature and success people are having with this, means then they are coming and looking at what is going on at the surface, but not under the hood.
I've heard sirpoc describe it as delicate high wire act. What you consider that, you at least need something to help balance you on the tight rope and the underpinning of that is fine but understanding what you are trying to achieve. Those who have done that , I think have received the best results. It took me a while, I made a bit of a mess of it first time around and ran my easy days way too hard and didn't really understand until 2 months in what a disaster that became.
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.
If we was running easy days too fast for her hours he had, he would have got injured well before 2+ years and burned out sometime around Christmas 2023. It's now the summer of 2025. You run at a pace that is sustainable to support 3 sub threshold runs a week. The key being here, if you can look back and manage a huge stretch of training day in, day out , then you mastered the intensity control and balance of this system. The spread of people's easy running is huge, even in elites. It's probably the least known or understood variable of why this is. The best explanation is form and mechanics and slower paces and slow HRs. For some people it's just easier, for others they struggle and it feels unnatural.
Missed day for what? Seems like the guy is only going to release something if he's happy with it from what he has said.
I would imagine from his persona, hearing him talk that whatever you mean by chance or window is of no interest to him. I think he said a dozen or so pages back the last thing he was interested in was cashing in, but thought probably he should get something out there simply to clarify all the stuff out there.
I think this is all part of the charm of the thread really. It's a natural ground swell movement rather than shilling or mass marketing.
if specificity doesn't really matter, does biking sub-t have benefits for runners? say im injured and need to bike, can I realistically hope to continue improving while training on a bike?
You are confusing specificity within running, to sport specific stimulus.
Not sure when sirpoc will be back, but he has done a huge amount of aerobic work. Vast in fact, compared to his running weeks as there's been very little easy.
It will be interesting to see how he goes when/ if he chooses to run again. I assume his improvement on the bike, that could suck him back in unfortunately. He did reply to a comment on Strava and just suggested he was "trying to hold on" or similar with what he is doing.
My own experience is you can lose very little cross training for 2-4 weeks, but after that some of the sport specific stimulus and muscle adaptations go. But if you do enough aerobically, at least that's all you need to bring back to life, opposed to doing nothing.
if specificity doesn't really matter, does biking sub-t have benefits for runners? say im injured and need to bike, can I realistically hope to continue improving while training on a bike?
It does matter, just not to the extent many believe it to be.
If you're injured and need to back, you can realistically hope to at least maintain your fitness.
There have been cases where injured runners did come back with PBs after an injury period where they only cross-trained.
It varies, as the volume needed to achieve such a feat would also have be considerably higher than what you were used to log (i.e. total running hours).
I’d be curious to hear from Sirpoc about his most recent injury. I was surprised to see that he had something flare-up. He manages his load so meticulously and increases quite slowly over time. What does he think is the reason for the injury?
He mentioned in his Strava that he thinks it’s probably from lifting stuff at his manual work job
He does manual work? My respect for him grows.
I've done manual labor jobs in the past & it trashed my body for running. Unless I'm thinking of a different kind of manual labor. I'd either try running before work & felt like trash at work where I couldn't keep up, or try running after work, but would come home, & be too tired to get off my butt.
This post was edited 31 seconds after it was posted.
Reason provided:
typo
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.
I actually agree with this to an extent. Others have said it, but you actually need to understand what you are doing and more importantly why. The runaway nature and success people are having with this, means then they are coming and looking at what is going on at the surface, but not under the hood.
I've heard sirpoc describe it as delicate high wire act. What you consider that, you at least need something to help balance you on the tight rope and the underpinning of that is fine but understanding what you are trying to achieve. Those who have done that , I think have received the best results. It took me a while, I made a bit of a mess of it first time around and ran my easy days way too hard and didn't really understand until 2 months in what a disaster that became.
I've been doing this for just over three months, and it really is a high wire act. The difference I feel between running my easy runs at 69% average MHR and 66% is quite noticeable. It really doesn't feel any different while doing the run, but the fatigue levels are quite different day in day out.
The challenge is: you can run 100 days in a row with an average of 70% maximum heart rate (MHR) for easy days until it starts feeling too fast. This happened to me, and I was stagnating without understanding why. Then I adjusted my easy days to an average of 66% MHR with a cap at 70%. Now, I walk up some small hills instead of shuffling. I also slowed my sub-threshold (ST) paces by about 3-4 seconds per kilometer. This creates a completely different experience. I feel super fresh every day, on both easy days and workout days. It’s hard to understand that your body needs to fully recover from workout days to improve. You should only feel fatigued after a race. Then, I dial back my sub-threshold paces until I feel fresh again. So with all of the CTL calulcation: you need a CTL that your body can absorb, and not the highest CTL you think you can manage.
I tried searching through all 326 pages but couldn’t find it. Anyone here experience the “threshold lock” feeling after doing this kind of training, where in a race setting it feels really difficult to run any harder than threshold? Say in a 5k or something
I had this in my first 5k after starting NSA (6 weeks into NSA) but not nearly as much in the second one (11 weeks into NSA). In that second 5k, I felt like I had a hard time getting up to pace, but once I made it up to pace by about 800m in, everything was fine.
I think the issue would probably get eliminated entirely by just doing a few strides during the warmup for the subT sessions, but honestly I've just been too lazy to do them since my main distances are marathons and ultras.
The challenge is: you can run 100 days in a row with an average of 70% maximum heart rate (MHR) for easy days until it starts feeling too fast. This happened to me, and I was stagnating without understanding why. Then I adjusted my easy days to an average of 66% MHR with a cap at 70%. Now, I walk up some small hills instead of shuffling. I also slowed my sub-threshold (ST) paces by about 3-4 seconds per kilometer. This creates a completely different experience. I feel super fresh every day, on both easy days and workout days. It’s hard to understand that your body needs to fully recover from workout days to improve. You should only feel fatigued after a race. Then, I dial back my sub-threshold paces until I feel fresh again. So with all of the CTL calulcation: you need a CTL that your body can absorb, and not the highest CTL you think you can manage.
Where were you with this sage advice a year ago, before I wasted almost a year's worth of training:( seriously though, well said!
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.