Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

colder and wiser wrote:

I think Steve has brought up 2 or 3 points that actually haven't been made before in this thread.

He's probably right about individualization - even time-constrained hobby joggers might find a more optimal plan if they were working with a highly experienced coach. But I think the experience on this thread has shown that most self-coached runners are terrible coaches. Vanilla NSA may hold people back, but for a lot of people that's a good thing.

A lot of people looking for an X-factor have thrown in a whole session of hills or 5K pace intervals. Steve's suggestion to cut back a few minutes of sub-T and try 5 x 30 seconds at 5K pace in the workout is a lot more sensible. He's probably right that 6-8 weeks of race-specific training following a long block of NSA is good race prep, and it's more or less what sirpoc did for marathon prep. But is there a downside to introducing that kind of periodization in terms of recovery or injury risk or continued aerobic development at the hobby jogger level? That's an open question.

Steve's argument about fragility is new and probably needs to be addressed. People have pointed out before that NSA involves riding a thin line between stimulus and recovery - that's just what maximizing CTL means. If the system breaks down if minor variations are introduced, that's a problem. How robust is the approach? NSA comes with some built-in mechanisms to keep people from overtraining; are they sufficient?

This has actually been some of the most interesting discussion on the whole thread and I hope it continues.

sjm1368 wrote:

I think a lot of the confusion comes around this:

I made a video to answer a simple question asked by viewers: how would I evaluate the training program as a whole. So I did that. It's positives, what it does well, what it lacks, what to watch out for. And overall I said: It's a great way to build aerobically. It's drawbacks are it's one dimensional and neglects speed.

What you all are asking in this thread is a different question, which is: I've been doing this training for X months, should I adjust.

And I've been criticized for not giving substance, which I don't know what that means exactly. But part of that is because the answer to the above question is always contextual, and always...don't change much and do so gradually.

Like, if you came to me doing 200m repeats every single day and you were PRing, I wouldn't immediately drastically alter that. I'd say okay. Let's evaluate what is missing from your program. Let's evaluate where you are at relative to your goals. Let's weigh the costs and benefits. And then make gradual changes.

The first step is always looking at what is there and what's missing.

I've seen it all. I've got world class 5k runners who didn't have a single threshold or tempo run in their training. Some without any strength/power/pure speed. Some with no long runs. Others with no long repeats. And on and on. It doesn't mean you instantly say "Ah, no tempo runs, let's load them up." You say...okay how is this impacting you, is it worth it.

How do you evaluate that? You look at their goals and their physiology. With elites, I often do a lactate test that includes a threshold step test + a max 400. Or sometimes you do a speed reserve test. Or sometimes you simply compare race results. How does their 800-1500-5k, or their 5k-10k-half marathon line up? Or where do they line up in terms of workout strengths (do they kill tempos but struggle on 200s, or long runs.)

That gives you an idea on where the weak link in the chain is. Is your 5k at 4:50 pace, but your 10k is at 5:00 pace...well we can't get the 10k any closer. So we have to investigate why your 5k is stuck at 4:50. Sometimes that answer is way down the chain, sometimes its closer by.

Then you look....hmm is this reflected in training? Do you have that weak link because you never do anything faster than 5k pace? Or whatever the reason may be.

Now, with amateurs, you've got more weak links everywhere. So the truth is you just do something pretty good for a long while and you've got room to grow. But again, you make that evaluation on an individual basis.

Once you've got all that sorted, then you start looking at what's the easiest, risk free way to introduce a solution. And then you get to workout progressions, blends, combos, etc.

So again, maybe this all comes down to, oh Steve isn't giving us exacting answers. That's because there are none. There is no formula for training or coaching.

For the guy who said he's happy, injury free, and running well. Well, don't change much. To the guy who says his shorter distance is blocked, a weak link, well...gradually change something. And no, don't just run more 5ks.... Be systematic about it. I don't think a 5k race is less risky stimulus than a well-crafted progression of 200s, 300s, or 400s, in a controlled fashion. Or adding in some short work in a combo workout. Again, the exact workouts...depends on what the weak link is (is it rhythm/mechanical, physiology (able to tap into speed/FT fibers), etc.).

I'm going to sound like a broken record, but I think a lot of the issues in this group (and amateurs) in general is you suck at running workouts. Everything becomes an X factor workout. A test. A proving ground. So you associate speed work with risk.

Instead of seeing that Bob Schul built world class endurance and a very high threshold doing the vast majority of his workouts at distances of less than 300 meters. Again, not suggesting you try that. But just suggesting you expand your definition of intervals to see more controlled, aerobic, etc. style.

And to the guy who asked about coaching. I'd love to, but life is way too hectic to commit to any other coaching folks. I coach a handful of elites because of the challenge of it.

Anyways, I'm really no trying to pump content for contents sake on youtube or elsewhere. I made a video because I had a bunch of people ask. So I gave my honest thoughts based on physiology, history, and my experience. I've done the same for many programs. Every program has it's flaws, including my own training preferences.

cheeto legend wrote:

Cheetodust wrote:

It’s me the old guy mentioned. I’m coming up on almost two years of doing the plain vanilla method. I’ve had a week or two with small injuries but mostly healthy. Answer a few of the questions. Since adopting this method, (now 43y) I’ve dropped 4:35->4:20 mile, 15:45->14:55 5k, and ran 2:00. In the 800, plus better xc results. These are all times I figured were well beyond in my rear view. Unlike many in the thread, I raced at a pretty high level, topping out around 30 years old, trials all that. But I stagnated big time in my late 30’s early 40’s. I still ran every day. I used to love speed work but it tore me up physically and honestly this method showed how poor my aerobic abilities were.
i tried the x-factor stuff, did hills the first summer, got no change in effect besides more lower limb stiffness. So I just went back to the original 3 workouts.

i have a full time job, kids, busy schedule. Understanding that it’s just load helped me realize I could just knock out time based sessions on the treadmill at night when life was busy with the same results, if not better. I am extreme in how much I don’t care about the details. I love the set it and forget aspect, my true love being racing itself. I’ve gotten way better at racing after 30 years of running, been invigorating. I use HR and essentially rpe since I barely look at my watch during reps at this point.
The things I’ve had to dial in actually is I was feeling stale when the gun went off for races, and found a 800-1k at LT in my warmup was super effective on race day. Beyond that, I don’t even taper besides chopping my closest workout down to 60% if it’s a big race.
i could do any number of things bigger and better but nothing would I be able to sustain like this.

Damn dude, you are legit rolling and your Strava titles are epic. It's funny as I sometimes see your runs and I truly believe attitudes like yours and patience are THE way to do this.

We only need Grandma's guy now. It's funny, because I think a lot of people still think these people aren't legit and it's ironic the really fast guys who train like this are the ones that absolutely ignore all the noise and totally forget about pushing the boat out or speedwork. I think the ever excellent John Whelan touched on that in his post.

Thread is bringing out everyone lately. It's cool, even when everyone doesn't agree I always feel this is a nice space of LRC.