You need to keep in mind that a lot of these NSA runners, like sirpoc (or I suppose myself), were already decent runners when they got on NSA.
It is not that hard to think that even a former 1:5x or even ~2:0x 800 guy (or equivalent 1500/mile) could go on run a nice mile time with NSA alone.
But no, if you're starting as a 25-minute runner in the 5k with no faster background (or fast running in other sports), you aren't getting down to a 4:20 mile off of tempos.
I’d like to share my experience (challenges and successes) as a fairly untalented runner trying sweet-spot/NSA training with no exceptional baseline speed or long distance talent (in HS never broke 65 in the 400m, 2:15 in the 800m, 5:00 in the 1600m, or 10:50 in the 3200m). When training 30mpw on a speed program, I’ll be able to sneak under 60 for 400m, but then can barely run a 17:00 for 5000m. When building from that program to a longer distance one (5000-10,000m), I’m usually hitting 70-80mpw and running low-16:00 for 5k and 35:00 for 10k but can barely hit 62 for 400m. In other words, I lose endurance fitness rapidly when focusing on speed and anaerobic power, but lose speed and speed endurance rapidly when training for long distances (even when doing strides and sprints after longer workouts). When switching between these programs in either direction, I can keep some of the benefits for at least a couple months but lose them slowly after that. When doing a hybrid of these programs, I am middling at both short and long distances (vs. focusing on either). It sucks to not have any strengths, but I think I am figuring how to manage it.
Now, I followed “textbook” NSA to the tee for about 18 months (about 50-60mpw with 3x10min, 5x6min, 10x3min sub-T based on periodically updated Friel’s tests) and had similar results as I did with slightly higher mileage programs. Cool to see some aerobic benefits at a tad lower mileage, but I still could not handle faster paces. I tried to do NSA with and without strides over the course of that 18 months, and no matter what, same result when trying to run faster. It was like I was getting stronger (more enduring) but never able to access any speed. Then I thought, maybe I’ll introduce the 25x1min workout instead of the 5x6min workout. As it turns out, this is a magical workout for my physiology. It is speed-endurancey due to the supra-threshold mechanical stress but ultimately still sub-T from a physiological standpoint. All of my paces improved for other sub-T efforts over the next few months, and suddenly I hit PRs in the mile (4:23), 5k (15:05), and 10k (32:12). Kind of crazy. I am thinking now that for my kind of musculature and physiology that favors neither speed nor endurance, the middle ground 25x1min or 25x400m workout is highly valuable because it doesn’t detract from aerobic progress the way that sprints and hill sprints do, but offers plentiful mechanical benefits that some (but not all) people need. I now do one, sometimes two, 25x1min workouts per week (always keeping 3x10min in the mix to counterbalance), and both my aerobic and muscular strength have improved at once it seems. Anyway, long post but when trying to find the right stimulus/load with this kind of method, I have realized through trial and error that for some folks there is utility in considering extra mechanical load to strengthen the muscles alongside the aerobic gains. I’m working on adding a bit extra mileage before extending the sub-T workouts themselves, but for whatever reason have been feeling stronger than ever doing both the shortest sub-T reps with the longest sub-T reps each week (plus a third sub-T that is either 5x6min or another 25x1min).
Learned a lot from the folks in this thread, and although I nearly thought I was a non-responder, I found an NSA variant that works for me super well while keeping the other central tenets.
Holy cow. What an improvement! Glad you stuck with it and found what works. Excited to hear about future gains.
I’d like to share my experience (challenges and successes) as a fairly untalented runner trying sweet-spot/NSA training with no exceptional baseline speed or long distance talent (in HS never broke 65 in the 400m, 2:15 in the 800m, 5:00 in the 1600m, or 10:50 in the 3200m). When training 30mpw on a speed program, I’ll be able to sneak under 60 for 400m, but then can barely run a 17:00 for 5000m. When building from that program to a longer distance one (5000-10,000m), I’m usually hitting 70-80mpw and running low-16:00 for 5k and 35:00 for 10k but can barely hit 62 for 400m. In other words, I lose endurance fitness rapidly when focusing on speed and anaerobic power, but lose speed and speed endurance rapidly when training for long distances (even when doing strides and sprints after longer workouts). When switching between these programs in either direction, I can keep some of the benefits for at least a couple months but lose them slowly after that. When doing a hybrid of these programs, I am middling at both short and long distances (vs. focusing on either). It sucks to not have any strengths, but I think I am figuring how to manage it.
Now, I followed “textbook” NSA to the tee for about 18 months (about 50-60mpw with 3x10min, 5x6min, 10x3min sub-T based on periodically updated Friel’s tests) and had similar results as I did with slightly higher mileage programs. Cool to see some aerobic benefits at a tad lower mileage, but I still could not handle faster paces. I tried to do NSA with and without strides over the course of that 18 months, and no matter what, same result when trying to run faster. It was like I was getting stronger (more enduring) but never able to access any speed. Then I thought, maybe I’ll introduce the 25x1min workout instead of the 5x6min workout. As it turns out, this is a magical workout for my physiology. It is speed-endurancey due to the supra-threshold mechanical stress but ultimately still sub-T from a physiological standpoint. All of my paces improved for other sub-T efforts over the next few months, and suddenly I hit PRs in the mile (4:23), 5k (15:05), and 10k (32:12). Kind of crazy. I am thinking now that for my kind of musculature and physiology that favors neither speed nor endurance, the middle ground 25x1min or 25x400m workout is highly valuable because it doesn’t detract from aerobic progress the way that sprints and hill sprints do, but offers plentiful mechanical benefits that some (but not all) people need. I now do one, sometimes two, 25x1min workouts per week (always keeping 3x10min in the mix to counterbalance), and both my aerobic and muscular strength have improved at once it seems. Anyway, long post but when trying to find the right stimulus/load with this kind of method, I have realized through trial and error that for some folks there is utility in considering extra mechanical load to strengthen the muscles alongside the aerobic gains. I’m working on adding a bit extra mileage before extending the sub-T workouts themselves, but for whatever reason have been feeling stronger than ever doing both the shortest sub-T reps with the longest sub-T reps each week (plus a third sub-T that is either 5x6min or another 25x1min).
Learned a lot from the folks in this thread, and although I nearly thought I was a non-responder, I found an NSA variant that works for me super well while keeping the other central tenets.
Holy cow. What an improvement! Glad you stuck with it and found what works. Excited to hear about future gains.
Thanks! FWIW, I was actually very sore after the first few 25x1min workouts (5-10k pace) and was worried this would mean hampered recovery and lower quality for other sub-T workouts. Temporarily, yes. But once you get over it after several weeks, other sub-T efforts will feel very smooth and snappy at the same paces (careful to not overdo the paces though when returning to longer reps), and for me, the paces seemed to progress really well week over week since introducing the quicker reps—in a way that consistent aerobic stimulus from longer reps + semi-regular time trials (as the anaerobic stimulus) work didn’t quite do for me.
You need to keep in mind that a lot of these NSA runners, like sirpoc (or I suppose myself), were already decent runners when they got on NSA.
It is not that hard to think that even a former 1:5x or even ~2:0x 800 guy (or equivalent 1500/mile) could go on run a nice mile time with NSA alone.
But no, if you're starting as a 25-minute runner in the 5k with no faster background (or fast running in other sports), you aren't getting down to a 4:20 mile off of tempos.
I’d like to share my experience (challenges and successes) as a fairly untalented runner trying sweet-spot/NSA training with no exceptional baseline speed or long distance talent (in HS never broke 65 in the 400m, 2:15 in the 800m, 5:00 in the 1600m, or 10:50 in the 3200m). When training 30mpw on a speed program, I’ll be able to sneak under 60 for 400m, but then can barely run a 17:00 for 5000m. When building from that program to a longer distance one (5000-10,000m), I’m usually hitting 70-80mpw and running low-16:00 for 5k and 35:00 for 10k but can barely hit 62 for 400m. In other words, I lose endurance fitness rapidly when focusing on speed and anaerobic power, but lose speed and speed endurance rapidly when training for long distances (even when doing strides and sprints after longer workouts). When switching between these programs in either direction, I can keep some of the benefits for at least a couple months but lose them slowly after that. When doing a hybrid of these programs, I am middling at both short and long distances (vs. focusing on either). It sucks to not have any strengths, but I think I am figuring how to manage it.
Now, I followed “textbook” NSA to the tee for about 18 months (about 50-60mpw with 3x10min, 5x6min, 10x3min sub-T based on periodically updated Friel’s tests) and had similar results as I did with slightly higher mileage programs. Cool to see some aerobic benefits at a tad lower mileage, but I still could not handle faster paces. I tried to do NSA with and without strides over the course of that 18 months, and no matter what, same result when trying to run faster. It was like I was getting stronger (more enduring) but never able to access any speed. Then I thought, maybe I’ll introduce the 25x1min workout instead of the 5x6min workout. As it turns out, this is a magical workout for my physiology. It is speed-endurancey due to the supra-threshold mechanical stress but ultimately still sub-T from a physiological standpoint. All of my paces improved for other sub-T efforts over the next few months, and suddenly I hit PRs in the mile (4:23), 5k (15:05), and 10k (32:12). Kind of crazy. I am thinking now that for my kind of musculature and physiology that favors neither speed nor endurance, the middle ground 25x1min or 25x400m workout is highly valuable because it doesn’t detract from aerobic progress the way that sprints and hill sprints do, but offers plentiful mechanical benefits that some (but not all) people need. I now do one, sometimes two, 25x1min workouts per week (always keeping 3x10min in the mix to counterbalance), and both my aerobic and muscular strength have improved at once it seems. Anyway, long post but when trying to find the right stimulus/load with this kind of method, I have realized through trial and error that for some folks there is utility in considering extra mechanical load to strengthen the muscles alongside the aerobic gains. I’m working on adding a bit extra mileage before extending the sub-T workouts themselves, but for whatever reason have been feeling stronger than ever doing both the shortest sub-T reps with the longest sub-T reps each week (plus a third sub-T that is either 5x6min or another 25x1min).
Learned a lot from the folks in this thread, and although I nearly thought I was a non-responder, I found an NSA variant that works for me super well while keeping the other central tenets.
That's insane if true. Running 4:20s in the mile without being much below 60s 400, and transferring that ability to 5k / 10k beyond is huge.
The 25 x 400 workout is one of my favorites and I respond very well to it, but sounds like you've found the closest thing to a 'magic fix' for you. And another example of how training needs to be individualized for different physiologies. Awesome!
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
SHJ is kinda right tho, someone running 60k a week should be running more and I think he demonstrated very thoroughly how to increase safely. This is disingenuous imo
I’d like to share my experience (challenges and successes) as a fairly untalented runner trying sweet-spot/NSA training with no exceptional baseline speed or long distance talent (in HS never broke 65 in the 400m, 2:15 in the 800m, 5:00 in the 1600m, or 10:50 in the 3200m). When training 30mpw on a speed program, I’ll be able to sneak under 60 for 400m, but then can barely run a 17:00 for 5000m. When building from that program to a longer distance one (5000-10,000m), I’m usually hitting 70-80mpw and running low-16:00 for 5k and 35:00 for 10k but can barely hit 62 for 400m. In other words, I lose endurance fitness rapidly when focusing on speed and anaerobic power, but lose speed and speed endurance rapidly when training for long distances (even when doing strides and sprints after longer workouts). When switching between these programs in either direction, I can keep some of the benefits for at least a couple months but lose them slowly after that. When doing a hybrid of these programs, I am middling at both short and long distances (vs. focusing on either). It sucks to not have any strengths, but I think I am figuring how to manage it.
Now, I followed “textbook” NSA to the tee for about 18 months (about 50-60mpw with 3x10min, 5x6min, 10x3min sub-T based on periodically updated Friel’s tests) and had similar results as I did with slightly higher mileage programs. Cool to see some aerobic benefits at a tad lower mileage, but I still could not handle faster paces. I tried to do NSA with and without strides over the course of that 18 months, and no matter what, same result when trying to run faster. It was like I was getting stronger (more enduring) but never able to access any speed. Then I thought, maybe I’ll introduce the 25x1min workout instead of the 5x6min workout. As it turns out, this is a magical workout for my physiology. It is speed-endurancey due to the supra-threshold mechanical stress but ultimately still sub-T from a physiological standpoint. All of my paces improved for other sub-T efforts over the next few months, and suddenly I hit PRs in the mile (4:23), 5k (15:05), and 10k (32:12). Kind of crazy. I am thinking now that for my kind of musculature and physiology that favors neither speed nor endurance, the middle ground 25x1min or 25x400m workout is highly valuable because it doesn’t detract from aerobic progress the way that sprints and hill sprints do, but offers plentiful mechanical benefits that some (but not all) people need. I now do one, sometimes two, 25x1min workouts per week (always keeping 3x10min in the mix to counterbalance), and both my aerobic and muscular strength have improved at once it seems. Anyway, long post but when trying to find the right stimulus/load with this kind of method, I have realized through trial and error that for some folks there is utility in considering extra mechanical load to strengthen the muscles alongside the aerobic gains. I’m working on adding a bit extra mileage before extending the sub-T workouts themselves, but for whatever reason have been feeling stronger than ever doing both the shortest sub-T reps with the longest sub-T reps each week (plus a third sub-T that is either 5x6min or another 25x1min).
Learned a lot from the folks in this thread, and although I nearly thought I was a non-responder, I found an NSA variant that works for me super well while keeping the other central tenets.
Very similar situation, although nowhere near as fast as you! Would be great if like others you could post or work out how to access your Strava to have a peek.
Especially for me, I've been in a similar situation (although 17 5k runner) and I found that I just couldn't quite get up to my fast twitch speed and did 1 minute or 45s Bakken style reps. Unfortunately, I never adapted to them even after a couple of months regular. I just couldn't shake the stress on the legs. In fact, I isolated a couple of injuries in the hamstrings to these as I've added them in and out over time. You can never be sure with injuries, but, the hamstring tendonitis only comes back after these sessions have become regular again.
Seemingly, I can still race down to 5k and that be OK on its own, but, anything faster than the top end up sirpoc basic guide paces and the risk of fatigue and injury just grows twofold it seems. I would love to find a solution.
I do think I'm leaving something on the table. But, then again, is that the point of all this? Potentially I am, this gets you 95% of the way on minimal risk and then once you are there, it's individual choice to if they gamble on the rest? Or just take the huge win, big PBs that have probably already come and stay healthy.
It's probably the only debate left in the thread. I think just about everyone would agree this method or a very close variant of it is winning in life.
You're vastly overestimating the average Youtube fan's desire for knowledge and willingness to commit to something as uninteresting as vanilla NSA. Sirpoc on YouTube would be pearls before swine. The algorithm creates a vicious cycle where creators are perversely incentivised to pursue unrealistic goals, constantly change the focus of their training and take unnecessary risks. A clickbait title for an injury update would perform considerably better than the 50th consecutive weekly 6 x 1600m session.
Look at A Serious Hobbyjogger (who I think is one of the best YouTubers, but still faces the same pressures to generate interest as any other channel). He had incredible success following NSA, created a YouTube channel off the back of that. He then opted for a more traditional marathon build instead of using the sirpoc special block. Had a pass-mark performance (we'll never know the counterfactual), and is now advocating that hobby joggers running 60k per week should drop their sessions and start doubling 3 days a week. The pressure to create content will always result in the pursuit of novelty over consistency which is the antithesis of NSA.
Totally agree. I think really a semi regular podcast where you can keep the chat really niche and interesting would be excellent though. The guy clearly doesn't care about "fame and fortune" (I'm sure nick bester genuinely thinks he's a celebrity!).
Conversations about running, for example. Something where you dip in and out when he feels like it. Clearly he communicates with guys like cheetodust, others who have gone deep into this method. If you read what's being said, many of these guys are highly experienced runners. Why not bring it all together? Someone must be able to manage it. Think of all the experience we have in this thread.
The "sirpod".
I would love to listen to sirpoc and cheetodust (using him as an example) talking about how they approach the 5k via this method. Or sirpoc and Hard2find debating the applications of training load. Or sirpoc and some of the guys talking about their marathon. Or just guys like chillruns who have gone so vanilla on this and had huge success. Quite quickly you are already into dozens of episodes when you feel like it.
Just an idea, but I think there should be a record of all this audio somewhere, even if it's informal and niche. They are actually some of the best podcasts out there. It's been mentioned throughout the thread about podcasts. Sirpoc won't like this. But he is stuck with all this now. Training like this sharing it, becoming more mainstream, he's stuck with it despite trying to downplay what he has done here. We've had people come and claim they knew all this already, but one thing is clear nobody ever has come along and put it all together in a clever, clear and understandable plug and play way. Including all the whys, which is the most important part in my opinion. He clearly has a vast knowledge of how training actually works, probably as much as any so called sports scientist.
But I totally agree, I would plead with him not to make a YouTube channel. That isn't the platform for a guy like this. I don't think he's stupid and I thinks he knows that. As others have pointed out and shared, when you turn down free gear you probably don't have that mentality anyway.
Long post, sorry guys, but this is the one place on letsrun I might be able to get away with it! Just thought I would dangle it out there like people did the book a year ago (which we now have cooking and supposedly it's awesome). But a bit peer pressuring never hurt.......
SHJ is kinda right tho, someone running 60k a week should be running more and I think he demonstrated very thoroughly how to increase safely. This is disingenuous imo
Someone running 60k per week with a harder long run and a vo2 max session each week would be able to completely safely transition to NSA immediately. Something like 5 mile easy days, 6 mile total on sub T days and an 8 mile long run would achieve a higher training load than what he proposes and there’s so much more headroom to safely increase that mileage within this system before you need to double.
He’s a cerebral guy and obviously puts a lot of thought into this stuff, but he actually saw better results when he removed a lot of the thinking out of his training.
Is there any evidence that running exclusively easy is safer than including sessions with intensity carefully controlled? Could the change in loading on different muscles when we run faster be protective and provide a better foundation for progressing load?
I am a fan of the channel, but to me the video missed the mark, and I think it is a symptom of being a content creator and feeling the need to make a unique contribution, but in this case not a sound one
Someone running 60k per week with a harder long run and a vo2 max session each week would be able to completely safely transition to NSA immediately. Something like 5 mile easy days, 6 mile total on sub T days and an 8 mile long run would achieve a higher training load than what he proposes and there’s so much more headroom to safely increase that mileage within this system before you need to double.
He’s a cerebral guy and obviously puts a lot of thought into this stuff, but he actually saw better results when he removed a lot of the thinking out of his training.
Is there any evidence that running exclusively easy is safer than including sessions with intensity carefully controlled? Could the change in loading on different muscles when we run faster be protective and provide a better foundation for progressing load?
I am a fan of the channel, but to me the video missed the mark, and I think it is a symptom of being a content creator and feeling the need to make a unique contribution, but in this case not a sound one
Totally agree with this. The whole method is very un-influencer friendly. You end up changing things for the sake of content. It's silly. There's obviously small tweaks and variations people have made, but it spirals quite quickly. You know longer have this approach.
Btw, sign me up to the "sirpod" where you could spend an hour with a more patient audience drilling down. What he's learned and can share down to the finest detail would be gold.
The "Sirpod" is genius, this would be great if it happened!
I've also found similar in that the vanilla NSA seems to give me threshold lock when it comes to racing, which is great for 10k and above but not for shorter distances. I remember my best times came when I used 2 min reps and 45 sec rest, as like a few have said, 1 min reps don't agree with my hamstrings. After reading these posts I think I'll add these back in and see if they help.
What does the model look like in the base phase, while building up to the threshold?
I was reading this thread about K. Ingebrigtsen's training, , 3Q + a long run seems to be a bit much at lower mileage (40mpw). Is it needed? Would another easy run work instad? How should the model be adjusted for that mileage?
Holy cow. What an improvement! Glad you stuck with it and found what works. Excited to hear about future gains.
Thanks! FWIW, I was actually very sore after the first few 25x1min workouts (5-10k pace) and was worried this would mean hampered recovery and lower quality for other sub-T workouts. Temporarily, yes. But once you get over it after several weeks, other sub-T efforts will feel very smooth and snappy at the same paces (careful to not overdo the paces though when returning to longer reps), and for me, the paces seemed to progress really well week over week since introducing the quicker reps—in a way that consistent aerobic stimulus from longer reps + semi-regular time trials (as the anaerobic stimulus) work didn’t quite do for me.
Thanks. What rest were you using with the 1 min reps to keep it S/T?
Do you feel you need the faster reps all year round, or using them more as a sharpening phase?
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Reason provided:
Added words.
It's wild going back to the beginning and seeing where it all started. We were so young and innocent, once upon a time...;)
I count myself lucky to be one of the ones who has had their later years of running brought back to life, so ever thankful for the thread. I do genuinely wonder where I or others would be if sirpoc had never chosen to reply to the thread. Does anyone know how or why he even bothered?
I don't even bother watching running content anymore, based on the fact this has taken the pressure off the 'what next' in my running. More time for other things. So the usual suspects on YouTube , social media, are at least minus one viewer because of the thread. I think I'm enjoying running more, because nowadays I'm thinking about it less. I'm not worrying what I am going to do for my next block. I know what I'll be doing in 3weeks or even 6 months away. That's a huge upside, although obviously my huge performance gains are a big part of that!
Totally agree with this. The whole method is very un-influencer friendly. You end up changing things for the sake of content. It's silly. There's obviously small tweaks and variations people have made, but it spirals quite quickly. You know longer have this approach.
Btw, sign me up to the "sirpod" where you could spend an hour with a more patient audience drilling down. What he's learned and can share down to the finest detail would be gold.
Good post. Of all the things I have learned through everything in this thread, the guys having the most success are all essentially doing the same thing at least 6 of the 7 days. If not all. The odd person like cheetodust who is using Monday I think to cross training? A few who maybe do actually manage to handle something shorter, but still sub threshold on one of the 7 days.
But ultimately, it's essentially the same thing. I already can see an influencer saying "but now this". "What about this?". Quite quickly you have moved away from the core principles in play. That's what a lot of people are missing. Nobody is saying this is the only way to train. But, if you do change things up too much quite quickly you are no longer actually training like this anyway.
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.