An individual optimal time result of course out from your talent , not in terms of medals and so on.🧙♂️
Indeed .. Canova cares deeply about the performance of hobby joggers with jobs and family that train sub optimally :D
How much he cares about hobby joggers is irrelevant in the context I think? He just commented the NSM sub threshold training when somone asked him about it.
Indeed .. Canova cares deeply about the performance of hobby joggers with jobs and family that train sub optimally :D
How much he cares about hobby joggers is irrelevant in the context I think? He just commented the NSM sub threshold training when somone asked him about it.
the point that was trying to be made is his system doesn’t work for you hobbyjogger
many examples at this point, doesn’t matter if hes directly the coach of ppl are just trying to copy the design, its ridiculous what ppl are trying to pull off with actual lives and families
so again, what you already have is the adaptation of canova outside of the vacuum and very much steeped in reality, and the conservative approach, especially for a race over 2 hours, is the correct posture here, given conditions, etc, etc
amazing the number of ppl with all this ‘amazing training’ and buildups that stagnate and never keep progressing
Do you have experience with lactate testing? You keep saying it's useless, but you don't provide any other information.
What makes it useless? Do you have personal experience, or is this just an idea you've based on what you've researched?
Such testing is useless because 1) lactate values are highly variable (even more so that HR), 2) at best are only an indirect indicator of what's happening in exercising muscles, and 3) there are other, better ways of answering the same questions.
1) Yes, they are variable. In my experience not as variable as HR but we can agree to disagree.
2) Yes, it is indirect. What are you looking for? A muscle biopsy?
3) What are better ways to answer the same question?
The main point of my original post was that some overvalue lactate, but it is still valuable information for most runners, provided they use it correctly. It is another tool in the toolbox. I have already explained how I find it useful but you seem unable to grasp the larger concept. From your posts, it sounds like you read about some criticisms of lactate and have blindly followed them.
Such testing is useless because 1) lactate values are highly variable (even more so that HR), 2) at best are only an indirect indicator of what's happening in exercising muscles, and 3) there are other, better ways of answering the same questions.
1) Yes, they are variable. In my experience not as variable as HR but we can agree to disagree.
2) Yes, it is indirect. What are you looking for? A muscle biopsy?
3) What are better ways to answer the same question?
The main point of my original post was that some overvalue lactate, but it is still valuable information for most runners, provided they use it correctly. It is another tool in the toolbox. I have already explained how I find it useful but you seem unable to grasp the larger concept. From your posts, it sounds like you read about some criticisms of lactate and have blindly followed them.
Runners are clueless sounds like a bunch of people online who made an opinion on something without having any experience. He’s even parroting all the usual talking points.
it’s a shame. I see some popular online coaches parroting the same lines….variability, etc. Seems the one who do the least testing have the strongest opinion.
There we have it. NSM is sub optimal. DANCAN is better. Fan Jan says so. End thread.
Well, if you are observant it's not only me saying this that you can never reach your individual best possible results with only sub thresholds.
This is where I think the biggest issue lies with “elite” style coaching/training for hobbyjoggers. The assumption that all runners, elites and us normal folks, want the same thing.
”individual best possible results” is defined by that individual and what they want, not what their physiological potential is. We’re not all trying to win a specific race on a particular day. Some of us just want to be better in the (undefined) future. We don’t need the 1%s. We need to be happy to continue with the training indefinitely because there are no external rewards.
the point that was trying to be made is his system doesn’t work for you hobbyjogger
many examples at this point, doesn’t matter if hes directly the coach of ppl are just trying to copy the design, its ridiculous what ppl are trying to pull off with actual lives and families
so again, what you already have is the adaptation of canova outside of the vacuum and very much steeped in reality, and the conservative approach, especially for a race over 2 hours, is the correct posture here, given conditions, etc, etc
amazing the number of ppl with all this ‘amazing training’ and buildups that stagnate and never keep progressing
i guess its all because they did TOO much sub T?
This will sound ridiculous on paper, but I think if I had 7 hours a week to train, I would rather have sirpoc coach me than Canova. If I was going for Olympic gold, I would rather have Canova. In fact if sirpoc did, I would be there in a heartbeat to keep me in check. I fall into the category of accountability needed. As much as I think the book is incredible, I don't have the discipline to stick to it myself 1:1. I am sure I'm not alone in this. I fall to temptations and bad habits of the past.
When you think about it, it makes sense thoug. One understands the demands of the elite event, the other understands how to get best bang for your buck and to the start line fresh, uninjured and likely to give you the best chance to not waste your entry fee.
Look at the progress of Grandma's guy who appears to be working with sirpoc directly in some capacity.
1) Yes, they are variable. In my experience not as variable as HR but we can agree to disagree.
2) Yes, it is indirect. What are you looking for? A muscle biopsy?
3) What are better ways to answer the same question?
The main point of my original post was that some overvalue lactate, but it is still valuable information for most runners, provided they use it correctly. It is another tool in the toolbox. I have already explained how I find it useful but you seem unable to grasp the larger concept. From your posts, it sounds like you read about some criticisms of lactate and have blindly followed them.
By the way, I do see the flip side of this "I understand a lactate meter so I'm smarter than you" crowd are equally as annoying.
It's a useful tool. But in the context of hobby jogging and the spirit of this thread, the whole idea was to give you the vast majority of the benefits of a Norwegian style system with lactate testing, without having to test lactate. This is essentially why this thread is so popular, it's opening up smart training to the masses without being too complex, yet you still get the great results.
That has been remarkably useful by using other tools to effectively create a sweet spot akin to cycling. You could easily call this the "British time trial sweet spot method". But it's just not as catchy eh? But that's more its route, than anything else. (Giving away spoilers here! Lol)
99% of people who have had success (probably more?) using this method haven't touched, owned or probably know what a lactate meter is other than seeing someone like Ben Felton make a mess of reading the results of it on his Insta reels. But the non use of it is great, because the idea here is plug yourself in for an hour a day and maybe 90-120 mins on a Sunday and get on with your life.
IMO if you gave the book to someone versus giving them a lactate meter, the book would be better purchase for the vast majority of people at a fraction of the cost.
How much he cares about hobby joggers is irrelevant in the context I think? He just commented the NSM sub threshold training when somone asked him about it.
It's incredibly relevant. How you train me - four kids, a wife, 50 hour a week job - is going to be totally different to how you coach an athlete running twice a day and lying down for 6 hours on a bed having a nap in-between. The whole name of the game is absorbing your training and recovery. The context is all important here.
You also have the factor that considering I am all of the above, just a hobby jogger with not much time, the absolute must is to train the gaping hole in my aerobic base and keep continuing to do so until that's exhausted. Here is the thing, it won't be probably for years. Whereas guys who are elite have effectively completed NSM or something close years before and they are looking for the last "push" to get them to where they want to be. In fact, it's more a "pull" and this is where coaching for elites come in. It's how to tease out that last improvement by "pulling" your fitness finally up for more high end stuff.
If you don't understand that, I don't know how you can possibly call yourself a coach. The other half of the problem is clients of coaches, want to train like elite athletes as a status symbol and don't want to do the dirty work. The dirty work is what gets it done and the dirty work is NSM, and I say that as a compliment.
How much he cares about hobby joggers is irrelevant in the context I think? He just commented the NSM sub threshold training when somone asked him about it.
It's incredibly relevant. How you train me - four kids, a wife, 50 hour a week job - is going to be totally different to how you coach an athlete running twice a day and lying down for 6 hours on a bed having a nap in-between. The whole name of the game is absorbing your training and recovery. The context is all important here.
You also have the factor that considering I am all of the above, just a hobby jogger with not much time, the absolute must is to train the gaping hole in my aerobic base and keep continuing to do so until that's exhausted. Here is the thing, it won't be probably for years. Whereas guys who are elite have effectively completed NSM or something close years before and they are looking for the last "push" to get them to where they want to be. In fact, it's more a "pull" and this is where coaching for elites come in. It's how to tease out that last improvement by "pulling" your fitness finally up for more high end stuff.
If you don't understand that, I don't know how you can possibly call yourself a coach. The other half of the problem is clients of coaches, want to train like elite athletes as a status symbol and don't want to do the dirty work. The dirty work is what gets it done and the dirty work is NSM, and I say that as a compliment.
Well, you should take out of the context what Canova really told.He didn't say the needed SPECIFIC faster stuff just had to be in a high mileage context to reach individual running refirement. He told it was a must to reach highest possible capacity regardless how much volume you do in your running week.
In this I can just agree with Renato out from my perspective coaching/ coached hundreds of hobby joggers to individual success on amazingly little volume that suits very well the guy/ gal having " four kids, a wife, 50 hour a week job" , shortly a normal life to fit in the desire to develop one's running ability to it's max despite limited training time for it. 🧙♂️
Well, you should take out of the context what Canova really told.He didn't say the needed SPECIFIC faster stuff just had to be in a high mileage context to reach individual running refirement. He told it was a must to reach highest possible capacity regardless how much volume you do in your running week.
In this I can just agree with Renato out from my perspective coaching/ coached hundreds of hobby joggers to individual success on amazingly little volume that suits very well the guy/ gal having " four kids, a wife, 50 hour a week job" , shortly a normal life to fit in the desire to develop one's running ability to it's max despite limited training time for it. 🧙♂️
You are ignoring the main point. You do not need anything specific, or very unlikely until you have cashed in your easy gains by pushing your lactate curve right, with subthreshold volume. This will take most of us years, to reach. That is the most eye opening thing of the thread. We are trying to do the stuff guys like you think we have to do to reach our potentially, far (really far) too early.
You clearly don't understand that. Which is fine. Or you don't believe it. Which is also fine. But actually by not opening up your eyes to what is going on (I have no doubt you have no understanding of load, or managing load) you are burying your head in the sand or living in some sort of delusional world that your DANCAN system, which is just really basic cut and paste classic training, is providing some sort of magic.
What's funny is I read sirpoc's fantastic book and his early training seemed quite like DANCAN. it worked really well and he made huge gains and got to around a sub 19 runner. But then there becomes a bottleneck as describes it, with a lot of training that looks quite traditional. You no longer have the easy gains, but you are also doing too much hard work regularly that can't be absorbed by a weak base. This is the boom and bust cycle this method exposes.
IMO this explains why any sub elites you have coached have got worse. Because you are permanently putting them into a state of stagnation, with no load progression and on top of that the fatigue goes past the point of being controlled. This really you should think about. This isn't an attack on you, it's trying to help. I think you are also hampered by the fact you were a good athlete yourself and like many elites, this is often in spite of their training, rather than because. Bakken is the opposite, he got to elite because of his training. Same with sirpoc on hobby level, he got to the top of that because of his training, not in spite.
You obviously won't understand or accept any of this, but actually you should read the book yourself and you might learn something. You are basically the epitomy of sub optimal coaching the thread has spoken about.
You are ignoring the main point. You do not need anything specific, or very unlikely until you have cashed in your easy gains by pushing your lactate curve right, with subthreshold volume. This will take most of us years, to reach. That is the most eye opening thing of the thread. We are trying to do the stuff guys like you think we have to do to reach our potentially, far (really far) too early.
You clearly don't understand that. Which is fine. Or you don't believe it. Which is also fine. But actually by not opening up your eyes to what is going on (I have no doubt you have no understanding of load, or managing load) you are burying your head in the sand or living in some sort of delusional world that your DANCAN system, which is just really basic cut and paste classic training, is providing some sort of magic.
What's funny is I read sirpoc's fantastic book and his early training seemed quite like DANCAN. it worked really well and he made huge gains and got to around a sub 19 runner. But then there becomes a bottleneck as describes it, with a lot of training that looks quite traditional. You no longer have the easy gains, but you are also doing too much hard work regularly that can't be absorbed by a weak base. This is the boom and bust cycle this method exposes.
IMO this explains why any sub elites you have coached have got worse. Because you are permanently putting them into a state of stagnation, with no load progression and on top of that the fatigue goes past the point of being controlled. This really you should think about. This isn't an attack on you, it's trying to help. I think you are also hampered by the fact you were a good athlete yourself and like many elites, this is often in spite of their training, rather than because. Bakken is the opposite, he got to elite because of his training. Same with sirpoc on hobby level, he got to the top of that because of his training, not in spite.
You obviously won't understand or accept any of this, but actually you should read the book yourself and you might learn something. You are basically the epitomy of sub optimal coaching the thread has spoken about.
Whilst Jan divides opinion, he is a qualified coach and sirpoc isn't. One has coached to a high level, one hasn't.
Whilst Jan divides opinion, he is a qualified coach and sirpoc isn't. One has coached to a high level, one hasn't.
Oh come on, what a ridiculous argument this is even for a troll. The way this thread has been communicated to the masses means sirpoc has actually coached thousands of people and IS a coach, he probably just doesn't realise it.
The only thing that makes a good coach is understanding of the athletes in question, a phisiological understanding of running and communicating their ideas. Yet some coaches gate keep the industry as if is rocket science or the like.
You are ignoring the main point. You do not need anything specific, or very unlikely until you have cashed in your easy gains by pushing your lactate curve right, with subthreshold volume. This will take most of us years, to reach. That is the most eye opening thing of the thread. We are trying to do the stuff guys like you think we have to do to reach our potentially, far (really far) too early.
You clearly don't understand that. Which is fine. Or you don't believe it. Which is also fine. But actually by not opening up your eyes to what is going on (I have no doubt you have no understanding of load, or managing load) you are burying your head in the sand or living in some sort of delusional world that your DANCAN system, which is just really basic cut and paste classic training, is providing some sort of magic.
What's funny is I read sirpoc's fantastic book and his early training seemed quite like DANCAN. it worked really well and he made huge gains and got to around a sub 19 runner. But then there becomes a bottleneck as describes it, with a lot of training that looks quite traditional. You no longer have the easy gains, but you are also doing too much hard work regularly that can't be absorbed by a weak base. This is the boom and bust cycle this method exposes.
IMO this explains why any sub elites you have coached have got worse. Because you are permanently putting them into a state of stagnation, with no load progression and on top of that the fatigue goes past the point of being controlled. This really you should think about. This isn't an attack on you, it's trying to help. I think you are also hampered by the fact you were a good athlete yourself and like many elites, this is often in spite of their training, rather than because. Bakken is the opposite, he got to elite because of his training. Same with sirpoc on hobby level, he got to the top of that because of his training, not in spite.
You obviously won't understand or accept any of this, but actually you should read the book yourself and you might learn something. You are basically the epitomy of sub optimal coaching the thread has spoken about.
I wrote out a reply but then deleted it and just posted the snarky "Indeed .. Canova cares deeply about hobby joggers!" instead.
But yeah .. online discourse about running often feels like it's written by teenagers.
"Dude! You need to reach your full potential!"
But life is not like that ... Once you're established with a full time job and kids then it becomes more about survival than big dreams. Not that you can't have big dreams, but they tend to shift to your career and your kids.
-
Running is therefore not the main goal, but something that helps you function in daily life. It clears your thoughts and helps you function .. and the added endurance ensures that you also function after 2-3 pm.
You want something that maximizes this effect and keeps it going for ever. NSM is great. Clear structure and does not leave you overly fatigued. Yet you still see gains.
-
The question is then "Why don't you do the school thing and just go for a run x times a week and be done with it?"
Some can do just that, but human nature is such that if you're not aiming for something then it can become hard to find motivation. It's too easy to skip a run and then it snow balls. If you skip to many runs then you're back being tired and struggling in daily life.
-
So in order to stay on the beat you start looking into running resources, reading books, posting on Letsrun and chasing PRs. Tho focus tends to be on improving your last PR and as long as there is improvement that is fine.
It's a life of celebrating small victories and not a life of lamenting not being able to climb Mt. Everest.
It's about having a rudder in life and performing as good as you can overall .. Running is a means to an end and not the main goal.
We do not pay our bills by running!
-
What one has to realize is that going into a Canova/Pfitz/whatever style training regiment two things suddenly can happen.
1. You're perpetually tired running those intense long runs, which in term hurts your performance at work and at home.
2. You get injured and lose the solid anchor that running is. Which in turn f.... even more with daily life at work and at home.
Was browsing the running/jogging category on Amazon (US) looking for kindle deals and NSM now is found in the popular row along side with Born to Run, Endure, 80/20 and Murakami
1) Yes, they are variable. In my experience not as variable as HR but we can agree to disagree.
2) Yes, it is indirect. What are you looking for? A muscle biopsy?
3) What are better ways to answer the same question?
The main point of my original post was that some overvalue lactate, but it is still valuable information for most runners, provided they use it correctly. It is another tool in the toolbox. I have already explained how I find it useful but you seem unable to grasp the larger concept. From your posts, it sounds like you read about some criticisms of lactate and have blindly followed them.
1. Your experience isn't supported by the science.
2. Depending on the question, yes
3. Just measure performance. It's the only thing that matters, and it integrates everything.
What's funny is I read sirpoc's fantastic book and his early training seemed quite like DANCAN. it worked really well and he made huge gains and got to around a sub 19 runner.
Was he really that slow to start? That's really weird - you would expect practically any decent cyclist to be sub 18 after just a couple of weeks of run training, i e., enough to be able to actually run 5k hard without hurting themselves.
What's funny is I read sirpoc's fantastic book and his early training seemed quite like DANCAN. it worked really well and he made huge gains and got to around a sub 19 runner.
Was he really that slow to start? That's really weird - you would expect practically any decent cyclist to be sub 18 after just a couple of weeks of run training, i e., enough to be able to actually run 5k hard without hurting themselves.
Cycling specificity is totally different to running specificity. Unless you "cross-trained" running alongside your cycling, you're likely to be humbled pretty badly when you try running long distance.
To be fair to sirpoc, he hadn't cycled at a high level for a few years before picking up running, he started out at 29 minutes and it took him a few months to get under 20.
1. Your experience isn't supported by the science.
2. Depending on the question, yes
3. Just measure performance. It's the only thing that matters, and it integrates everything.
When only measuring performance, how do you interpret why a performance is what it is? Using only power or pace, and duration does not tell you anything but effort and duration.
We get it, you don’t like lactate measurements. Good for you.
Tell us how you map an athlete’s physiology with performance data? MMP curve and power-duration modeling? Has pitfalls. Single race result to describe an athlete? Wrong.
Tell us your ways. I analyze more data than 99% of humans. Enlighten me
Was he really that slow to start? That's really weird - you would expect practically any decent cyclist to be sub 18 after just a couple of weeks of run training, i e., enough to be able to actually run 5k hard without hurting themselves.
Cycling specificity is totally different to running specificity. Unless you "cross-trained" running alongside your cycling, you're likely to be humbled pretty badly when you try running long distance.
To be fair to sirpoc, he hadn't cycled at a high level for a few years before picking up running, he started out at 29 minutes and it took him a few months to get under 20.
Yes, I am aware of the specificity principle. My comment still stands.