IIRC he said his threshold was around 5.3w/g, which is enough to get you on an elite amateur team in the US and do pretty decently for yourself. Generally enough to win some local P/1/2 races and be mid pack in national level P/1 events and maybe get a solid result on a really good day. He probably would have fared pretty well in stage races with a long-ish TT.
Which with average running economy, would mean being able to run about 5.3 metres per second for the same duration. That's around a 47 minute 15 km/1:06 half mary pace.
Once again, the data points to him being really unfit or having horrible running economy when he first started.
A 28 min 5K pace is faster than the fitness entry standards for joining the British Army.
Many pages ago, somewhere in the thread, Sirpoc mentioned if he didn't train fo a while cycling, his FTP would drop from 300+ to well under 200, something like 170. I suspect he is a huge responder to training, but off the bat appears pretty untalented. I posted about this before but nobody seems interested. Based on this I'm surprised he even managed a 28 after no training for 4 years.
I bought up before the question of "what is talent?". Is it running a 20 off no training l but then maybe only responding to training minimally, or someone who has a very low starting point, but a really high ceiling?
I myself fall into the latter category, which I find interesting. I didn't run for 7 years, but was a 16 minute runner after 3 years of college and a good training with no injuries. 7 years later I picked up running again, ran a Turkey trot in one of the covid years and ran 29. I've managed to get back to around sub 17, but it took a while to respond to the training. I've seen this in others before. It's touched on in the book, high initial responders, versus low initial responders but they might have different end points.
It's a very interesting subject to me, as it's quite personal. To be anyway this would be a really interesting debate and might answer what talent is or who and why some people respond to training better than others or why some people can just turn up and run 20-21.
Good post and you're right it's under-discussed.
I have a very narrow range. Untrained I could probably always run 24 which feels like a untaxing decent jog biomechanically, although if really detrained I'd be gasping. However, after 7 months of vanilla NSM and other training before that I'm probably in 21:30 shape which is piss-poor and basically seems like my ceiling. Maybe it's because I'm a natural sprinter (and now mid 50s), I don't know but suspect it's relevant.
I can't imagine a somewhat athletic man who was fit 3-4 years ago running 28+ at max effort, unless they had terrible form or mentally gave up. I'm sure they could have run 24. But whether it was 28 or 24 I also can't imagine them clocking 21, then breaking 20, then 19, 18, down to 15/16. That's so out of reach it's unreal.
So yeah, I'd love to learn more about high/low responders but also how it ties in to differences of phenotype, biomechanics, natural range, etc.
Many pages ago, somewhere in the thread, Sirpoc mentioned if he didn't train fo a while cycling, his FTP would drop from 300+ to well under 200, something like 170. I suspect he is a huge responder to training, but off the bat appears pretty untalented. I posted about this before but nobody seems interested. Based on this I'm surprised he even managed a 28 after no training for 4 years.
I bought up before the question of "what is talent?". Is it running a 20 off no training l but then maybe only responding to training minimally, or someone who has a very low starting point, but a really high ceiling?
I myself fall into the latter category, which I find interesting. I didn't run for 7 years, but was a 16 minute runner after 3 years of college and a good training with no injuries. 7 years later I picked up running again, ran a Turkey trot in one of the covid years and ran 29. I've managed to get back to around sub 17, but it took a while to respond to the training. I've seen this in others before. It's touched on in the book, high initial responders, versus low initial responders but they might have different end points.
It's a very interesting subject to me, as it's quite personal. To be anyway this would be a really interesting debate and might answer what talent is or who and why some people respond to training better than others or why some people can just turn up and run 20-21.
Pretty curious about this as well. I was a pretty good cyclist myself in the early 2000s. I stopped riding about 29 years old. Started running on my 36th birthday. Maybe a few kgs heavier but nothing huge. Took me ages to break 24. But then quite soon after I got down to about 20 flat. Yet I saw people just turn up to parkrun and run sub 20 like it was nothing. A guy who swam open water locally, ran a 19:20 on zero training. Took me almost 17 months to beat that. On around 4-5 hours a week.
Have been using NSM and broke 17 for the first time this year!
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. I think it was in another thread were no one less than mr Renato Canova discussed this and told there must be SPECIFIC faster paces than sub threshold to create this.
By the way you can stop your harassment with this " Fat Jan " now . I'm not obese anymore and now have normal weight, 86 kg on 189 cm height. 😉
Renato in 2009:
"Gimpy, it sounds like you are not following correct training plan for best results. When I hear young athletes talk about training they do, I listen very closely to words. The words I hear from you are "tired", "injured", "confused", and "unhappy". You must listen to my words clearly my friend. The biggest problem that you have is you do things in wrong order. How do I know this? Very simple. The words you use to describe your training give me picture of your training plan. Yes it is true that I don't know exactly what training you do. But trust me Gimpy, you do things wrong way.
Here is my advice. And other people give their advice, and you decide what you want to do. But as for Renato, here is my advice for Gimpy.
Take summer months, June, July, and August. For 8 weeks you do three types of runs. Long easy runs, long steady runs, long medium runs. I make this very simple. You know what these paces are. It is time to be simple. Build your kilometers each week. Start with many long easy runs, then progress to some long steady and long medium runs. In July add 8x100 meters two times per week. In August you add tempo runs one time per week, maybe 8k - 10k runs, also it is important that you add hill fartlek workouts in August one time per week. Everything else is long easy, long steady, and long medium runs. This three month cycle is very simple and easy. Why does Renato write workout plan for me that is not extreme, and complicated, and the same as he writes for his world class athletes? My friend, the reason is that the answer to your problem is to get simple, not complicated. Too many young athletes try to copy Shaheen or Kwalia workout plan. This my friend is very stupid. You need simple plan. You have simple plan. Now do it and stay healthy. This is not science that is molecular, it is common sense training. Gimpy my friend, when you get to 13:00 for 5k then we talk about rocket science training. But for now my friend, this will help you stay healthy."
Renato,You have mentioned in many of your posts on this message board that an athlete needs to build up their aerobic house for about ten years to help them reach their full potential. You have also said that training should...
Are people really waiting 3+ months for results with this? This is what I'm struggling with. I'm 9 weeks in and my performances are yet to upturn. I do feel fresher. I've gone from 6 days a week now to 7. Even as an older runner this feels a lot better balance spread across the week.
But I'm having quite a lot of people tell me in my running club with any good training, 9 weeks is plenty of time to see gains. I'm feeling a bit nervous about carrying on. I must admit, for me this is unusual, by now something would usually be tangible. Or is it really that long term? I think this is what my brain is struggling with the most. Are these just old habits I'm unable to shake? Anyone else feedback who has been here would be very grateful!
Are people really waiting 3+ months for results with this? This is what I'm struggling with. I'm 9 weeks in and my performances are yet to upturn. I do feel fresher. I've gone from 6 days a week now to 7. Even as an older runner this feels a lot better balance spread across the week.
But I'm having quite a lot of people tell me in my running club with any good training, 9 weeks is plenty of time to see gains. I'm feeling a bit nervous about carrying on. I must admit, for me this is unusual, by now something would usually be tangible. Or is it really that long term? I think this is what my brain is struggling with the most. Are these just old habits I'm unable to shake? Anyone else feedback who has been here would be very grateful!
Sirpoc has actually said that most should see gains after 6 months.
Are people really waiting 3+ months for results with this? This is what I'm struggling with. I'm 9 weeks in and my performances are yet to upturn. I do feel fresher. I've gone from 6 days a week now to 7. Even as an older runner this feels a lot better balance spread across the week.
But I'm having quite a lot of people tell me in my running club with any good training, 9 weeks is plenty of time to see gains. I'm feeling a bit nervous about carrying on. I must admit, for me this is unusual, by now something would usually be tangible. Or is it really that long term? I think this is what my brain is struggling with the most. Are these just old habits I'm unable to shake? Anyone else feedback who has been here would be very grateful!
Sirpoc has actually said that most should see gains after 6 months.
Why wait 6 months for gains when you can clearly see it in 1-2 weeks? 🧙♂️
Are people really waiting 3+ months for results with this? This is what I'm struggling with. I'm 9 weeks in and my performances are yet to upturn. I do feel fresher. I've gone from 6 days a week now to 7. Even as an older runner this feels a lot better balance spread across the week.
But I'm having quite a lot of people tell me in my running club with any good training, 9 weeks is plenty of time to see gains. I'm feeling a bit nervous about carrying on. I must admit, for me this is unusual, by now something would usually be tangible. Or is it really that long term? I think this is what my brain is struggling with the most. Are these just old habits I'm unable to shake? Anyone else feedback who has been here would be very grateful!
I think Coggan mentioned a while back about how fatigue could mask improved fitness. Even if you generally feel fresher (from managing workout and recovery intensities) you're still carrying substantial fatigue just from doing 3x workouts a week. It's very possible that you're fitter than before but also just need more time to adjust to the fatigue.
Are people really waiting 3+ months for results with this? This is what I'm struggling with. I'm 9 weeks in and my performances are yet to upturn. I do feel fresher. I've gone from 6 days a week now to 7. Even as an older runner this feels a lot better balance spread across the week.
But I'm having quite a lot of people tell me in my running club with any good training, 9 weeks is plenty of time to see gains. I'm feeling a bit nervous about carrying on. I must admit, for me this is unusual, by now something would usually be tangible. Or is it really that long term? I think this is what my brain is struggling with the most. Are these just old habits I'm unable to shake? Anyone else feedback who has been here would be very grateful!
I think Coggan mentioned a while back about how fatigue could mask improved fitness. Even if you generally feel fresher (from managing workout and recovery intensities) you're still carrying substantial fatigue just from doing 3x workouts a week. It's very possible that you're fitter than before but also just need more time to adjust to the fatigue.
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.