Are you trying to kidding us? This can' t be explained away even if you tried a bad attempt.😉 If in 14:45 shape at 5 k 3:09 pace at 1000m is even faster than LT2 pace and definitely not subthreshold pace!!
As someone pointed out, what do you mean LT2 pace? Are you serious? Do you think if you run Daniel's classic threshold pace for 3 minutes and then have a minute rest, your lactate rises about above your actual second lactate turn point phisiological marker is? You can do 400m/70-85 second repeats at 10k pace and it still be a sub threshold workout. Jan, you are actually embarrassing yourself.
The only one embarrasing oneself is you if you claim running 1000m threshold reps 3:09 pace or faster with 60 sec rests with a shape of 14:45 5 k would be sub threshold )) Are you serious with this?? Time to look for something else to write about than running for you I say. 🤔😉
The only one embarrasing oneself is you if you claim running 1000m threshold reps 3:09 pace or faster with 60 sec rests with a shape of 14:45 5 k would be sub threshold )) Are you serious with this?? Time to look for something else to write about than running for you I say. 🤔😉
Just to clarify, the reps were 3:11/km average. I also think 14:45 is almost a guarantee, in a fast race. But anyway, even 3:09/km would be in line with like, literally the whole thread. The whole premise of what sub t is. Like, the whole thing. From day 1. But that's cool, you have reinvented the whole thing and we look forward to what the raw numbers of Subthreshold pace is. Doesn't matter. It's the same pace for 90 seconds, 3 minute, 6 minutes, 10 minutes, 20 minutes, apparently.
I'm a 17 min 5k runner. Can you tell me what my Subthreshold pace is across the board? Obviously whatever it is, I'll generate the same amount of lactate, no matter how long I run for, whether that be 3 minutes or 20.
Are you trying to kidding us? This can' t be explained away even if you tried a bad attempt.😉 If in 14:45 shape at 5 k 3:09 pace at 1000m is even faster than LT2 pace and definitely not subthreshold pace!!
Not tying to bash you Jan, but a little confused, what do you mean by Subthreshold pace? Because the whole idea here, is that sub threshold is a state and you are basically controlling time v intensity to not breach LT2, MLSS or whatever you want to call it.
Are you suggesting there is a magic Subthreshold pace itself? Because this would be a new discovery. Surely you need to know how long you are running for? Someone already mentioned Bakken, but he has done some really short, but significantly fast stuff and it still been subthreshold.
Serious answer . I'm not suggesting there should be ' a magic sub threshold pace" . Of course we know the lactate concentration in the blood depends on distance run relative to speed and e.g running 400m thresholds can go faster than 1000m reps and still be sub threshold, but what I write running 3:09 paced 1000m reps to a 14:45 shape 5 k runner and just 60 sec rests can NEVER be sub threshold .
What do you mean threshold pace? Like Daniels threshold pace? I can't tell if you are trolling?
From day 1, it's been clear the 3 min reps are faster than "threshold pace" and also there isn't really anything called threshold pace that exists. But the short reps basically safeguard you from breaching LTHR for almost the entire workout and that lactate never gets too crazy. Wait until you find out about Bakken's 45/15 threshold workout, you are gonna be really mad.
We literally know his max HR is 193 (probably more as he said he never tested, but he saw this in a race this year) and that his LTHR is 178-79. His average HR for the entire session is like 150. It's very unlikely thanlt hour is gonna feel more than 5-6/10 with all the jogging and rests. Especially when he's run a half marathon at like an average of 175+ for just over an hour which I assume is actually like 9-10/10 RPE.
I'm not sure you know how all this works my man. Like, at all.
Ahaha! You don't know what you are talking about! It's a very clear proved fact now this we now discuss is NOT subthreshold pace! ....and even faster than Sirpoc's LT2 pace.
the thing is, for some people, LT1 could be around 90% HR (yes, LT1). What feels very hard at a given pace relative to one's PRs could be very easy for another person, even if they have identical PRs. But for some guys, running at even 80-85% could send them over LT2.
I have no doubt Sirpoc can run at LT1 at a very high HR, after all, he has 10-20 years of sweet spot training under the belt. Yes, he has only run for 4 years, but all that cycling from previous decades must have an effect on his lactate threshold and whatnot.
J.S, you've exposed yourself as a coach literally dug your own grave.
Serious answer . I'm not suggesting there should be ' a magic sub threshold pace" . Of course we know the lactate concentration in the blood depends on distance run relative to speed and e.g running 400m thresholds can go faster than 1000m reps and still be sub threshold, but what I write running 3:09 paced 1000m reps to a 14:45 shape 5 k runner and just 60 sec rests can NEVER be sub threshold .
You've basically ended your last shreds of credibility with that statement. I'm a 15:32 NSM runner. I'm stupid and obsessive, so I test lactate every session, even though I don't need to.
LT2 for me is 3.8. I run my 3 min reps at 3:16-18, which proportionally is faster than sirpoc running his at 3:09-3:11. Following his pattern, he's probably in even better shape than his London build and 30:41 10k. My lactate on the last rep is usually around 2.8-3.3mmol. I have had the odd day where is been higher, but meh. 95% of the time, maybe more , it's in that range.
So how you can say that is never (interesting you use caps for emphasis like the 'other' poster, as other similarities) Subthreshold, is impossible for you to say. Absolutely, impossible and really does make you look stupid.
Serious answer . I'm not suggesting there should be ' a magic sub threshold pace" . Of course we know the lactate concentration in the blood depends on distance run relative to speed and e.g running 400m thresholds can go faster than 1000m reps and still be sub threshold, but what I write running 3:09 paced 1000m reps to a 14:45 shape 5 k runner and just 60 sec rests can NEVER be sub threshold .
Firstly, this is still a statement you can't quantify. Already one person as posted their own data, to show, what you have said is wrong.
Secondly, you have back tracked. You were going on about LT2 pace and seemed staggered someone might be able to run well under lactate threshold, at a pace a vdot calculator spits out as a threshold pace.
Seemingly, you've now googled and started talking about what Lt2 actually is, as if we hadn't noticed your previous posts. You are absolutely an insane person who can just brush off everything like it never happens. This is truly the sign of someone mentally unwell or unstable.
You've basically ended your last shreds of credibility with that statement. I'm a 15:32 NSM runner. I'm stupid and obsessive, so I test lactate every session, even though I don't need to.
LT2 for me is 3.8. I run my 3 min reps at 3:16-18, which proportionally is faster than sirpoc running his at 3:09-3:11. Following his pattern, he's probably in even better shape than his London build and 30:41 10k. My lactate on the last rep is usually around 2.8-3.3mmol. I have had the odd day where is been higher, but meh. 95% of the time, maybe more , it's in that range.
So how you can say that is never (interesting you use caps for emphasis like the 'other' poster, as other similarities) Subthreshold, is impossible for you to say. Absolutely, impossible and really does make you look stupid.
the beauty of this method is you can just run by effort. As long as you're cruising without it being too hard, you're in the right place and after the workout if you feel you can repeat it exactly as it is, you're doing it right.
There's no need to complicate things with lactate, HR...all that jazz. You can even do away with a stopwatch if you want. Just run by feel/RPE, with the very exception of easy runs, now for beginners at least, under 70% HR is a good guideline/training wheel.
Serious answer . I'm not suggesting there should be ' a magic sub threshold pace" . Of course we know the lactate concentration in the blood depends on distance run relative to speed and e.g running 400m thresholds can go faster than 1000m reps and still be sub threshold, but what I write running 3:09 paced 1000m reps to a 14:45 shape 5 k runner and just 60 sec rests can NEVER be sub threshold .
You've basically ended your last shreds of credibility with that statement. I'm a 15:32 NSM runner. I'm stupid and obsessive, so I test lactate every session, even though I don't need to.
LT2 for me is 3.8. I run my 3 min reps at 3:16-18, which proportionally is faster than sirpoc running his at 3:09-3:11. Following his pattern, he's probably in even better shape than his London build and 30:41 10k. My lactate on the last rep is usually around 2.8-3.3mmol. I have had the odd day where is been higher, but meh. 95% of the time, maybe more , it's in that range.
So how you can say that is never (interesting you use caps for emphasis like the 'other' poster, as other similarities) Subthreshold, is impossible for you to say. Absolutely, impossible and really does make you look stupid.
The only one look stupid with this your comment is you. It's very clear your 5 k pb 15: 32 is very bad relative your threshold . This happens when you only train NSM sub threshold and no faster maxVO2.🤔😉🧙♂️
of course it's refreshing, you're literally just jogging. lmao
Sorry to burst your bubble, but according to research by (Peter Coe), you get no benefit from running below 55% vo2max (63-70%) and barely any benefits at 60%. (70-75%)
Salazar (who was 16 mins faster than your godfather in old rubber shoes btw) said you're just burning calories running that slow. If I were you, I would keep it at 70% HR and gradually move up to 75%. If you are too tired, then you're either, unfit, or your workouts are too hard.
I was curious to see how accurate this claim is, so I dug a little bit.
Author: Sergey Roussakow, MD, PhD (0000-0002-2548-895X) This blog reconsiders the traditional point of view about the training effect and physiological mechanisms of easy running and low heart rate training. The Miracle of Lo...
and it seems they agree. That is, if you want to train heart stroke volume and improve myocardial contractility, you need to run closer to your AeT.
They find (emphasis mine):
British Journal of Sports Medicine wrote:
This suggests that the force of myocardial contraction in most cases increases with increasing load, manifested by an increase in ejection fraction and not always in an increase in stroke volume, which is an indirect measure of myocardial contractility distorted by the effect of heart rate on EDV. This exposes two major pitfalls of the concept of “maximum stroke volume training” at easy running:
* when a reflex sympathetic increase in stroke volume at light exercise, compensating for the postural decrease in stroke volume, is misjudged as a real increase in myocardial contractility, which has a training effect, and; * when the lack or modest increase in stroke volume as heart rate increases is misjudged as the lack of increase in myocardial contractility, which is supposedly useless for myocardium training.
Simply put, the concept assumes a training effect where there is none, and misses it where it exists, that is, it is turned upside down.
This does not mean that low heart rate running is useless. Its good tolerance allows for higher volumes of running, which results in increased basic endurance, from the muscle recapillarization, strengthening of muscles, bones, joints and ligaments to dilated myocardial hypertrophy and brain and fatigue resistance, but increased myocardial contractility is not in the list.
of course it's refreshing, you're literally just jogging. lmao
Sorry to burst your bubble, but according to research by (Peter Coe), you get no benefit from running below 55% vo2max (63-70%) and barely any benefits at 60%. (70-75%)
Salazar (who was 16 mins faster than your godfather in old rubber shoes btw) said you're just burning calories running that slow. If I were you, I would keep it at 70% HR and gradually move up to 75%. If you are too tired, then you're either, unfit, or your workouts are too hard.
I was curious to see how accurate this claim is, so I dug a little bit. and it seems they agree. That is, if you want to train heart stroke volume and improve myocardial contractility, you need to run closer to your AeT.
This suggests that the force of myocardial contraction in most cases increases with increasing load, manifested by an increase in ejection fraction and not always in an increase in stroke volume, which is an indirect measure of myocardial contractility distorted by the effect of heart rate on EDV. This exposes two major pitfalls of the concept of “maximum stroke volume training” at easy running:
* when a reflex sympathetic increase in stroke volume at light exercise, compensating for the postural decrease in stroke volume, is misjudged as a real increase in myocardial contractility, which has a training effect, and; * when the lack or modest increase in stroke volume as heart rate increases is misjudged as the lack of increase in myocardial contractility, which is supposedly useless for myocardium training.
Simply put, the concept assumes a training effect where there is none, and misses it where it exists, that is, it is turned upside down.
This does not mean that low heart rate running is useless. Its good tolerance allows for higher volumes of running, which results in increased basic endurance, from the muscle recapillarization, strengthening of muscles, bones, joints and ligaments to dilated myocardial hypertrophy and brain and fatigue resistance, but increased myocardial contractility is not in the list.
I might be misinterpreting the finding however.
An interesting comment indeed.
And I just add that Lydiard himself told in a lecture - 64 in Tokyo Olympics his LSD was misinterpreted by many and the "S" stands for " Steady" and not " Slow" .
The only one look stupid with this your comment is you. It's very clear your 5 k pb 15: 32 is very bad relative your threshold . This happens when you only train NSM sub threshold and no faster maxVO2.🤔😉🧙♂️
Jan this doesn't make any sense, at all and is the ramblings of someone who doesn't understand subthreshold training.
I also test lactate. I've also trained like this to get from 18:22 to 16:13. I've been training 9 years previously and posted a lot of my thoughts here and Reddit previously.
I can run 3 min repeats at about 3:26-27 /km and be about 0.5-1 mmol under my LT2 which sits at about 3.4. Again, this is also proportionally probably faster than sirpoc or at least equal.
So there's absolutely no way you can make the claims you do, with zero evidence and really just makes you look silly. For sirpoc himself, 3:11/km average from the session discussed, is probably around 60 minute pace where he is at the moment. Even 3:09/km (using your claim as the example) is probably around 10 mile pace. If he can't run that in 3 min blocks with a minute rest, and keep lactate below 4.0 mmol (which is his LT2. I would be really surprised. If anyone also runs this session and thinks it is above 5-6 RPE.
The only thing that really matters is that this training has shifted my lactate profile to the right , pushed it up from below and now I can run at a faster given velocity . That's basically all training is. There's nothing special about what my threshold or vo2 max is. I've also ran a 4:40 mile recently.
Jan this doesn't make any sense, at all and is the ramblings of someone who doesn't understand subthreshold training.
I also test lactate. I've also trained like this to get from 18:22 to 16:13. I've been training 9 years previously and posted a lot of my thoughts here and Reddit previously.
I can run 3 min repeats at about 3:26-27 /km and be about 0.5-1 mmol under my LT2 which sits at about 3.4. Again, this is also proportionally probably faster than sirpoc or at least equal.
So there's absolutely no way you can make the claims you do, with zero evidence and really just makes you look silly. For sirpoc himself, 3:11/km average from the session discussed, is probably around 60 minute pace where he is at the moment. Even 3:09/km (using your claim as the example) is probably around 10 mile pace. If he can't run that in 3 min blocks with a minute rest, and keep lactate below 4.0 mmol (which is his LT2. I would be really surprised. If anyone also runs this session and thinks it is above 5-6 RPE.
The only thing that really matters is that this training has shifted my lactate profile to the right , pushed it up from below and now I can run at a faster given velocity . That's basically all training is. There's nothing special about what my threshold or vo2 max is. I've also ran a 4:40 mile recently.
To clarify for Jan, because he isn't the sharpest took, I've been training 15 months like this, 9 years overall. 7 years of training suspiciously like you suggest, basic cookie cutter vo2 heavy programs, got me to the 18. Dropping every shred of vo2 max work, got me from 18 to 16:13 in 15 months.
Jan this doesn't make any sense, at all and is the ramblings of someone who doesn't understand subthreshold training.
I also test lactate. I've also trained like this to get from 18:22 to 16:13. I've been training 9 years previously and posted a lot of my thoughts here and Reddit previously.
I can run 3 min repeats at about 3:26-27 /km and be about 0.5-1 mmol under my LT2 which sits at about 3.4. Again, this is also proportionally probably faster than sirpoc or at least equal.
So there's absolutely no way you can make the claims you do, with zero evidence and really just makes you look silly. For sirpoc himself, 3:11/km average from the session discussed, is probably around 60 minute pace where he is at the moment. Even 3:09/km (using your claim as the example) is probably around 10 mile pace. If he can't run that in 3 min blocks with a minute rest, and keep lactate below 4.0 mmol (which is his LT2. I would be really surprised. If anyone also runs this session and thinks it is above 5-6 RPE.
The only thing that really matters is that this training has shifted my lactate profile to the right , pushed it up from below and now I can run at a faster given velocity . That's basically all training is. There's nothing special about what my threshold or vo2 max is. I've also ran a 4:40 mile recently.
Just to blow Jan's mind. I am a 16:54 guy, really good success 8 months in so far bringing me down from 17:42 lifetime (11 years ago), training like this, I'm 43.
But anyway, yeah, I can run some of the really short ( under a minute) stuff Bakken has touched upon before, quite a bit under 10k pace and probably closer to 5k pace and still be under Lt2 not only in terms of LTHR, but in terms of real measured lactate against my own profile.
I can never decide on the sessions, I do like them if I have a 3-5k coming up, but for me, the mechanical cost is quite heavy. But nothing like a true vo2 max workout, I'm still much further up the recovery scale the next day.
There's basically countless combos and variations. All of which will shift around a bit person to person, when it comes to intensity, time, rest and lactate generated. But there is a general broad pattern across most people who have trained like this. Which is why the original pace guidelines have been solid. The ones in the book with 5k as a hobby jogging relevant anchor point, are an improvement and I'm glad it's in there.
3 min reps x10 btw for me, at around 50-60 minute pace, isn't going to cause me any problems, at all. It's not easy though, but also lactate is still totally under control. Which is the idea, you are generating a decent amount but not letting it go through the ceiling and out of control. What does Jan think, you need to jog these reps to stay sub t?
Fellas, is the thread cooked now? 4 pages of this and we're getting the Trials and Tribulations thread treatment
Have only a question to offer. 46m, lifelong jogger but nothing serious since school (30 years). Full-on boom and bust type of guy. Typically around 20-25min 5k shape, down to 18:xx on a good boom. Got back from injury, and into NSA a few weeks ago with promising early signs.
My goal is to go back see how close I can get to my 800m time. Idea is to use some of NSA but add some short faster reps with looong breaks to keep the lactate low. Am on the following schedule now:
Mon: sprinting (Tony Holler Atomic Speed Workout) and moderate lifting Tue: easy Wed: 4x 1500 sub-t + 6x 1' uphill on 3' walkdown Thu: easy Fri: 6x 1000 sub-t + 8x 200 on 3' jog Sat: easy Sun: 10k jog + 3x 2000 sub-t
Probably heresy for the purists, but been experimenting on this for 2-3 weeks and it feels great. Legs itching to get back out to run every day and day after workouts HR vs pace on easy is really good.
Whatchall thinkin?
This post was edited 9 minutes after it was posted.
I vaguely remember sirpoc saying there was a particular user on the time trialling forums that had very insightful posts - sirpoc's sirpoc essentially. Does anyone remember what the username was? I'm curious to check out their old posts but I can't remember where this was mentioned, it might be buried in the Strava group or somewhere in this thread.
