. . . none of which changes the fact that VO2max sets the upper limit to performance, with the primary difference between individuals with higher or lower values being their SV.
And the roof sets the upper limit of a house, but who cares raising it another floor if the only liveable place is the basement.
I think most of the guys in this thread had loved to raising it another floor if they just knew how to do it.
Of course you are 100% right in that thought. But try to convince a NSM runner of that is of course without possibility.
Of course. But this is a strawman at this point.
The whole point being, is you really care about that one 5k, you can build to it, sprinkle in some specificity and call it good. Tons of people have said this here, what you are saying is nothing new. You are basically rehashing debates from the first 100 pages like you are saying something new?
The point being, as a hobby jogger in all likelihood you want to keep progressing past one peak race, and whilst you might be a percent or two off your best 5k, you can likely outrun this by making it up with hitting volume.
Which is why so many people here have tried the marathon build and set PBs across the board, including down to the mile. It's a trade off just about any sane hobby jogger is going to make. Sure you will never be 100% ready for any event, but I'm probably 98% ready for just about anything, from the mile up to a half, at any point. That 98% is also probably worth more than 100% all in on something like a Daniels 5k block, in my experience.
You are absolutely wrapped up in your own mind on this, you are trapped in a space where you can't see past your own views and whilst there's been some pretty good debate and opposing views over the years, nothing you are bringing to the table is either new, or particularly interesting, especially as You've been asked before to lay out something better, your own training, or answer particular questions, all of which you ignore.
Let's say you're a 17:00 hobbyjogger experiencing success with NSM and you have two options:
Option A: start optimising for the 5K by including more intensity for 6 weeks, there's a 90% chance you make it to the start line without getting injured or burned out, but if you do you run a 16:30.
Option B: continue with vanilla NSA, there's a 99% chance you make it to the start line without getting injured or burned out, if you do you run a 16:45. In another 8 weeks you run 16:30.
Both options are fine, option A gets you there quicker, with more risk and work, option B gets you there on "autopilot" but takes longer.
Let's say you're a 17:00 hobbyjogger experiencing success with NSM and you have two options:
Option A: start optimising for the 5K by including more intensity for 6 weeks, there's a 90% chance you make it to the start line without getting injured or burned out, but if you do you run a 16:30.
Option B: continue with vanilla NSA, there's a 99% chance you make it to the start line without getting injured or burned out, if you do you run a 16:45. In another 8 weeks you run 16:30.
Both options are fine, option A gets you there quicker, with more risk and work, option B gets you there on "autopilot" but takes longer.
great summation
if youre willing to detonate, make the trade off; if not, way smarter to stay the course
Of course you are 100% right in that thought. But try to convince a NSM runner of that is of course without possibility.
Of course. But this is a strawman at this point.
The whole point being, is you really care about that one 5k, you can build to it, sprinkle in some specificity and call it good. Tons of people have said this here, what you are saying is nothing new. You are basically rehashing debates from the first 100 pages like you are saying something new?
The point being, as a hobby jogger in all likelihood you want to keep progressing past one peak race, and whilst you might be a percent or two off your best 5k, you can likely outrun this by making it up with hitting volume.
Which is why so many people here have tried the marathon build and set PBs across the board, including down to the mile. It's a trade off just about any sane hobby jogger is going to make. Sure you will never be 100% ready for any event, but I'm probably 98% ready for just about anything, from the mile up to a half, at any point. That 98% is also probably worth more than 100% all in on something like a Daniels 5k block, in my experience.
You are absolutely wrapped up in your own mind on this, you are trapped in a space where you can't see past your own views and whilst there's been some pretty good debate and opposing views over the years, nothing you are bringing to the table is either new, or particularly interesting, especially as You've been asked before to lay out something better, your own training, or answer particular questions, all of which you ignore.
Nonsense !!
It is of utmost importance to peak in one 5k race rather than consistently run at 95-98% of peak all year around.
Hobby joggers with jobs and maybe kids should approach the the local park run like Cole Hocker training for the Olympics ... Park runs are life and death after all !!
Damn it .. If you don't reach your max personal potential in that one race, you're a failure a human!!!
Let's say you're a 17:00 hobbyjogger experiencing success with NSM and you have two options:
Option A: start optimising for the 5K by including more intensity for 6 weeks, there's a 90% chance you make it to the start line without getting injured or burned out, but if you do you run a 16:30.
Option B: continue with vanilla NSA, there's a 99% chance you make it to the start line without getting injured or burned out, if you do you run a 16:45. In another 8 weeks you run 16:30.
Both options are fine, option A gets you there quicker, with more risk and work, option B gets you there on "autopilot" but takes longer.
Just thought I would jump in. As someone who has faced this choice. Option B. The upside is obvious and I wished I had worked this out years ago. Option A really is the best, short term. No doubt. For a race in isolation.
But the thing is, with option B, I probably might not even run that race faster in fact it's likely slower than option A almost always....... but it unlocks the possibilities to 2-3 races down the line, where I then run 16 flat or faster.
This is almost a real situation that happened to me. I was regularly taking maybe 1-2 seconds here and there, from short term builds, speedwork, vo2 work to really pull by top speed up.
14 weeks I wasn't much faster in NSM, I could have just done another normal textbook 5k build (Jan would approve lol) but 24 weeks in, I had far surpassed just taking a few seconds off my 5k time and took close to 34. It had taken me 6 previous cycles to knock 25 off in 18 months.
It's almost cheating, really, how you can just keep going and going and going. Even at a good hobby jogging level, you can surpass most goals by a stretch, even without specificity, provided you think outside of the parameters of builds and blocks and think 2-3, even 4 races down the line. That's the cheat code.
consistency is the most underrated cheat code in life
also the hardest to actually live by
I've followed sirpoc for a while, now also cheetodust and Wigglewaffle recently
This is what I can't get my head around. I'm too much of a tinkerer.
How these guys have legitimately gone years, essentially doing the same thing. Not messing around, not worrying about the last edge, or sharpening for a few seconds. Or whatever nonsense we are all debating, some characters worse than others.
But just incremently increasing volume and just cashing in time and time again with that consistency, blocking out all the noise and fluff everyone else is talking.
I just don't have the ability to do it. You are so right, it's insanely underrated.
When you ran your 17:47 and came thru the finish did you feel like you could have run another 3-5 mins at that effort? Have heard similar stories about 5k NSM.
That you ran 3:30km pace without touching those in training is wild.
What was your taper like?
That's seems to be the question: how much faster than your regular training paces can you run before biomechanics becomes a limiting factor?
Here's my theory: no matter how fast/fit you are, there comes a point at which the neuromuscular demands of running faster than your training pace is an issue. It therefore follows that to run as fast as your fitness might allow, you must occasionally run faster than that.
Okay, how much? My answer would be that although weekly strides may not be needed, to maximize performance over 800-5000 metres, you need to at least tickle those paces for 3-6 weeks beforehand.
Rationale: 1) running economy matters, and 2) neuromuscular adaptations are rapid.
This is the way to look upon it.
As mr Leif-Inge Tjelta told there is a need of frequently be atleast on 5 k "load" / pace to improve the energy efficiency and biomechanics at that level to its utmost. This is what e.g J.I does year around with maxVo2 in the form of 20 x 200m hillreps during building season and in the form of track reps in other parts of the year, and of course even faster paces. Then most of you thinks " He is a world top elite runner with all day to train and recover and it doesn't fit to my ' ordinary Joe life ' . Well, according to me and my longtime experience in practise it's very doable if you don't forget you need sometimes to squeeze in the faster work Tjelta, Canova and I'm talking about. You need to do all the main factors contributing to reach your very best possible results at distances from 1500m and up to the marathon. Infact the very first guy I coached ( Norwegian K. Ulriksen) 10 years ago lowered all his then pb:s from 1500 to marathon in just 2 and a half month ( !) with this approach and then I didn't even gave him special 1500m training.
That's seems to be the question: how much faster than your regular training paces can you run before biomechanics becomes a limiting factor?
Here's my theory: no matter how fast/fit you are, there comes a point at which the neuromuscular demands of running faster than your training pace is an issue. It therefore follows that to run as fast as your fitness might allow, you must occasionally run faster than that.
Okay, how much? My answer would be that although weekly strides may not be needed, to maximize performance over 800-5000 metres, you need to at least tickle those paces for 3-6 weeks beforehand.
Rationale: 1) running economy matters, and 2) neuromuscular adaptations are rapid.
This is the way to look upon it.
As mr Leif-Inge Tjelta told there is a need of frequently be atleast on 5 k "load" / pace to improve the energy efficiency and biomechanics at that level to its utmost. This is what e.g J.I does year around with maxVo2 in the form of 20 x 200m hillreps during building season and in the form of track reps in other parts of the year, and of course even faster paces. Then most of you thinks " He is a world top elite runner with all day to train and recover and it doesn't fit to my ' ordinary Joe life ' . Well, according to me and my longtime experience in practise it's very doable if you don't forget you need sometimes to squeeze in the faster work Tjelta, Canova and I'm talking about. You need to do all the main factors contributing to reach your very best possible results at distances from 1500m and up to the marathon. Infact the very first guy I coached ( Norwegian K. Ulriksen) 10 years ago lowered all his then pb:s from 1500 to marathon in just 2 and a half month ( !) with this approach and then I didn't even gave him special 1500m training.
consistency is the most underrated cheat code in life
also the hardest to actually live by
I've followed sirpoc for a while, now also cheetodust and Wigglewaffle recently
This is what I can't get my head around. I'm too much of a tinkerer.
How these guys have legitimately gone years, essentially doing the same thing. Not messing around, not worrying about the last edge, or sharpening for a few seconds. Or whatever nonsense we are all debating, some characters worse than others.
But just incremently increasing volume and just cashing in time and time again with that consistency, blocking out all the noise and fluff everyone else is talking.
I just don't have the ability to do it. You are so right, it's insanely underrated.
hear ya, mate, hear ya — that’s me as well
got a couple anecdotes in the book at my expense and for his entertainment (some were intentionally done, others, i yam what i yam)
but after a certain point youre just weighing ‘is this worth locking in for this amount of time for’ vs ‘eh i guess i don’t really give a S’
the easiest way to approach it, if success is above all what you want is choice limiting: if you can create an environment where you have less choices in the workout and you are just following the schedule because it is that or nothing, i think youll fare a lot better
the trap can be the ‘alternative’ which too often will equate to ‘think long, think wrong’ and youre just trying to turd mine for no reason
id say if you really want to make a go of it, turn it into a New Years Resolution and just put the tin foil hat on, with no wavering — at least then you know
yeah and until you are absolutely sure that youre operating at 92-94% of that for threshold, waste of time to focus on it directly
that’s what the pushback has always been, better performance is being driven bottom up not top down. having a higher vo2 max is a ‘nice to have’ but not essential, and also excludes the fact that your vo2 max will improve doing sub T, all ppl are really quibbling about is the RATE at which it will improve
many ppl have already used the top down approach and that’s why they’re here
a lot of motivated ppl around here, you tell them to focus on vo2 and they will run with that
Is it really that challenging for you and others to differentiate between the physiological determinants of VO2max and the optimal way of training for distance running??
. . . none of which changes the fact that VO2max sets the upper limit to performance, with the primary difference between individuals with higher or lower values being their SV.
And the roof sets the upper limit of a house, but who cares raising it another floor if the only liveable place is the basement.
You and others are the ones conflating the two, not me. I'm just telling you why the roof is as low or high as it is, nothing else. What you choose to do with that information is up to you - just don't gaslight people about the facts.
yeah and until you are absolutely sure that youre operating at 92-94% of that for threshold, waste of time to focus on it directly
that’s what the pushback has always been, better performance is being driven bottom up not top down. having a higher vo2 max is a ‘nice to have’ but not essential, and also excludes the fact that your vo2 max will improve doing sub T, all ppl are really quibbling about is the RATE at which it will improve
many ppl have already used the top down approach and that’s why they’re here
a lot of motivated ppl around here, you tell them to focus on vo2 and they will run with that
Is it really that challenging for you and others to differentiate between the physiological determinants of VO2max and the optimal way of training for distance running??
not sure what in anything i said would lead you to that question, but after having ignored everything else, lets hear your solution
ill leave it up to everyone else, but differentiation is not a problem for me
As mr Leif-Inge Tjelta told there is a need of frequently be atleast on 5 k "load" / pace to improve the energy efficiency and biomechanics at that level to its utmost. This is what e.g J.I does year around with maxVo2 in the form of 20 x 200m hillreps during building season and in the form of track reps in other parts of the year, and of course even faster paces. Then most of you thinks " He is a world top elite runner with all day to train and recover and it doesn't fit to my ' ordinary Joe life ' . Well, according to me and my longtime experience in practise it's very doable if you don't forget you need sometimes to squeeze in the faster work Tjelta, Canova and I'm talking about. You need to do all the main factors contributing to reach your very best possible results at distances from 1500m and up to the marathon. Infact the very first guy I coached ( Norwegian K. Ulriksen) 10 years ago lowered all his then pb:s from 1500 to marathon in just 2 and a half month ( !) with this approach and then I didn't even gave him special 1500m training.
now coached by Canova directly, not going well
im sure hell be reaching back out in short order
Well, I'm not sure if I fully understood your comment? But he was coached and adviced by Canova and Moen and did alot of volume and got severe injured ( heel spur) . Some years after I coached him we chat now and then and he wrote " Jan , I should have listen to you. " . Canova is of course a legend coach. ( even if I don't agree with him always) and I agree with him as he say there must be faster paces than thresholds to reach highest capacity to the runner. But in my own career and running experience now over 56 years I'm of course convinced it can be done on half or even less volume of what Canova advocates.
Well, I'm not sure if I fully understood your comment? But he was coached and adviced by Canova and Moen and did alot of volume and got severe injured ( heel spur) . Some years after I coached him we chat now and then and he wrote " Jan , I should have listen to you. " . Canova is of course a legend coach. ( even if I don't agree with him always) and I agree with him as he say there must be faster paces than thresholds to reach highest capacity to the runner. But in my own career and running experience now over 56 years I'm of course convinced it can be done on half or even less volume of what Canova advocates.