No, actually, you just said 5 (r)TSS per day, without specifying the time span over which that slope was calculated. Only when I asked did you clarify that that is over the last week.
As for your references, pffft. I know this topic more intimately than you ever will.
do you read the posts replying to you? You clearly miss information. And you clam so mcuh but demonstrate nothing.
While not perfect, pace on a flat course works ok in many settings. It’s actually great that running has stayed a basic sport in terms of technology and gear. Also, there are diminishing returns in ever higher measurement accuracy. If you nail the basics as a hobbyist, that gets you very far. That’s actually the beauty of NSW:)
My Stryd is great on my treadmill. Even then switching between treadmills it's a mess, unfortunately. But it doesn't really do anything more than what a run sensor or regularly calibration of my treadmill can't tell me. It's just a glorified foot pod with a few extra features and algorithms built in.
The newest gen still hasn't fixed the main issue, that outside in variable conditions it simply does not work like a proper power meter does. I know a lot of people have had struggles with the wind. The wind sensor is at ground level on the pod, which when you think about it is absolutely ridiculous and flawed. But I also have big issues with hills. I am in a very hilly area and it's useless for anything over a couple of % gradient. The whole beauty of my power pedals, is i can put them in any situation and they read the same, for the same effort.
It has got better over time. But compared to a cycling power meter, it's just a piece of overpriced kit. Always seems to be cyclists or multi sporters pooping the party on this one. Calling it a "power" meter is a pretty loose term and bordering on false advertising and pretty offensive to actually call it a power meter lol
It would be great though if someone did develop something better. I would imagine it's a race between continuous lactate testing, a proper power meter or a better breathing sensor, for the first piece of kit to truly change how runners train and collect data in real time!
Again .. wrote to me "Lots of hobby joggers are not disciplined to do this properly and the intervals are a way to prevent them over cooking."
Which I disagree with.
Intervals come from an elite setting and has absolute nothing to do with protecting hobby joggers.
Being allowed to fly close to the sun more comes with more bang for the buck, if you execute it correctly. But given that you are flying closer to the sun also means that, if you don't execute it correctly then you can f... yourself up even harder.
Plenty of post here and on Reddit from people that f... up their intervals and pay a price.
Couldn't disagree more. The whole idea of broken intervals is to give you some wiggle room. Imagine you did 30 mins straight tempo and set off to fast, keep it up, by the end you have ran a race. By breaking it up, you are allowing yourself an opportunity to fix it, especially for those testing lactate, after the first 5 or 10 minutes, or however long the rep is you can re assess the workout.
There is also the psychological factor it gives you, it feels easier broken up as well, because of that you are also less likely to do something crazy off the bat.
It's very basic principle and nothing to do with being elite.
Imagine you did 30 mins straight tempo and set off to fast, keep it up, by the end you have ran a race.
But why would you not slow down?
Is keeping an eye on your HR and pulling back if you approach threshold really that hard?
-
Now let's play the same worst scenario in the context of "undisciplined hobby joggers" with intervals
-
Imagine someone over estimating their fitness
Then he/she goes out and runs intervals by pace, cause you know ... Pace is better than HR!
A couple of weeks down the road that person is fried
-
There a dangers in every approach but a bit of common sense and listening to your body should keep you in the clear.
While I'll gladly state that intervals are the most bag for the buck training wise, I will probably die on the hill that there is nothing particularly protective about them in the context of "undisciplined hobby joggers" .. It's just a different set of pit falls.
Has anyone who's done this method for a while tried letting their CTL and performance plateau for a while, then added in 45/15 sessions or Magness's rhythm 200s to see if they made a tangible difference?
Imagine you did 30 mins straight tempo and set off to fast, keep it up, by the end you have ran a race.
But why would you not slow down?
Is keeping an eye on your HR and pulling back if you approach threshold really that hard?
-
Now let's play the same worst scenario in the context of "undisciplined hobby joggers" with intervals
-
Imagine someone over estimating their fitness
Then he/she goes out and runs intervals by pace, cause you know ... Pace is better than HR!
A couple of weeks down the road that person is fried
-
There a dangers in every approach but a bit of common sense and listening to your body should keep you in the clear.
While I'll gladly state that intervals are the most bag for the buck training wise, I will probably die on the hill that there is nothing particularly protective about them in the context of "undisciplined hobby joggers" .. It's just a different set of pit falls.
Interval also create less machanicall stress. Bakken wrote a lot about it, calls it mucle tone or something if im not mistaking
That said, I sometimes do a fast 5k to just under LT2 when I dont have a lot time and I enjoy then quit a lot.
Is keeping an eye on your HR and pulling back if you approach threshold really that hard?
-
Now let's play the same worst scenario in the context of "undisciplined hobby joggers" with intervals
-
Imagine someone over estimating their fitness
Then he/she goes out and runs intervals by pace, cause you know ... Pace is better than HR!
A couple of weeks down the road that person is fried
-
There a dangers in every approach but a bit of common sense and listening to your body should keep you in the clear.
While I'll gladly state that intervals are the most bag for the buck training wise, I will probably die on the hill that there is nothing particularly protective about them in the context of "undisciplined hobby joggers" .. It's just a different set of pit falls.
Interval also create less machanicall stress. Bakken wrote a lot about it, calls it mucle tone or something if im not mistaking
That said, I sometimes do a fast 5k to just under LT2 when I dont have a lot time and I enjoy then quit a lot.
I haven't read that part of Bakken .. Sirpoc writes a more uncertain "studies indicate that intervals might cause less mechanical stress" in his book (my wording)
But speaking of Bakken, the main article does tell the compelling story about that an last century Olympian that suffered worse results after life no longer could afford him the time to run intervals and he switched to continuous running. There is no doubt that they're best bang for the buck training wise.
-
In the context of casual runners .. I'm not so cure they offer more mechanical relief. Maybe muscle wise, but given the higher paces I suspect they structurally charge just as high a price as a slightly slower continuous run ...
But sure, for someone that has been run high mileage for a long time they're brilliant.
-
Anyways .. I have no beef with running intervals, my beef is only with claiming that NSM is protective of "undisciplined hobby joggers".
Again .. wrote to me "Lots of hobby joggers are not disciplined to do this properly and the intervals are a way to prevent them over cooking."
Which I disagree with.
Intervals come from an elite setting and has absolute nothing to do with protecting hobby joggers.
Being allowed to fly close to the sun more comes with more bang for the buck, if you execute it correctly. But given that you are flying closer to the sun also means that, if you don't execute it correctly then you can f... yourself up even harder.
Plenty of post here and on Reddit from people that f... up their intervals and pay a price.
Couldn't disagree more. The whole idea of broken intervals is to give you some wiggle room. Imagine you did 30 mins straight tempo and set off to fast, keep it up, by the end you have ran a race. By breaking it up, you are allowing yourself an opportunity to fix it, especially for those testing lactate, after the first 5 or 10 minutes, or however long the rep is you can re assess the workout.
There is also the psychological factor it gives you, it feels easier broken up as well, because of that you are also less likely to do something crazy off the bat.
It's very basic principle and nothing to do with being elite.
But you can do the same with tempos, if anything it's actually easier to adjust in a tempo than intervals where you can easily overshoot especially for shorter stuff. I would add that, when I say tempo, I mean 20-60 mins continuous runs at aerobic threshold, not 20 mins at LT2 pace as in Daniels's tempo. They are never meant to be hard. In fact they should feel fairly easy.
Has anyone who's done this method for a while tried letting their CTL and performance plateau for a while, then added in 45/15 sessions or Magness's rhythm 200s to see if they made a tangible difference?
My off-season short intervals workout is 4-5x1000 + 6-10x200 on 300m jog cause main distance 800m in summer. Still dialling this in a bit, am fairly new to NSW.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Sirpoc's long runs have been gradually increasing. Was hitting around 23K but since the masters 5K victory he's been nudging up through 25, 26, and 27 yesterday. Time-wise, now at 2 hours. We either have another marathon on the cards, or he's just adding load. If he goes for 28 or 2:05 next Sunday it'll be clearer, and if we see 3x5K in the coming weeks, it's a dead cert.
Has anyone who's done this method for a while tried letting their CTL and performance plateau for a while, then added in 45/15 sessions or Magness's rhythm 200s to see if they made a tangible difference?
For me it did a bit. It is actually much harder to pinpoint the appropriate effort on the 45/15 sessions, but to me they were never so hard that I'd feel destroyed for more than a day. I ran around 5k-8k pace for the reps (vs. 10k pace for the 60/30 reps) – could have probably run a tad faster but that would be overkill. I found that I personally felt sharper in shorter races or time trials if I did this workout 3-4 days beforehand. The tradeoff is that I am not sure I could get huge volume in with this shorter workout. I think it was Bakken that said no more than 30ish reps, as more would be too mechanically demanding. All in all, I see it as a great transition workout for those faster-twitch folks who want to weave in a smidge of periodization without deviating too far from the base NSA principles, or who want to mix it up a bit every few weeks. It is easy to accidentally overcook with this workout, so I only use it once every 3-4 weeks. It's very fun for me and helps break up the monotony of the traditional 3, 6, 10 minute workouts in a relatively low-risk (compared to fast intervals at mile pace or below, which I used to do in college) manner.
Has anyone who's done this method for a while tried letting their CTL and performance plateau for a while, then added in 45/15 sessions or Magness's rhythm 200s to see if they made a tangible difference?
For me it did a bit. It is actually much harder to pinpoint the appropriate effort on the 45/15 sessions, but to me they were never so hard that I'd feel destroyed for more than a day. I ran around 5k-8k pace for the reps (vs. 10k pace for the 60/30 reps) – could have probably run a tad faster but that would be overkill. I found that I personally felt sharper in shorter races or time trials if I did this workout 3-4 days beforehand. The tradeoff is that I am not sure I could get huge volume in with this shorter workout. I think it was Bakken that said no more than 30ish reps, as more would be too mechanically demanding. All in all, I see it as a great transition workout for those faster-twitch folks who want to weave in a smidge of periodization without deviating too far from the base NSA principles, or who want to mix it up a bit every few weeks. It is easy to accidentally overcook with this workout, so I only use it once every 3-4 weeks. It's very fun for me and helps break up the monotony of the traditional 3, 6, 10 minute workouts in a relatively low-risk (compared to fast intervals at mile pace or below, which I used to do in college) manner.
To clarify, doing this every 3-4 weeks means that I typically do the 45/15 workout twice in a 42 day period. I don't do it more because at the end of the day, accumulated load is still king for NSA. If I ever raced 8-10k, I would scrap this entirely, but I do find it helpful prep for mile-5k races. I have another slower-twitch friend who tried this workout a few times to work on turnover, but he couldn't hit the same relative pace range without compromising quality for his next NSA workout in two days. So, YMMV – stick to basic NSA principles, but it is not unreasonable to play with specific variations that might be better for you (just happens to be riskier to deviate in the sense that you might sacrifice some load accumulation or injury doing faster variants of these workouts).
Has anyone who's done this method for a while tried letting their CTL and performance plateau for a while, then added in 45/15 sessions or Magness's rhythm 200s to see if they made a tangible difference?
I did the 200s, felt OK. Then got greedy and did some all out max hill sprints, full rest and ripped my hamstring. Was 7 months into NSM, fantastic progress and had PB'd at 800 and 3k. No idea why I did it, other than I guess I felt I needed to push on more and got greedy. Which is stupid looking back, as I was still improving. Lesson very much learned. All risk, for little reward considering I was still on the upward trajectory. Slowly building back up, a lot of cross training.
My lesson is one thing can lead to another. You add in some risk with the intensity, all is good, but then that tricks you into "it'll be ok this time" so you add more, and something goes south. At my age full vanilla from here on in is a no brainer considering that alone had got me middle distance PBs.
Even if I'm lacking the last 1-2%, which probably isn't attainable for most of us anyway on hobby hours, I'll take being healthy consistently. Someone mentioned it the other day, a sacrifice has to be made somewhere in hobby jogging and I have fully come around to the idea the hard intensity, even in small doses, is it. I will admit, I used to be a VO2 fanatic in the sense i didn't believe you can run a up to a 5k without it. Tail between my legs, was very much wrong.
My Stryd is great on my treadmill. Even then switching between treadmills it's a mess, unfortunately. But it doesn't really do anything more than what a run sensor or regularly calibration of my treadmill can't tell me. It's just a glorified foot pod with a few extra features and algorithms built in.
The newest gen still hasn't fixed the main issue, that outside in variable conditions it simply does not work like a proper power meter does. I know a lot of people have had struggles with the wind. The wind sensor is at ground level on the pod, which when you think about it is absolutely ridiculous and flawed. But I also have big issues with hills. I am in a very hilly area and it's useless for anything over a couple of % gradient. The whole beauty of my power pedals, is i can put them in any situation and they read the same, for the same effort.
It has got better over time. But compared to a cycling power meter, it's just a piece of overpriced kit. Always seems to be cyclists or multi sporters pooping the party on this one. Calling it a "power" meter is a pretty loose term and bordering on false advertising and pretty offensive to actually call it a power meter lol
It would be great though if someone did develop something better. I would imagine it's a race between continuous lactate testing, a proper power meter or a better breathing sensor, for the first piece of kit to truly change how runners train and collect data in real time!
First time really cycling now I've been injured. Kinda hilarious now looking at how inaccurate a Stryd is depending on what situation you put it in, versus an actual power meter on a bike.
Well done to Stryd, they have a very good marketing team as I bought into it!
Has anyone who's done this method for a while tried letting their CTL and performance plateau for a while, then added in 45/15 sessions or Magness's rhythm 200s to see if they made a tangible difference?
I did the 200s, felt OK. Then got greedy and did some all out max hill sprints, full rest and ripped my hamstring. Was 7 months into NSM, fantastic progress and had PB'd at 800 and 3k. No idea why I did it, other than I guess I felt I needed to push on more and got greedy. Which is stupid looking back, as I was still improving. Lesson very much learned. All risk, for little reward considering I was still on the upward trajectory. Slowly building back up, a lot of cross training.
My lesson is one thing can lead to another. You add in some risk with the intensity, all is good, but then that tricks you into "it'll be ok this time" so you add more, and something goes south. At my age full vanilla from here on in is a no brainer considering that alone had got me middle distance PBs.
Even if I'm lacking the last 1-2%, which probably isn't attainable for most of us anyway on hobby hours, I'll take being healthy consistently. Someone mentioned it the other day, a sacrifice has to be made somewhere in hobby jogging and I have fully come around to the idea the hard intensity, even in small doses, is it. I will admit, I used to be a VO2 fanatic in the sense i didn't believe you can run a up to a 5k without it. Tail between my legs, was very much wrong.
What did you get down to in the 800? I’m assuming with this method that you lose some speed but a number of people have run shockingly quick 800s and miles using this method despite not doing anything faster than threshold. I’m curious how much speed you really “lose” with this method. Strides/mechanical efficiency seems to be overrated, at least more so than we think.
Training prescription in running activities have benefited from power output (PW) data obtained by new technologies. Nevertheless, to date, the suitability of PW data provided by these tools is still uncertain. The present st...
So is it dogma to stay at the orginal layout? Or is it that nobody is giving us an addition that actualy makes sence. But then are still telling us we need to do additional stuff anyway because the elites train like this, or the great choaches are saying so, or a study shows it, etc. But without making a senseble tweak to work with.
So can you give us an exemple of the "additional stuff" in a way that it fits the the system?
I honestly believe that if you can improve the system that loads of people would use it.
I'm not interested at all in 'improving the system" nor in telling people what they should or should not be doing in their own training. to each their own, what ever works.
I was interested in how the lessons learned from NS could be incorporated into a more balanced program. I like training variety so this is not the program for me or my athletes, but that doesn't mean that there isn't something useful to learn from it.
But it's obvious that this thread is for pure converts only.
What did you get down to in the 800? I’m assuming with this method that you lose some speed but a number of people have run shockingly quick 800s and miles using this method despite not doing anything faster than threshold. I’m curious how much speed you really “lose” with this method. Strides/mechanical efficiency seems to be overrated, at least more so than we think.
I got down to a 2:11. This was off vanilla. I was trying to get a bit more out of it, by adding in the extras. That was a PB by around 4 seconds. I ran 16:30 as well in a 5k. Any speed you lose, most of us can make up with with aerobic gains to counter it. Even down to the 800. As I said, I think you can only really fit so much in for hobby joggers, really the thing that matters the least (by far) is specificity and targeted speedwork. Obviously it would be nice to have it all. But the easy gains are so easy if you are willing to grind away and put the work in, that the benefit is much greater than anything you lose at the sharp end.
