I would definitely go by pace or power, not lactate or HR.
I would also design the training with the specific demands of the event in mind, as well as the characteristics of the athlete.
For a hobby jogger focused on 5+ km distance races, that would mean doing as much threshold-raising training as possible, while avoiding anything that might get in the way of that goal.
Volume would be primarily dictated by time available and what the person could tolerate, and only secondarily by race distance/duration (hard to run a good marathon without doing at least a few really long runs - anything shorter, though, and there really isn't much need).
Anything/everything else would just be a difference without a distinction.
keep the big picture in mind
specificity, specificity, specificity
repeatability
the greatest predictor of performance is performance itself
I would definitely go by pace or power, not lactate or HR.
I would also design the training with the specific demands of the event in mind, as well as the characteristics of the athlete.
For a hobby jogger focused on 5+ km distance races, that would mean doing as much threshold-raising training as possible, while avoiding anything that might get in the way of that goal.
Volume would be primarily dictated by time available and what the person could tolerate, and only secondarily by race distance/duration (hard to run a good marathon without doing at least a few really long runs - anything shorter, though, and there really isn't much need).
Anything/everything else would just be a difference without a distinction.
keep the big picture in mind
specificity, specificity, specificity
repeatability
the greatest predictor of performance is performance itself
am i right?
Andy Coggan is the intellectual Uncle of this thread
And like any good Uncle he wont “Yes” or “No” as an acceptable answer to anything
I would definitely go by pace or power, not lactate or HR.
I would also design the training with the specific demands of the event in mind, as well as the characteristics of the athlete.
For a hobby jogger focused on 5+ km distance races, that would mean doing as much threshold-raising training as possible, while avoiding anything that might get in the way of that goal.
Volume would be primarily dictated by time available and what the person could tolerate, and only secondarily by race distance/duration (hard to run a good marathon without doing at least a few really long runs - anything shorter, though, and there really isn't much need).
Anything/everything else would just be a difference without a distinction.
Threshold-raising training; isn't that the crux of the whole matter? You've typed a lot of words without actually putting meaning behind the most important bit. Broadly put, you're saying do as much hard work as you can handle within the larger framework of as much total work as you can handle which is dictated by how much time you have available.
You've said no more than the basics of what this whole model is based on. And more importantly, the model gives specifics as to how to achieve the desired result. Your answer still doesn't provide an answer to how would you organize "threshold-raising training" in a specific way for someone who trains approximately 7 hours a week over 6 or 7 days? It's far easier to talk in generalities.
what he’d point you to is what is laid out here: train in the sweetspot
when that stops proving measurable gains, go racing
the single most important physiological determinant of endurance performance is muscular metabolic fitness
OK, he ran 18 or 19 or whatever. I never argued that he wasn't running whatever time. I keep repeating myself but everybody is determined to defend him and he doesn't need your help.
I believe his training was very poor before NSM. The story that he was stuck at 19 minutes without context doesn't help. You yourself on a prior post said his training was inconsistent. You made almost this exact post before registering. Go look at it :)
Do you think there is a difference between being stuck at 19 minutes vs training little and not being able to break through 19 minutes? Do you think it might help to see his inconsistent training so we can measure the impact of NSM?
This thread is cult like. No doubt or questions allowed. I don't idolize anybody and as much as I like Sirpoc's NSM, I don't idolize him. This is reminding me of MAF threads on Reddit.
Dude, I really don't know what you are arguing here. People are agreeing with you. His training was inconsistent and sub optimal.
Yes, he was running 18-19min off poor training and had potential to run faster but couldn't string the training together to do so. I'm not sure what trawling through his Strava will prove, as it is an established fact his training wasn't great which was limiting his performances.
The big benefit of NSM is it provides a very structured and clear guidelines on volume, time but most importantly intensity control. It allows you to run 6-7 days a week without feeling like you are grinding yourself into the ground. Which for most hobby joggers, we previously had no idea of how to do that and very little understanding of sweet spot type training. I'm running more mileage then ever, on 13 days a fortnight and feel way fresher than I did when training 9 days a fortnight and I'm heaps fitter because I can stack that extra mileage consistently.
It's not that other systems don't work, they clearly do as people have run incredible times on various different systems. The issue for hobby joggers is most of the other more "traditional" systems don't have very good intensity control. So most of us over do it in sessions and on easy runs. I see it at the run club I'm in all the time, people 3-5min slower than me in a 5km, running long runs and easy runs 30-60sec faster than me and then absolutely rinsing themselves in interval reps. Because traditionally that is what runners think they have to do. NSM is proving that you don't.
the best point about lactate here is that a step test can be about useless
lactate mapping can be a “distinction without a difference”
Coggans rhetoric is weak, but his physiology insights are conceptually, functionally, and, if you think in business terms, ‘actionable insights’ are virtually impossible to argue with
he does get some of the assumptions wrong, but he’s also not assuming that someone or anyone is controlling variables as he would, which i would argue some are doing that level of control
bottom line: i think there’s more agreement than divergence here, from a practical standpoint this is a Coggan inspired program, through and through
We may not all want to have a beer with Coggan (if he even drinks) but hes got many kids in this community and thinking regardless of whether its acknowledged or not
And that's exactly why NSM sucks, it takes too much time and probably a lot of weight loss. Join a running club and you're gonna get from 19 to 15 in a year.
Hi all, long time lurker here. I’ve discovered the forum about half a year back. After reading through the 10k+ posts I thought: might as well give it a try and in a later stadium add my experiences.
Background Over the past few years, I’ve been a very effective boom-and-buster. I have been running on and off for over 7 years, usually running about 6 months of the year, taking the rest off due to injury or burn-out. Looking back I’ve averaged about 20km/week/year since 2021. With peaks around 70km/week during marathon build-up and absolute lows where I wouldn’t run for weeks on end. Furthermore, usually I’d run my easy runs around 150 bpm (HrMAX = 187) and beat myself up at the track weekly whenever I wasn’t injured. Had a lot of fun, and some linear progress. Since 2022 I started cross-training with cycling and swimming for a total of 6 hours, that increased to 8 hours in 2025.
Some PRs from recent years: 2022: FM 3:00, HM 1:24, 10k 37:xx, 5k 17:40 2023: FM 2:56, HM 1:21, 10k 36:30, 5k 17:10 2024: HM 1:20, 10k 35:30, 5k 17:04 2025: 5k 16:48 (March), 10k 35:30 (October)
Through this I’ve gotten seriously injured every half year, peaking in 2025 where I made quite a jump in my 5k time in March, but now had structural nags and pains during the rest of the year.
NSM Stumbled upon NSM in September, started reading the forum and figured I’d give it a go. Decided to take 25k/week as a starting point and take my time building up from 3 to 4 times a week. I ran only easy (now being <130 HR for me). Which was incredibly slow, starting around 6:00 min/km. Took a while to get used to. Collected a lot of street credit by chatting with the elderly who I was now running along with. Quite relaxing. End of October ran a 10k race as a starting point in 35:30.
In November I started adding sub-treshold intervals, as I had now reached 5 weekly runs in a sustainable manner. Built it up by a few minutes each week, reaching about 45-50 minutes over three sessions in January. In the meantime my easy pace dropped from 6:00 in October, to 5:50 in November, to 5:45 in December, and a big jump to 5:30 in January.
Last weekend I ran a 34:09 10k, on the same race where I ran the 35:30 in 2025. Felt quite easy, never even came near those paces during training. Yet still, big PR. And no injury. Very happy with this result as it didn’t feel like a peak performance at all. I’m intending to stick to 5 times a week as that is sustainable for me, not going to build above 25% of volume for sub-treshold. Going to try a 5k in a month or two.
In my opinion the biggest success is consecutively running 50k weeks for several months now, without injury or feeling burnt out. I have never done that before and am enjoying it thoroughly. I realize that I’m only applying a stripped down version of vanilla NSM for cross-training, plus I’ve only been doing it for a very brief period of time relative to others. However my experience doing this is so much more positive than any other running method so far that it doesn’t feel premature to share a good result in this stadium.
Anyways, will post another update when I do that 5k some time in the future.
Kind regards
Thank you for this post!
After you ran the 34:xx 10k did you have any delayed fatigue or were you able to jump into training right away the next day?
When you raced did you feel like you could have gone faster after you crossed the line? Probably a weird feeling racing that pace you never touched in training!
This is a good podcast. One thing mentioned is how the zone between LT1 and LT2 (the threshold zone) is a large zone. So S/T sessions have a good bit of leeway in fitting into this zone, without needing to go over. Traditional methods, JD etc, are about riding the threshold, so inevitably are going to go over into the severe domain. Extra fatigue for not a lot of extra benefit.
Thanks for that. And, yeah, you seem pretty talented considering how fast you were running already on very low mileage -- if I took off half a year, I would probably have to go back to Couch to 5K. Then again, I'm old as f now.
It's all just lydiard isn't it. NSM seems pretty similar to the lydiard base building period, where instead of sub thresh intervals, he advocated for time trials (a time trial is not a best effort in lydiard parlance by the way), with the rest supported by easier running - although lydiard's suggested supporting runs do seem to be at harder effort - i think the phrase was 'comfortably tired'.
NSM doesn't include the hills or sharpening components of lydiard, but lydiard was all about load over time...then adding the special stuff.
stupid. no, are you stupid or idiot, or maybe both. have you opened a lydiard book. Running to the Top, Arthur Lydiard. Page 87.
Fun Run Schedule for Beginners For Six Weeks Monday : Jog 15/30 Minutes Tuesday: Jog 30/60 Minutes Wednesday Jog 15/45 Minutes Thursday: Jog 30/45 Minutes Friday: Rest or jog 30 minutes Saturday: Jog 15/45 minutes Sunday: Jog 30/60 Minutes
For Four Weeks Monday : Relaxed striding 100 by 4/6 times Tuesday: Jog 30/60 Minutes Wednesday Time trial 3000 metres Thursday: Jog 30/60 Minutes Friday: Rest or jog 30 minutes Saturday: Time trial 5000 metres Sunday: Jog 45/75 Minutes
his time trial definition is 7 out of 8 RPE (87.5%) this is not threshold (pg 84). this is recipe for burn out. this is no different than easy hard philosophy. no different than racing tempos. you tell me if you have done a time trial and held back. you will not improve long term. idiot. stupid idiot sandwich. please put bread between your face cheeks and call yourself idiot sandwich
worse yet are repetitions for established intermediate or advanced runners. all anaerobic capacity development. "Run One and Jog One" pg 83. you tell me 3x 1600 metres or 6x 800 metres at vo2, for multiple weeks on end how you can continue to improve. you will stagnate like daniels, maybe walk backwards on your arse. only difference is higher overall mileage so higher baseline to work off of. but at the elite level its no different between programs. there's a reason why college and pro programs switch to threshold for long term development. idiot sandwich.
run the lydiard way for distance track senior men has, as long as possible:
Monday easy fartlek 60
tues 1.5 hours aerobic
wed time trial 10,000 metres
thurs 1.5 hours aerobic
friday easy fartlek 60
saturday 10,000 metres
sunday 2 hours aerobic
he does not advocate running time trials as a best effort. The anaerobic capacity stuff does not come in till much later and closer to important races. If 87.5% effort is not threshold for a 10k time trial, what is it? 10000 time trial is not vo2…
I was listening to this and doing the maths when Dan was talking about 3 and 6 minute Reps. Sounded a lot like the paces for this method.
I’ve been listening to this podcast from the start and enjoyed the Sirpoc episode. No one in that chat was trying to push an agenda.
What I really like about their podcast is that they are deliberate on the science (when it’s proven) and honest with their own approach, but never insisting that everyone else should be training a certain way. It’s very much, the science suggests and it’s working for me. Not dissimilar to how the method came about.
"Differences would be 1) breaking up such training into intervals, which is irrelevant, and 2) never moving on from this phase, which makes sense when you consider the distances most hobby joggers like to race and the risk of overdoing it in this population"
Lydiard had a non-periodized plan,a 2 week race/non-race week format: Road (non-race week) Monday: repetitions 3 × 1,600 meters or 6 × 800 meters Tuesday: aerobic running 90 minutes Wednesday: time trial 3 miles Thursday: aerobic running 90 minutes Friday: fast relaxed striding 6-10 × 100 meters Saturday: time trial 3 miles Sunday: aerobic running 90 minutes or more
Road (race week) Monday: wind-sprints 10-16 × 100 meters Tuesday: easy fartlek 30-60 minutes Wednesday: time trial 1 mile Thursday: fast relaxed striding 4-6 ×100 meters Friday: jog 30 minutes Saturday: race Sunday: aerobic running 90 minutes or more
Shirtboy (everyone), you wrote about cycling before. Drew the TT for the annual club tri relay (too many runners).
How to best minimally integrate cycling for 3 months? Have no interest beyond this one “race” just don’t want to completely embarrass myself (did some hobby cycling way back)
Thinking to start with just 3x20 once a week, maybe up to twice in the last month? Question is drop a running workout for every added cycling one or can you go to 4 workouts (3x running + 1x cycling). Or any other options? Cheers
Yeah sure! Transitioning into my 'new' paces based off of the 34:09. Those feel a bit fast though, so I'll do this first for a week or two, see how it feels.
6*3 on 3:34 with 60 seconds walking recovery 2*10 on 3:43 with 2 minutes walking recovery 3*6 on 3:39 with 90 seconds walking recovery
Two easy runs of 50 minutes, all the interval-runs I run for a total of 60 minutes. Intervals, walking recovery, the rest is easy jogging. I live about 10 minutes away from a track, so I usually run there. Helps me to stay on the paces, as 9 out of the 10 times I overdo it.
Thanks for the reply. Five days after the fact and I'm still a bit sore, so it has made quite an impact on the legs. I'm used to the feeling, especially after a HM or marathon, but not following a 10k. Hopefully today I can finally sit down rather than fall down and 'take the risk' when going to the toilet.
I don't think I could have gone much faster. Maybe a second or 10 if I had paced it more efficiently. I was so hyped once I saw the first kilometer time on my watch with such little effort that I maybe took it a bit too far in the first part of the race. Looking at the file I ran 3:24, 3:25, 3,26, 3:23, 3:26, 3:28, 3:27, 3:28, 3:26, 3:19. So enough left for a final push, but not much. I was also bent on not completely destroying myself as it would have led to an even longer recovery.
I've done some easy jogging on sore legs which felt fine, but I wont do any intervals on sore legs to prevent injuries. Will try again Today and replace some of the intervals with easy running time to maintain the training load for this week. If it's a bit lower this week however, not a problem. Can also compensate with cycling a bit more. I guess that is a luxury of only running 5 days, I can still use the two days 'off' without having to worry about reaching my weekly total running training load.
Thanks, I do think I respond well to training in general, which is a blessing. And also the main reason I kept booming and busting, as it did make me faster. During the long breaks I wouldn't really be off the couch as I would cycle more hours in those times where I couldn't run. It has been about 3 years of doing 6+ hours of either cycling, swimming or running. Which does contribute in some way or another to 'picking up running fitness'/maintaining it after taking a break.