Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Yeah maybe something like that wrote:

The Book wrote:

Or how about lowering intensity a bit all over the board? You can play around with intervals.icu and plan some sample weeks ahead to see how much you must lower the speed/intensity/HR to get into gray. If you have been in green for a long time, I don't think it's that important that you get into gray "next week", but you should find an sustainable intensity that produces a weekly ramp rate than will soonish put you into gray and keep you there. (If you drastically overcompensate the ramp rate into a negative one, it will just put you into blue instead).

Yeah, I think you’re probably still in a spot where just volume is going to build meaningful fitness for a while, and then you can add intensity. You mention a 180-185 total over some time, but I’d personally care less about my total base mileage in that span and more about my level of consistency and average mileage over the last 3-4 weeks. You say you’ve gotten around 35-36. I’d consider making sure you’re at several weeks of 6 days/week above 40 miles per week before going with the three workouts, but I haven’t read the book, so maybe it gives you another way of ramping up. Maybe even just 1-2 days of workouts per week to start, or just more base mileage? Seems like you’re monitoring it well and being smart about pace though.

counter point wrote:

(Him) wrote:

1 caveat. Cheeto has a history of competitive track as a young guy. If you entered into running later in life, you will need to do sprint work/fast intervals to reach closer to your potential in the 8/15. I’m positive NSA will help you drop times in the 8/15, but NSA will not bring you anywhere as close to your potential compared to training for a 5K/10K/half Mary. 800 still is a long sprint. If you are truly sprinting, 3 x 30’ subT + 1 sprint day per week sounds like a disaster. For a simple schedule incorporating NSA, best optimization is probably 20-30 min of standard threshold + 1 speed day for focusing solely on 8/15. Then a standard week of vanilla NSA. Repeat ad nauseam.

Where do you draw the line though? Is what speed he had in his legs 25 years ago relevant? I'm a fast twitch guy, does just by being fast twitch mean I don't need to bother with speedwork for a 800/1500? Maybe. My weakness is aerobic so that natural fast twitch is always there. The whole thing is about risk and reward, surely? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with what you are saying, but just that you need to weigh it up.

FelixSprock wrote:

I spent 5ish months doing primarily sprint work and heavy weightlifting/plyos throughout the end of 2024 into early 2025 racing. Mileage was MAYBE 15-20 miles/week. I could easily crank out a 18-19 sec 150m. Ran indoors and did 2:45 for 1k/4:52 for 1 Mile.

I spent 12 weeks doing NSA end of this past year (similar timeline as 2024) after taking a break from running. No strides, no speedwork. Some maintenance lifting in there to keep me healthy. Ran 4:52 for the mile again. I definetely couldn't throw down as fast of a 200m time as the year previous when I did the speed block, but my mile time stayed the same, in about 1/3 of the training time it took to get to that same time the year previous. I ran much more even splits for that Mile and nearly PR'd in my 8k a month prior (PR is from college 3 years ago). I anticipate I could have probably gone 2:50 ish for the 1k. In the speed block, relative to my 1k, my Mile was trash. Probably because the mile is like 80ish percent aerobic. The gains came much easier over the mile with NSA.

Point being, there's tradeoffs to speed work. If I tried to do what I did for workouts in the speed block during NSA, say 1x a week, I probably would have gotten hurt. However, if I WERE to include it for an 800/1500m build, I would probably do some variation of max effort 6-10 sec hill sprints/ or a set of flying 10-30m reps. But, generally, most people have much more easier gains to access with aerobic training than speed training, since the mechanical stress of hard speed work in volume management is MUCH easier to f*ck up than plain ole aerobic volume.

(Him) wrote:

FelixSprock wrote:

I spent 5ish months doing primarily sprint work and heavy weightlifting/plyos throughout the end of 2024 into early 2025 racing. Mileage was MAYBE 15-20 miles/week. I could easily crank out a 18-19 sec 150m. Ran indoors and did 2:45 for 1k/4:52 for 1 Mile.

I spent 12 weeks doing NSA end of this past year (similar timeline as 2024) after taking a break from running. No strides, no speedwork. Some maintenance lifting in there to keep me healthy. Ran 4:52 for the mile again. I definetely couldn't throw down as fast of a 200m time as the year previous when I did the speed block, but my mile time stayed the same, in about 1/3 of the training time it took to get to that same time the year previous. I ran much more even splits for that Mile and nearly PR'd in my 8k a month prior (PR is from college 3 years ago). I anticipate I could have probably gone 2:50 ish for the 1k. In the speed block, relative to my 1k, my Mile was trash. Probably because the mile is like 80ish percent aerobic. The gains came much easier over the mile with NSA.

Point being, there's tradeoffs to speed work. If I tried to do what I did for workouts in the speed block during NSA, say 1x a week, I probably would have gotten hurt. However, if I WERE to include it for an 800/1500m build, I would probably do some variation of max effort 6-10 sec hill sprints/ or a set of flying 10-30m reps. But, generally, most people have much more easier gains to access with aerobic training than speed training, since the mechanical stress of hard speed work in volume management is MUCH easier to f*ck up than plain ole aerobic volume.

And here’s where there looks to be a lot more similarity in training for elite runners and us hobby joggers. In that same article, with regards to sprint training, Bakken says:

MB: “But the performance on the threshold became quite a bit worse. So it ate into the threshold. And I performed worse in general.
LL: You became faster and did well on short distances, but on what you were supposed to be good at, you got worse?
MB: That's right. So then we adjusted towards more intensive sessions, pure sprint reps. Instead of running pure sprint sessions. But it's individual too. Some are more explosive and will probably tolerate it in a better way.”

Like the “trash mile” (lol), Bakken’s threshold ability was reduced when incorporating speed sessions.

Link to article:

Link:runningwritings.com/2024/09/marius-bak...

Grumple wrote:

(Him) wrote:

And here’s where there looks to be a lot more similarity in training for elite runners and us hobby joggers. In that same article, with regards to sprint training, Bakken says:

MB: “But the performance on the threshold became quite a bit worse. So it ate into the threshold. And I performed worse in general.
LL: You became faster and did well on short distances, but on what you were supposed to be good at, you got worse?
MB: That's right. So then we adjusted towards more intensive sessions, pure sprint reps. Instead of running pure sprint sessions. But it's individual too. Some are more explosive and will probably tolerate it in a better way.”

Like the “trash mile” (lol), Bakken’s threshold ability was reduced when incorporating speed sessions.

Link to article:

Link:runningwritings.com/2024/09/marius-bak...

Wha did Bakken mean by “pure sprint reps” an “pure sprint sessions” here:

“So then we adjusted towards more intensive sessions, pure sprint reps. Instead of running pure sprint sessions. But it's individual too. Some are more explosive and will probably tolerate it in a better way.”

Is he saying that mixing short all out sprints and threshold negatively affected his threshold?

(Him) wrote:

I think the past speed/lifetime miles is relevant. It all depends on what your time goals are. I found this quote from Bakken:

Bakken - “Because what I saw at the end of my career, that I could get away with fewer kilometers and be in correspondingly the same shape. And I think it has to do with running economy, and especially stabilizing ligaments and tendon structures and building up elasticity in the musculature, it's about a property that you train up, and then you won't need as much later in the career.”

So it should be easier for Cheeto (and you as a FT guy) to get closer to, in this example, 25s/200. The goal 2 min/800 runner comparatively has to “train up” the ability to get to 25 sec. And because of the capability to run a faster 400, your ceiling for 1500 is higher and that’s where focusing on aerobic work is more beneficial for a lot of people

Cheetodust wrote:

I would agree with the tendon/ligament conditioning over time. I’ve only done sporadic high mileage over my career but have essentially non stop ran 40mi/wk non stop since late 90’s. It’s probably why I can roughly average barely 50mpw and still squeeze results.
Disclosure I’ve picked up a mild calf strain likely primed by putting spikes on for an indoor meet and not having worn them in roughly 9 months. So that was full ego that I didn’t need to at least do a few strides or 200’s the week prior to prime my legs for the aggressive pull of spiked racing. I like that excerpt from Bakken, it mirrors exactly what I’ve felt. I feel like my high end gear is dull or missing, I’m sure I could open up my stride in a 400 if I really tried but for now I still feel my ROI is far exceeded with aerobic work. Don’t get me wrong, I do reminisce wistfully of sub 60 day's!

(Him) wrote:

FelixSprock wrote:

I spent 5ish months doing primarily sprint work and heavy weightlifting/plyos throughout the end of 2024 into early 2025 racing. Mileage was MAYBE 15-20 miles/week. I could easily crank out a 18-19 sec 150m. Ran indoors and did 2:45 for 1k/4:52 for 1 Mile.

I spent 12 weeks doing NSA end of this past year (similar timeline as 2024) after taking a break from running. No strides, no speedwork. Some maintenance lifting in there to keep me healthy. Ran 4:52 for the mile again. I definetely couldn't throw down as fast of a 200m time as the year previous when I did the speed block, but my mile time stayed the same, in about 1/3 of the training time it took to get to that same time the year previous. I ran much more even splits for that Mile and nearly PR'd in my 8k a month prior (PR is from college 3 years ago). I anticipate I could have probably gone 2:50 ish for the 1k. In the speed block, relative to my 1k, my Mile was trash. Probably because the mile is like 80ish percent aerobic. The gains came much easier over the mile with NSA.

Point being, there's tradeoffs to speed work. If I tried to do what I did for workouts in the speed block during NSA, say 1x a week, I probably would have gotten hurt. However, if I WERE to include it for an 800/1500m build, I would probably do some variation of max effort 6-10 sec hill sprints/ or a set of flying 10-30m reps. But, generally, most people have much more easier gains to access with aerobic training than speed training, since the mechanical stress of hard speed work in volume management is MUCH easier to f*ck up than plain ole aerobic volume.

And here’s where there looks to be a lot more similarity in training for elite runners and us hobby joggers. In that same article, with regards to sprint training, Bakken says:

MB: “But the performance on the threshold became quite a bit worse. So it ate into the threshold. And I performed worse in general.
LL: You became faster and did well on short distances, but on what you were supposed to be good at, you got worse?
MB: That's right. So then we adjusted towards more intensive sessions, pure sprint reps. Instead of running pure sprint sessions. But it's individual too. Some are more explosive and will probably tolerate it in a better way.”

Like the “trash mile” (lol), Bakken’s threshold ability was reduced when incorporating speed sessions.

Link to article:

Link:runningwritings.com/2024/09/marius-bak...