Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

All bar number five were answered and provided around 2 years ago, just number 5 is new, however muscle biopsies are painful and serve no practical use apart from telling you fibre type which is difficult to change (according to the literature) but the small study is self selecting for young very fit students.

This may or may not mirror the population as a whole, like most in this thread are people who come to running later in life as they were not naturally talented (little training to perform above average) or the opposite (need a sheet load of training) to perform above average.

Maybe this study needs to expand the audience to draw conclusions as I’m not so confident as you could drive a London bus through the analysis to date due to assumptions made.

Thanks for this post. Bought the book yesterday having finally taken the plunge into changing things up, based on your post as your story sounds almost exactly like the situation I'm in.

I keep going through cycles of treading water but ultimately over time I'm just getting worse, very gradually.

Previously would do a lot of faster paced work and I just don't think it's optimal at my age. Interestingly, about 4 years ago I could only run tempo for a while due to a nagging injury, somewhere around LT1 I guess, and that was the fastest I've been in my 40s. I never really put 2+2 together as that's why I had got into peak 10k shape.

The book is incredibly well written by someone new to writing, exceptionally well laid out and makes you really feel you have confidence in what's being imparted. Considering it's a running book, of which are usually very dry, it is also quite entertaining.

My hope is to return to the thread at some point and write something as good as this post.

A stranger showed up to my running club this week and asked what we were doing.

"We're running Sub-Threshold Intervals, want to join?"

Stanger: "You're running 'intervals'? but intervals are the time between running bouts? and by the way what do you mean by threshold..." He went on and on telling us how threshold doesn't exist and all sorts of other strange things until it got dark out.

"Thanks for the info stranger, still want to join us"

Stanger: "Join you!? you guys are clueless! ... besides I've never been one for running anyway" We looked at each other confused and when we turned back to the stranger he was gone, in fact there was no one in sight.

We ran silently in the dark, confused at who or what had lectured us for hours just to vanish.

We got to the pub right before closing and the bar tender asked us if we wanted to try her new oktoberfest beer brewed with black currants. Before we could tell her we just wanted a few pints of the usual, a shadow showed up behind us saying "Oktoberfest? but it's october 20th, oktoberfest has been over for two weeks" and then he lectured us on the origins of oktoberfest and german beer purity laws. By the time he finished the pub had closed and we never got to have our pints. "Good, that lady was clueless!" the stranger says "Drinking isn't good for you, personally I've never tried the stuff" Then he turns into a giant winged bug the size of a mini cooper, but instead of a head he just had a giant arse.

"Oh my god, it's a fly! With two arses and no head!"

One of the stranger's arseholes opened up and said "I'm not a fly, i'm a gnat, I can't stand flys" And flew right into a bug zapper, dying instantly.

It's definitely not just semantics.

For example, knowing that training both below and above "threshold" have similar physiological effects means that you can't be misled by influencers like the Uphill Athlete.

Likewise, knowing that LT1, LT2, and especially the difference between them aren't really meaningful means that you won't waste your time, energy, and money pursuing lactate testing.

Understanding that it is very unlikely that you are truly some ultra-FT "snowflake" allows you to accept that what seems to work for many very well may work for you as well.

TLDR: Knowledge is power, in this case letting you focus on determining what really does/doesn't work for you, versus blowing around like a leaf in the wind, following first one training fad, then another.

Careful that’s not a normal light! Look out!

Your post makes no sense whatsoever.

Fir example, the claim that "threshold" can only be trained from below and not above " was only proffered recently, citing an Uphill Athlete interview.

As for my prior comments about the fiber type of the plantar flexors (the primary muscles engaged when running, at least on level terrain), they were based on multiple studies of HUNDREDS of young UNTRAINED men. Given that aging results in a slowing of muscle contractile properties (if not an outright shift in fiber type), the odds of a middle aged runner being predominantly FT would be even lower than what I cited previously.

[Speaking of fiber type: Dave Costill has recently suggested that they may have inadvertently OVERestimated the percentage of ST fibers in the plantar flexors of elite distance runners in his classic study from the 1970s, as a result of inserting the biopsy needle through their thin gastrocnemius and into the underlying soleus muscle. If so, then the range in fiber type in the population would be even smaller than generally held, i.e., we're almost all very much mixed ]

The study in question (note the 2nd author).

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Skeletal muscle enzymes and fiber composition in male and female track athletes - PubMed

Muscle samples were obtained from the gastrocnemius of 17 female and 23 male track athletes, 10 untrained women, and 11 untrained men. Portions of the specimen were analyzed for total phosphorylase, lactic dehydrogenase (LDH)...

Open link

Hey
everyone, I’ve been trying to follow the NSM approach for several
months now, but I’m feeling pretty exhausted and my legs feel heavy. I
keep my paces conservative during the sessions and do my easy runs at
around 65% of max HR.

The problem is, my legs just can’t handle three sub-threshold sessions per
week, no matter how far below the lactate threshold I keep them.
What can I adjust to still apply the principles of the system that I really like?

My idea was to do two sub-threshold interval sessions plus one LT1-style
workout instead of three sub-threshold ones. Has anyone had good results
with just two sub-threshold sessions per week?

Or could I make up for the missing third session with more easy volume instead?
I’d really appreciate any insights or experiences you can share. Thanks

Maybe less sub t work during each session? Curious to hear what other folks think.

What do a typical training week look like before? What does it look like now?

If you increase load too quickly it doesn’t matter how easy your easy days are or how far under threshold the sub-t sessions are, you’ll struggle if the increase is too much

The moron down voter at work again,

Ok then .. If it is definitely not semantics and it is important to know that both training above and below "threshold" have similar physiological effects then that begs the question:

Dear runnersareclueless

What "pulling up from above" training do you recommend to the average reader of this thread?

On top of what others said, are you eating enough, carbs specifically?

Or could the problem be muscle strength related? Though not part of the canon per se, single leg deadlifts, loaded calf raises and gmed strengthening work are by my experience rather useful.

Need more information as someone else commented.
How many days a week and what sort of mileage/time were you running before?

How many days a week and what sort of mileage/time are you running now?

if it has increased, how long do it take you to increase to the new system?

How much sub T are you doing each session?

How long are your easy runs an your long run?

People also think NSM is easy but you are still close to the edge, that’s why people get themselves into a hole if they push intensity too much. If adapting to NSM means increased mileage and number of days running, it’s only reasonable to expect some level of fatigue.

Options could be, dropping back to 2 sub T sessions a week, reducing mileage on easy runs, taking a rest day. Or even taking a down week if fatigue is too much.

I laughed hard at this. Perfect depiction of the pompous pedantry on display in this thread.

Apologies for another cross-training msg but I’ve been doing NSM for about 8 months - running 7 days a week, ~7.5 hours total. It’s been working well: marathon PB last year (2:55) and more recently a sub-18 5k.

However, I’ve got a bit of knee wear and tear, so I’m thinking about reducing run volume slightly and incorporating some cross-training, probably cycling. I go to gym 2-3 times a week focusing on glutes, hammys, quads, calves.

Curious what has worked for others in a similar situation:
- Swapping easy runs for easy bike rides?
- Replacing a run workout with a bike workout?

Goal would still be to maintain/improve running performance while reducing impact a bit.
Would be great to hear from anyone who has successfully integrated cycling or other cross-training while still chasing running times.

The occasional 5k race would be an excellent choice.

So in other words nothing that he/she isn't already doing?

Yes yes ... Your posts in this thread aren't just semantics .. You're going to great lengths to add value here :)

I advice you to scale down to try only 2 faster runs per week . One lactate threshold interval in the LT2 range and one maxVO2 interval ( e.g 10 -20 x 1 min @ 5 k race pace. And further I advice you to first try only 5 running sessions per week with then 2 days totaly off.... this will help you to translate to a more effective training and you will feel full of energy at most of your runs. Then after some short time you see improvement you can try add one more easy day run and you get to perfect 6 days running and one planned day off to " reload your batteries 100% " . Functions great! Good luck! 🇸🇪🧙‍♂️🇸🇪