Hot take: Magness knows more about running than Bakken and sirpoc have ever dreamt of. They are nerds whereas Magness has dealt with a range of runners, in the real world. This type of training these frauds promote us very narrow and not good for most people.
Yeah, Bakken havent experienced how real world running is like, and havent dealt with real runners.
Or...
You should find the blogposts where he talks about testing the flexibility of Kenyan runners, being in a WC final and advising on the training of the Ingebrigtsen runners.
Hot take: Magness knows more about running than Bakken and sirpoc have ever dreamt of. They are nerds whereas Magness has dealt with a range of runners, in the real world. This type of training these frauds promote us very narrow and not good for most people.
Bakken has changed the way elite running has gone in the last 25 years.
Sirpoc is a modest talent who worked out how to get to a level where he could beat professionals in time trials and then in a second life become British masters 5k champion in running. All on being incredibly smart and practical and probably getting to very close to his maximum potential, all while training on hobby hours and having a life. In fact, he often plays down the fact of how intelligent he is, I guess (deliberately) to not get drawn into things.
This isn't to say Magness isn't important. But what we can learn and have from Bakken and then how to apply that to most of us via sirpoc is almost as good as it gets for the average reader of this thread.
Also for all the people ripping on Magness like cult members because he offered some very measured, reasonable constructive criticism of NSM: Bakken talks about how discussions on his forum with Magness were an influence in how he developed his training system.
Interesting that the foreward is by Magness given his critical stance against strictly sub-threshold training.
Bakken does mention Norwegian Singles and how it funnily enough originated with "unknown" Ingebrigtsen brother Kristoffer and then was refined by Englishman James Copeland and he does recommend it as a very safe way to train.
-
The book does not stop there tho. It book culminateshaving you running doubles combined with a weekly xfactor session.
Further more he also has you periodizing aiming at two yearly peaks, one in spring and one in the fall.
(He does discuss flat (in other words sustainable) training vs. periodizing and does single NSM out as an example of flat training. He recommends flat training for running with life/family obligations that primary train for fitness. Something he has done himself for many a year)
-
So yeah .. There is room for Magness to do his shtick without being misplaced
I agree, the overlap between Bakken/Magness/sirpoc (and Bu as well) in general is huge. I read the Bakken book in Norwegian, and IMO it's a must read for anyone who wants to modify anything in vanilla NSM, or to just learn more about threshold training. Bakken's book isn't "one method" in the same way as sirpoc's book, its more like a toolbox of how to think about training when threshold is the backbone of your training.
Also for all the people ripping on Magness like cult members because he offered some very measured, reasonable constructive criticism of NSM: Bakken talks about how discussions on his forum with Magness were an influence in how he developed his training system.
Nah Magness was just plain weird when he came to this thread IMO. Incredibly stuck to his idea that you must do something outside of what is being talked about here when it comes to training.
He cannot separate theory, elites and the reality of hobby jogging.
He lost the argument when he essentially said "yes" when backed into a corner and asked if he would change anything even if the runner was still making progress on vanilla NSM. This to me just means he's a little too rigid in his views.
Fwiw I totally agree with the ideas Magness had, if that runner has totally stagnated, plateaued or reached a peak from spamming NSM. I don't think Magness, Bakken or sirpoc would disagree here. But, he in my view (and this is just my view) was too keen to change things up, almost for the sake of it.
Ultimately this is why this thread, the method, has had so much success. It doesn't try and get cute with stuff you simply don't need to. I don't understand why some people have a problem with vanilla being almost as good as it'll get, probably for ~90% of us at least. Stuff like adding in speedwork for 5 hour a week guys is simply the whole problem in the first place and why most of us are here. Even a sprinkling of it has caused huge problems for a large percentage of us. Let alone being crazy enough to add it in when you are on easy street cashing in the easy gains further back down the NSM chain.
It would be cool to hear your opinion on supplementing with cross-training. It seems like you've mostly settled on supplementing on your sub-threshold days with 30 minutes sweet spot.
The book covers the use cases where you are injured, can't handle 7 days of running, or just like cross training. None of those really describe me, I'm just close to topped out on vanilla (~7-7.5 hours) and have 30-45 minutes available in the PM. I'm not particularly interested in double runs, be it double threshold or just easy. I have a stationary bike and I'm experimenting by adding 20-30 minutes sweet spot on sub-threshold days and 30-45 minutes easy on easy days to add aerobic volume. It's too early to see how much it will help, but it seems promising.
I roll out the red carpet. Unbelievable you are back out of the bushes :)
A question to you:
How can A. Maders lactate model be used to explain changes in running performance in Sirpocs training concept? What parameters change short (6 weeks) or long term (half a year)?
Paper: A. Mader, 2003, Glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation as a function of cytosolic phosphorylation state and power output of the muscle cell
If I'm going to be doing ad hoc projects for you, I might as well give ChatNB's website some traffic...
Yes it is. Interesting comparisons between Lydiard, Hadd, & NSM.
I suggested doing this awhile ago & got downvoted, lol. "Another thing to consider is potentially using Hadd’s approach as a prologue of sorts to NSA. In other words, building up your ability to train with the lower HR work and “earning” the ability to do an approach like NSA effectively."
Personally I think there is a case to be made for using Hadd Phase 2 as a marathon build rather than NSM. NSM Vanilla, then 8/9 weeks out have 2 lengthier sessions a week and an easy long run.
Sessions Hadd recommended were one with shorter reps roughly 20 and 25 secs per mile faster than MP and one with reps roughly 20 to 30 seconds a mile slower than MP
Faster on a Tuesday
3 x 15 mins @ MP-20, leading up to 6 x 1 mile @MP-25
Slower and longer on a Thursday
3 x 20 mins @ MP+30, leading to 3 x 30 @ MP+20, and 3 x 30 @ MP
It would be interesting to see the load compared to the "special block"
Also for all the people ripping on Magness like cult members because he offered some very measured, reasonable constructive criticism of NSM: Bakken talks about how discussions on his forum with Magness were an influence in how he developed his training system.
Nah Magness was just plain weird when he came to this thread IMO. Incredibly stuck to his idea that you must do something outside of what is being talked about here when it comes to training.
He cannot separate theory, elites and the reality of hobby jogging.
He lost the argument when he essentially said "yes" when backed into a corner and asked if he would change anything even if the runner was still making progress on vanilla NSM. This to me just means he's a little too rigid in his views.
Fwiw I totally agree with the ideas Magness had, if that runner has totally stagnated, plateaued or reached a peak from spamming NSM. I don't think Magness, Bakken or sirpoc would disagree here. But, he in my view (and this is just my view) was too keen to change things up, almost for the sake of it.
Ultimately this is why this thread, the method, has had so much success. It doesn't try and get cute with stuff you simply don't need to. I don't understand why some people have a problem with vanilla being almost as good as it'll get, probably for ~90% of us at least. Stuff like adding in speedwork for 5 hour a week guys is simply the whole problem in the first place and why most of us are here. Even a sprinkling of it has caused huge problems for a large percentage of us. Let alone being crazy enough to add it in when you are on easy street cashing in the easy gains further back down the NSM chain.
Part of the issue with Magness, among others, that has already been discussed here is their heavy bias of having gone through the competitive running landscape at the Division I collegiate and semi-pro levels. Things like strides, speed work, etc. are ingrained in anybody that has gone through those systems. Again, the audience is different here. It’s not 14-24 years old kids running 800m-5k. It’s adults who have busy lives, limited ability to recover and have tried training in the more “traditional” way and ended-up stagnating and/or injured. Dropping things like strides, speed work, etc. have allowed people to be healthier and more consistent than ever before. Somebody linked to the IRP podcast. I love the podcast. But how many podcasts, YouTube channels, etc are there of older athletes that are constantly injured from doing the stuff that his method avoids? I’d love to see Moose or Crokes take a stab at this method. Brady I think has too high or a training load recently to give it a go. But Moose and Crokes are injured often. I bet they’d thrive with this method.
Personally I think there is a case to be made for using Hadd Phase 2 as a marathon build rather than NSM. NSM Vanilla, then 8/9 weeks out have 2 lengthier sessions a week and an easy long run.
Sessions Hadd recommended were one with shorter reps roughly 20 and 25 secs per mile faster than MP and one with reps roughly 20 to 30 seconds a mile slower than MP
Faster on a Tuesday
3 x 15 mins @ MP-20, leading up to 6 x 1 mile @MP-25
Slower and longer on a Thursday
3 x 20 mins @ MP+30, leading to 3 x 30 @ MP+20, and 3 x 30 @ MP
It would be interesting to see the load compared to the "special block"
I'm actually doing something very similar. I used NSM for my marathon pb last year after copying sirpoc. It went well, really well in fact but it almost felt too easy that I was sure I had left some marathon work on the table. It was a huge PB.
So actually I got a coach who laid something very similar out like this, to really top out, or max all the work I have done via NSM.
It actually feels harder than the special block. It's a no go for me. Unfortunately, it's too late to abandon. My load looks higher on intervals, although I can't say I'm perfect at tracking it, but my legs are more trashed and clearly I'm more tired in general. You probably go beyond that point nsm is good at, which is doing the maximum amount of work not only that you can handle to fit in with your life, but that it's a load that you can actually absorb.
It's hard to compare marathon builds to be honest as a hobby runner as you are going to be close to the edge no matter what plan, but this doesn't feel good. I broke 3 comfortably last time and I almost have no chance of breaking 3 this time.
I came into this off the back of the NSM marathon build, a few weeks off and back on around 5 months of vanilla.
It's good to experiment and get fresh opinions, especially as the coach I have is very highly respected, but I'm just going back to NSM and i will no doubt do that for a marathon I have planned next January.
I'll post up more maybe post race, after taper and I get back to running.
What I find interesting is a lot of people have been experimenting. For instance, harpoonz posted some good stuff about short distance and adding intensity. There was a guy who posted about Lt1 only. It seems we all gravitate back towards something that resembles NSM vanilla.
Ran 15:12 this morning at parkrun. 23 years old and was around a 16:30 runner since I was around 19. I am a young professional now and 2 days a week I'm travelling for work but usually have a gym available, there's always a bike but sometimes not a running machine. I have been coached before and actually dumped my coach in favour of NSM.
I messaged sirpoc on the off chance he would reply - which he did - and asked him kindly how he would structure the time I have available and how to add in some cross training. He said he would have a think and came back with an 8 weeks starting point, which he did the next day. This went well even with only 5 days of running and 2 of cycling. The balance was 2 sub threshold runs, 1 sub threshold ride, 3 easy runs (one slightly longer) and one easy ride.
After those 8 weeks I ran 16:17 and I think a lot of that was because I was now being consistent and shedding some of my bad habits that had led to the classic boom and bust talked about in great detail here.
After the 8 weeks, he kindly gave me a few tweaks that he would do given my situation and helped me plan the next 3 months. I kept feeling stronger. I really wanted to break 15, of which he told me to just think long term and that it probably wasn't on yet but "the middle of 2026" was realistic.
Today is just such an amazing day here in the UK, I decided to jump into the parkrun and squeezed everything I could to run 15:12, also inspired by the gym who posted last week jumping into a parking and smashing his pb. He advised me beforehand I would run between 15:10-15. Unbelievable prediction. I think in total I've been running and cycling this way since around August last year, when I first messaged him.
Best "coach" I've ever had and when I offered to give him some money for his troubles, he legitimately told me to keep it for beer money LOL. He's as top a guy as you think he is.
I also thought I would make this post for those who can't, or don't want to run the full 7 days. It's adaptable based on a few tweaks to include the cross training. The elliptical I am sure, will also do. I've never had such a consistent period of running or training in general, so it's a bit of a catch 22 situation. The training leads to the results, or the consistency leads to the results based on the balanced nature of the training. I mean, I guess this connundrum doesn't really matter. Which came first, chicken or the egg.
So what does an example week of training look like? Time/distance per day, paces, HR, etc.?
These posts always make me laugh. It's vanilla NSM 5 days a week with two days cycling. His paces are going to be in line with what the paces are prescribed for a mid 15 runner, running around an hour a day with probably a 80-90 minute long run. He's going to be running easy days south of 70% MHR and not breaching LTHR on workouts.
Ok, the two days cycling might be more of a mystery. But even then, it's hardly rocket science. Which is why it all works so well.
Who knows, if you aren't running 7 days a week, maybe you try to cram in more sub-T volume, maybe you push the pace more to the edge of LT2. Dude probably has some natural talent getting to 16:30, but most people aren't running a 15:00 5K on straight vanilla NSM running 7 days, much less running only 5 days a week with 2 days on a bike.
3. The body needs occasional exposure to high lactate levels as a stimulus to develop lactate buffering. Sub-T is good for developing lots of pipes for moving lactate around, but we also need higher lactate levels as a stimulus to build thick pipes that can deal with higher demands.
These are not dumb arguments
#3 is.
It is repeatedly elevating H+, not lactate, that induces increases in muscle buffering capacity (which is practically irrelevant in events longer than about 10 minutes).
As for "more pipes" vs. "thicker pipes", that's just coaching double-speak. Exercise training induced growth throughout the entire vascular tree, but that has nothing to do with lactate.
It is repeatedly elevating H+, not lactate, that induces increases in muscle buffering capacity (which is practically irrelevant in events longer than about 10 minutes).
As for "more pipes" vs. "thicker pipes", that's just coaching double-speak. Exercise training induced growth throughout the entire vascular tree, but that has nothing to do with lactate.
A surprisingly good post. You might even receive more upvotes than down for once.
Who knows, if you aren't running 7 days a week, maybe you try to cram in more sub-T volume, maybe you push the pace more to the edge of LT2. Dude probably has some natural talent getting to 16:30, but most people aren't running a 15:00 5K on straight vanilla NSM running 7 days, much less running only 5 days a week with 2 days on a bike.
Vanilla NSM, is just vanilla NSM, tbh. There's really not much variation with what the most successful people have been doing with this. There's guys who do 1-2 days cross training but it's all relatively straightforward. 90-100 mins max of sub threshold, rarely people seem to bother with strides and everyone is running incredibly easily to buffer between workout days.
Asking what paces people run is largely irrelevant and once you know a guy's race time, you can probably work it out retroactively anyway.
The whole point of training like this is you don't really need to compare yourself to others or ask what the next guy is doing. We are all doing the same relative to the time we have available and our race speed.