Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

I'm catching up with the thread and seeing it devolve, but this post is spot on.

I've never understood the attitude towards doubles on LR, going back years. You only need to even start thinking about doubling once you're at 70mpw. Or, now, the insanity of 22K 5Kers doubling because they read it in Bakken.

First, why do people care so much about how others make up their volume? Second, why is doubling even seen as bad at all at low mileage? As a kid you'd have PE/games in the day and run or do some other sport in the evening, are adults incapable of that?

If anything I think doubling at low mileage can be better than singles, and - contrary to the usual objection that it's difficult to fit into a normal day - can be easier for some people. 40 mins over lunch, 30 mins before dinner, 2-3 times a week is going to be more doable for some people than 60 mins at either lunchtime or evening, slightly higher volume, and gives a double stimulus. But either way, I don't see why people care so much about it. Just run.

If people want to do stupid stuff with the training, so be it. Part of the reason that so lay hobby joggers struggle is that they can’t do the necessary, boarding work over a long period of time. They can’t be patient to build-up slow enough. They jump to the next new, shiny thing every couple of weeks or months. It happens time and time again. It seems pretty clear at this point, nearly 600 pages and several years later, that the people with the best results are the ones that stick to Vanilla for a long time and build load very gradually. Those who get fancy with it often get injured or burned. But if you want to change it up, go for it. nobody is saying you can’t. Nobody says you have to train this way. But don’t call it NSM and don’t expect the same results.

Any other long time NSMers find themselves stuck around their LTHR in shorter races (<= 10K)? I've been on NSM since about January 2025, racing every 6-8 weeks but a bit more often now that it's spring racing season. I'm not watching HR much during the race, but as an example, I ran an 8K today where my average HR was 169, max HR was 178. I'm typically ending my last 3-minute reps around 172, so I'm really barely exceeding sub-T HRs. Looking back at races from my early days of NSM, I was regularly averaging around 180 and peaking in the high 180s. I can't complain all that much because my pace is significantly faster now, but I'm pretty sure I'm leaving a decent amount of time on the table. It's probably psychological (central governor type thing), but anyone have experience/advice?

Not many normal working people have a chance to make a 40 min run at their lunchtime. And they are expected to eat lunch too in that time. When having a 'normal' life it gives most to your running to get maximized recovery between the running sessions and therefore singles are superior to doubles .

You really seem to need a change in your program. A need of the " X- factor" so many in this thread talks about.

I don't notice much difference between splitting up my easy runs into two 25 minute runs instead of one 50 minute run, which I did last year before moving to a new city. I'm going the same pace and same distance either way. It just works better for my lifestyle this way, as it saves a lot of time since it just replaces my commute.

I love doubling and it gets me right to 70 mpw. when I was younger, I thought singles were king and it would kill me resulting in a couple days off per week and only getting to 40-45 miles. I wish I would have run easier and doubled more often in my youth

Have you tried sub-t reps as part of your warm-up before a race? A couple people here who had the same experience said that doing a 3 min sub-t rep or two before the race was the difference maker.

That's a good idea, I might experiment with the warm up being more intense. I did 2x3-minute reps before a race a few months ago, and it didn't seem to make a huge difference, but that's just a sample of one. I got the book a week later and switched to 1-2 400m reps depending on the race length.

I knew X-factor would be a response, and I might be at a point where I need some to break through the HR ceiling. I think a couple of the cross trainers on here have talked about some short VO2 max bike sessions, so maybe that's worth a look too.

The argument then really isn't that doubles are bad but that you and others are not intelligent enough to fit them into your "busy lifes", so other people shouldn't either because they might profit from them. Got it.

Doubles are great, if you can recover. Then, suddenly my life got busier and doubles became impossible. I was lucky, I spent years working from home, now I don't. I have to be in the office 8 ours a day and then I have three small kids to deal with at home. Doubling in this situation is almost impossible. Like it would be for anyone. I'm 34 years old and the body can't handle itm the impact of two workouts a day over a period of time is a lot. Sleep is the key to doubling really. Anyone who has done it long enough will probably tell you recovery in-between and good regular sleep at the way.

When I was training for a Tri back in bed day, cycling twice a day just isn't the same impact. I think sometimes we underestimate how hard running in general is.

I totally get that but, again, that's not an argument against doubles in general -- that's just an explanation why you are not doing them anymore. People in this thread and on Reddit usually act like people have no business doubling unless they run a 15:xx 5k or something.

Besides, Bakken doesn't even say you should double every day. For runners, who run at least 6-8 hours and want more, he recommends trying doubles, starting with a middle ground where you do one double subT day every other week. He even specifically mentions the weekends (or the commute to and from work) for it.

And I think most advanced runners should be able to double once every fortnight.

I had a great 5K race back in February where I tried a mini cutdown in the warmup. 15' v. easy jog then 3'>2'>1' subt with 1' walk-jog between reps.

I used to think like this. I didn't have to go to work for about 2 years during lockdown. I had so much time and free time that doubles just became a regular thing for me and didn't seem hard.

Then, as the world got back to normal, stresses did for me. Then, in the spirit of NSM.....I was looking for a job and then I got a job and heaven knows I was miserable then......doubling may as well have been on a different planet. Suddenly what was an easy routine became near on impossible. The only time I have managed to double is if I'm working away for a few days, can't train and then come into a Tuesday off a couple of full rest days. Even then, they are both much nearer LT1 - this is both sessions just not the morning one. This is more just to fit in what I've missed, rather than for specifically doubling.

I really don't think until you have done it in a real life situation you can appreciate how hard running doubles is. This is assuming you are doing it properly with the PM session and something a decent amount harder on a Saturday. If you cross train, doubling is feesible or certainly more realistic. The whole thing feels a notch easier if I do the elliptical in the morning around LT1 rather than running that session.

The real simple way to think of it is this:

If you can go to work, look after a family, lead a social life AND you find running 5 running sessions a week easy, then you are the kind of hardened runner NSM isn't going to be for in the first place. You can almost certainly adapt to more intensity prescribed programs and survive.

At the usual NSM 3 min rep pace?

I don't get this. Is there a typo?

I thought NSM was exactly for people who work, have a busy life, and can fit in 5-7 sessions a week. Are you saying that people who find that "easy" to manage are not a good fit for NSM? If so then we're on different planets.

I assume he means if you can do 5 workouts a week (classic doubles) and balance all of the things mentioned, then why would you need NSM in the first place?

Which makes sense to me. NSM really is designed to give individuals the most you can handle, without adding in the stress of doubling.

Which, I would agree, is very stressful. As a non pro, I usually have dreaded it. NSM vanilla seems just so much more doable week to week, month to month. In fact I'm now at year to year like others.

I ran 15:47 on doubles. I ran 15:33 on singles. The difference being in the year I ran just singles, I actually managed more running over the 12 months and by the end was in peak shape. When I was doubling, I had a lot of down weeks, a few injuries (which may or may not be related to doubles) but in general the extra fatigue meant I needed down weeks. If I took a 12 month snapshot period of this time around 2023, I actually ran less than the same snapshot of NSM over and equivalent period.

This whole thread has gone off the rails and full circle.

Whilst the talk and idea about doubles certainly has its merit and place in training, for the everyday person it's often not very feasible besides your ever apparent statistical outliers.

Let's draw it back to the reason for NSM: for time crunched folks who have had a difficult time recovering from alternative or traditional training philosophies, leading to stagnation and injury.

As said in the book, doubles should be considered when you max out gains from singles, logistically. The amount of sleep and proper nutrition and LACK of real-life stress it takes to recover from double session days week after week is few and far between for most people. Heck, I find it hard to recover from singles sometimes because of how stressful my life is (I just run REALLY REALLY slow easy miles and taper back intensity or volume on Sub-T days if its needed). But I HAVE found consistency with it - moreso than in the past (running the same times but injured every few weeks).

If you have the luxury of optimal recovery just like the pro runners who do this for a job, be my guest. But doubles just realistically isnt sustainable year in and out for most folks (pro runners even periodize their training to prep their bodies for racing when doing doubles - they TAPER down). Besides HM and marathon specfic tapers, NSMers largely don't do an aggressive taper because the whole point IS long term repeatability.