Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

For those that have used this training for a while, I’m looking for experiences transitioning into marathon training. I have the book, so I’ve seen the “special block” but I’m also interested in experiences other have had using this as a base phase and then transitioned into a “traditional” plan like pfitz. I responded very well to a pfitz HM plan and am debating the best approach for a fall marathon. Will be my first marathon.

I think this might actually be a cult at this point. A few thread pages ago I posted about how Cam Myers heart rate was in the 150s at 4:20 pace as a 13 min 5k runner. His heart rate was not under 70% of max and it almost never is ( his max is 206). Would you say that he's going too fast on his easy runs? Obviously not. If trying to stay under 70% of heart rate has you going 7min/km as a 19 minute guy, wouldn't it make sense reevaluate the rule rather than try to doggedly smash your head against it? Even Sirpoc never says you MUST do anything he says, he just gave us the tools to make informed decisions ourselves

That's why for anyone thinking their easy runs may be 'too slow' (though I agree with the cultists here that it's almost never too slow and it's just an ego problem), 65% of 5k speed is a better max cap and provides the linear relationship between race pace and easy pace that so many people crave. For a 19 min 5k guy, the max they would run then would be 5:50/km, which is much more respectable

70% max HR is just a guideline. The real, hard rule is: You *must* run slowly enough on easy days that you recover in time for the next workout. With 3 workouts and an easy-pace long run every week forever, it's surprisingly easy to mess things up. What seems easy after 3 weeks, turns out to be too intense after 3 months. Or you hit a plateau because you're wasting too much intensity on easy runs instead of using it to progress workouts.

So, no worries. Let everyone figure out their own physiology. If you can run your easy days a bit faster than predicted and still recover in time, go for it! We won't stop you.

But we've heard over and over again from people who have started off running easy days too fast and then had to slow down. I've had to do it twice over myself. A year ago when I thought I was doing it right, I was around 4:50/km on easy days (and I was around 18:30 for 5K). Now I've realized that 5:25/km is a lot closer to the pace I have to run if I'm going to be ready for tomorrow's workout.

The 70% MHR guideline is a pretty good ballpark figure for a lot of people. Don't knock it until you're ~6 months in to NSM.

You're thinking about this wrong. NSA is more than just a set of prescribed workouts. The part about ramp rate is crucial, but everyone skips over it.

If you're currently doing about 6 hours of volume in total each week, that's great. Start with that. But if you're not already doing 90 minutes of volume at pace, don't jump into 3 x 30-minute sub-T sessions! If you do, of course you'll be overcooked after a few weeks.

Let's say you're currently doing a Daniels 20-minute tempo run and 6 x 800 at 5K pace each week. That's around 42 minutes of volume at pace per week.

So start there. 3 x 14 minute sessions, at very manageable sub-T intensities. 5 x 3 minutes, 2 x 6 minutes, 1 x 10 minutes + 5 minutes, for example. The rest is easy miles.

Then add 2-3 minutes of volume (in total for all three sessions, not per session) at pace each week. The idea is to keep it so gradual that you barely notice. And in 3-6 months, you'll be up to 3 x 30 minute sessions each week. Or build up even more slowly.

We're not teenagers trying to hit a big time by the end of the season, or elites who have one shot at the race of a lifetime. We're boring adult hobby joggers who can spend months or years if we want, slowly building up weekly training load. It's our secret weapon.

Ya, I think after 6 months when you have a decent aerobic base experimenting is fine.

People seem to lump all easy runs together but over time I've tweaked the easy days looking at each a little differently. For example, using a Tue, Thur, Sat subt day model...

Wed/Fri: I stay below 70% & have no desire to go faster since I'm tired from the day before & need to be ready for tomorrow. Day after 3 min reps (Fri) my legs are the most tired so this is my slowest run of the week & even then I struggle to keep below 70% so I just shorten the mileage & go by time. It's a junk day in my mind. Get it over with & drink some Fri night beers.

Sun: long run I go more by RPE & end up between 71-76%, a gentle progressive pace. I usually don't care to go above this (unless it's really muggy), or slower. With 2 days until next subt, I've found I can run this pace & still easily be rested for Tue. I also recover much better on weekends than weekdays.

Mon: I usually keep around 69-71%. It's part of the 2 day break from subt days & I usually feel good & rested that day already. Another reason I think pushing long run a touch is fine.

I actually see the “cultish” part of the thread being an asset. In that the cultishness really is just pointing people back to the basic principles that work for most people. We all think we’re special and the basic rules don’t apply to us but by definition most of us are wrong.
the cultishness means unless you can bring some proof to the thread the “what-ifs” don’t really get much traction. we’re all tempted to make improvements but it’s good to get reminded of the basics.

The cult has shown they’re open to people who come in, shown they understand the basic program and have made modifications to the program with reasons that are consistent with the principles and catered to someone’s specific situation and acknowledge “hey I’m trying something different because that’s what I think works for me. I’m not going to pretend the basic principles are wrong” as those tweaks gain more followers and success stories they become branches off the main program.

The people who run into issues are the ones who may have good intentions but they come in and say hey what about making this change, I haven’t tried it and have no solid reason for why it would work but I just feel like it’s better. (The classic this program would be better with speedwork, even though I haven’t tried it) Or I think this principle is wrong because i don’t think it applies to me (I say everyone should run their EZ days as fast as I do because I do it and I’m fine!) Or they know someone who’s had success, training in a way that doesn’t match the program. (This obviously isn’t the only way to train and no one is forced to train this way) as an adjunct to that one obviously this training program has a pretty specific application which is adult hobbyjoggers in a specific ability and training tkme window (Cam Meyers is one of the best runners in the world, this program is obviously not for him)

Is not about change the method. I follow it strictly myself and it works very well for me. I have the 70% rule for all my easy runs (more like 65%).
But my arguments are not really made up. On the reddit forum people writes all the time that they struggle to keep their easy pace under 70%. That they have to go down to almost walking paces even if they are reasonable fast runners.

My thoughts on this is simply that they maybe have set their maxHR wrong. However I know for sure, slower runners with no sports background that their max HR during a 5 or 10k does not differ much from their slower runs.

There's tons of modifications to this method that have worked, including the marathon bolt on, or adjusting it to cross training, or even 5-6 days, even just two workouts a week. But I'm yet to be convinced anyone really has made a case for running easy runs over 70% other than because they want to.

You'd have to broadly agree with the principle that easy running under 70% max (albeit an arbitrary figure) seems work incredible well as a buffer between workout days, for just about everyone.

Nobody is saying your life depends on sticking to this. But the easy intensity along with a controlled ramp rate I'm firmly off the belief will keep you going for months, if not years. In fact, I think this is exactly why this is working for people over a long period of time.

I could probably easily do a month, at 75% MHR for my easy days. I'm sure, at that point, I would need 7-10 days deloading as I will have accrued too much fatigue. How do I know this? This was the perpetual cycle I was in for years before NSM and not understanding that easy running is actually the biggest problem of any system, NOT the intensity of the workouts I was doing.

Before there was a book I copied the stuff from the thread here 1:1. This was early enough I guess sirpoc hadn't even thought of a marathon yet.

So went from 7 months of NSM to Pitfz. Was a shock to the system. Topical debate, but easy running was a lot harder, the MLR was incredible hard in the middle of the week and quite intensity happy. I feel NSM gave me a good base and I did make it through, which is a risk with pitfz, but I don't think I ran my best race. I probably needed a much longer taper. I was overcooked with a month to go.

Last marathon I did I used the NSM book block. Felt a lot easier in the build, felt stronger in the race and the result was practically the same. The big advantage for me is I never doubted I would make the start line and wasn't fighting myself in the race. The big problem you will find is going from NSM back to another plan will likely feel harder, which is normal as anything else is more periodized and focused on the here and now.

Tbh, if you are pushing easy days or thinking "I could squeeze out a bit more on these easy days" time and time again for those of us who have been around this for a while can tell you that is the first step to the wheels coming off.

Just run really easy. So easy you can at least stick to the schedule for 6+ months. For most people that's going to be well south of 70% MHR, which is just a nice cap and one most (not all) elites seem to stick to as well. Of course those who don't, might have a better understanding of their physiology or make up. Most people who pick up NSM have no clue and the more they are reigned in the better.

Well, did you ask them if their mhr was wrong? Maybe they are just complaining and exaggerating because they dont like to see those kinds of paces on their strava.

You really expect someone to just do the same training non stop for 6 months? That is just pure stupidity.

It's not hypothetical. This whole discussion started because a 19min 5k guy has been running his easy runs at 7min/km, reduced his total volume and probably running the ST sessions too slow and wondering why he got slower after 7 months of this (page 611).

And people are saying he should be running at 7min/km if that means keeping his HR under 70%. I know critical thinking is not allowed in cults, but this is wild.

That's why NSM works. It's the whole point. You sacrifice peaking for races, you leave periodization on the table for constant and consistent gains. You are, in effect, doing the same thing over and over with a tiny ramp rate.

It works because over X period, you spread out the load in a way where you controlled the fatigue more than having big weeks and and then down weeks. By the end of X period, you did the most training you could without leaving much on the table given the time you have.

It's the idea of all year round fitness, which cyclists have come around to for a while now and even runners are. It's also why people are having such good success. Over this X amount of time they are very lieky doing more than they could, via most other training methods.

There is a much bigger picture here often folks just aren't understanding, outside of just the framework laid out. Which is surprising, as I read the book and it explains it very well.

Sure I have, but Reddit gets kind of messy fast with messages. Some people use 220 minus age. I guess most people just use the max their watch have noted once.

I dont think this is an ego thing about strava at all. I think people are trying to follow the method and the 70% rule. A rule that is based on that you actually know your heart rate.

For a real fast runner it does not matter that much. If they follow 70% rule its going to be slow enough, and its Not going to be near walking paces. But for the midpack of runners it can get too slow if their maxHR is set maybe 20 beats wrong. Wouldn you agree to that?

Imagine being this hung up on your easy paces. Running along, everything checks out: it feels easy, the heart rate confirms what you feel. But what is that? My pace is xx min/km? Oh no, better pick it up by a minute! Who are you racing?

Finally some reason=)

Lol, I have to stop feeding the troll, but yeah, its smart to have your MHR in the right ballpark.

whats the point of running 7 min/km if 6 min/km is real easy for you?