Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Haha it's just the classic case of comparing yourself to people on Strava

I'm an NSA devotee through and through. It's helped me take off over 2 mins off my 5k in the past year. Easy runs always under 67% of max heart rate. Only thing I do differently is 2 x 100m strides before workouts. I just like to push back on this thread from time to time because it can get a bit cult-ish

What a very strange post.

This is literally the go to for anyone who doesn't like the answers they are given, even if it's based on thousands of other users experiences.

Oh the irony.

Tbh, hard to disagree with this. I posted a while back about easy running for instance. My issue was that I didn't want to "hear" that 75% of MHR likely isn't easy, or sustainable. But for the most part, people were correct and this caught up with me whilst trying to do 3 sessions a week. Now I just don't worry about easy paces, stick to am easy intensity marker and the whole thing became better. This is just one of many examples where we can use the sheer mass of people in the thread to guage what most of what is laid out here, is as close to optimal that we need to worry about.

At it's heart, the method is very easy. But that's also it's strong point. It's weak point is that people get bored easily, so tinker around, or mess around, even when all the evidence of long term success is people who stick to this unglamorous routine for a long, long time. But that does require patience. There's really no short cut. It's been said a million times, you do not have to train like this but if you do, the window is pretty narrow to balance an intensity you can do weekly to infinity, but enough work that gets you fitter. Whether we like that or not, the guardrails are narrow. But this is the key point, sweet spot training has to have narrow guidelines, the clue is in the name.

For guys like sirpoc and cheetodust, this is perfect. They train and get on with their day. But this has led to fantastic consistency in middle age. I now fall into that camp. It takes the stress out of the whole thing and any of the changes I made were either for the sake of clinging onto comforts of sessions i did in the past, or like Harpoonz has posted the habit for thinking speed is the key to everything. It was hard, very hard, to drop those views. But my current performance is lifetime best, as much as my ego is butt hurt, I was probably wrong in most of my assumptions about this being a fad of training, too simple etc. you know, the usual criticisms.

I’m a devotee through and through, but y’all are cult members.

I think the bit you have bolded is actually a really excellent point. Sirpoc learned basically everything he laid out from time crunched sweet spot training on the bike and re-framed his own success in a different life for running. It's worth remembering sweet spot is pretty narrow range and why probably the closer you stick to what's laid out likely the better. I actually think we all probably overlook this or don't really appreciate it's importance.

Just want to say thank you Sirpoc.

I recently ran a 3 mile TT (I have to take a fitness test every year for my job - and a 3 mile run is part of it). And I ran a lifetime pb of 18:54. This was a completely solo out and back.

Apart from building aerobic fitness, two other major things this system brings to the table. First, if you are honest with yourself, you know exactly where your fitness is. I called my pace and knew exactly where I was. No magic, no guessing. Second, is intensity control. I just jumped right back into easy/Subthreshold afterwards. Before NSA, the intensity races brought - even 5K's - would tip me over the edge. The increased fatigue would always lead to small pains that eventually led to having to cut back training or injury. I'm older so I have to be careful.

Again, thank you Sirpoc. NSA works.

If you want to see a true cult, check out Steve Palladino on Facebook yesterday and the tilt he is on that sirpoc craps on Stryd.

Stryd users can be the worst, as the only mostly the ones left are the ones it works for. Ignoring all the users that have posted here or elsewhere explaining it doesn't for them. They just can't accept that is possible lol

Personally I think this thread is pretty balanced. There's a ton that's changed from the first 50 pages or what has been learned or adapted. I've learned plenty from adapted schedules or cross training, even the specificity of the marathon has come out of this thread in the middle pages.

It really does still provide useful information. We go through periods of ups and downs with it but it's hanging in strong.

It's also the natural home for it. Sure there are trolls, but LRC is pretty democratic. Yes it can get toxic, but if a thread is popular it can rise back to the first page. This would have never have all happened if this was on advanced running or similar on Reddit.

Who says?

A range like 2.3-3.0 mmol/L lactate (with individual variations) isn't a narrow range?

then you're missing out on a lot of easy gain from "reasonable easy runs". Peter Coe said that you don't gain any aerobic benefit from running at lower than 65% MHR. 70% is better, but 75% is optimal. Salazar also said you only burn calories by running that slow. I

used to believe in slow easy runs as well until I plateaued at 18 mins 5k, and after I brought my easy runs 1-2 notches up (4:50-5:00 per km instead of 5:30-5:40, 70-75% MHR instead of 65%) and it came down to 16 in a span of 4 months. I still felt (and still do) fresh for my workouts and aerobically I have become much stronger.

I think taller people have an advantage in some races--I am 5'2'' and it's a struggle at times, although my cadence is 200+ and I get better at improving my stride as well.

Good point from cheetodust on doing longer reps too, I found out 3x8 or longer worked for me due to not starting/stopping as much, less mechanical load on my body and less injury risk. I just adjusted the paces correspondingly.

My EZ runs are now 9:30-ish and they feel truly great, but I am just happy I can do ST every 48 hours with NO injury or niggles. Active warmups before each ST session though (5-10 mins. each) are huge. No static stretching either. Band work too. Need to do weights though at some point to withstand the pounding of longer races.

The mods would have deleted this thread faster than you could have said "Ingebrigtsen."

Did he run strides or some 150-200meters when he run that 3:46?

Lol is Palladino still going? Legit might be the biggest grifter on the internet/in the running scene. Some of plans he gets away with selling you could find in 10 seconds as basic guides on cycling websites. I've read a few of his papers. A complete and utter mess. Hopefully people have finally stopped giving him money. His balls deep in Stryd, his whole shill depends on it.

There's really no evidence for just about any of what you have posted. We are running into old wives tales from coaches again at elite level.

Btw, you absolutely didn't go from 18 to 16 just because you ran your easy days a bit faster as the single reason in isolation. That's an astronomical jump in just 4 months. The only time I have really made a gain like that without changing too much is weight loss.

Because it is. The clue is in the name and the fact for cyclists it's just really a few % either way of a fixed point. That is narrow. The entire thread is built on this premise.

Run too easy, you are in the territory of an LT1 workout. Which is nice, but more a good set up for a double in the morning, but not what you are looking for with 3x sessions a week to maximise fitness on limited time.

Run too hard, you cooked yourself and you will likely struggle to manage 3 workouts over the next period of X amount of time.