How much Lactate Threshold work per week?

The 4x4 philosophy you refer to is IMO a too simple protocol based on just VO2 max training for less endurance developed people. From what I understand the Ingebrigtsens are not using this, but have rather taken the threshold philosophy to an extreme (and seem to have success with it) As a more VO2 max workout at around 5k pace, 4x4 can work. For threshold, I believe in much less rest. I do long and basically continuous threshold (4-9min reps with 20s jog rest) or short speedy 50-75sec reps and 30s jog. Or I alternate every 2 min around threshold pace or go continuous.

They do generally 60s rest, maybe 30s or at least shorter when @400m reps

I think your 14min race pace (6.40 based on your 5k)+ 10% could be your theoretical threshold pace = 7.20

Doing comfortable work at 7.40 is still very important to support a 7.20 so continue the good work. i think I would have kept the pace and gradually reduced the rest down to 1min

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:

The 4x4 philosophy you refer to is IMO a too simple protocol based on just VO2 max training for less endurance developed people. ...

Going forward, I hope to do several of the types of reps I described, spaced through-out the week (not necessarily seven per session), and see how it goes (including recovery), as sort-of a base-building philosophy. I may kick up the low/high Heart Rate alerts a bit, from the ones selected for today's session, and compare the paces that result.

This is actually turning out to be a type of 'easy interval method', as suggested earlier in the thread by 'eurodonkey'.

Maybe I'll hop into some races (or Time Trials) in a month or two, when the weather warms up, for the high intensity 'speed work'.

Thanks again for all of your insight and suggestions! I will refer back to this thread, and review all the good advice and comments given.

Of course, if you adjust the pace, this protocol can be used for different purposes, but it then just reduces to being 4x4min intervalls :-)

I support that "easy interval" thought. You might manage a lot of it and as I say, I would consider progressing the rest down first before the speed goes up

Well, here is something to consider. The total running time from today's session was ~75 minutes, with 28 of those minutes being at 'repetition intensity'. I could have instead gone out and spent this time slogging through a 75 minute easy run, for base building, but instead, I got some 'sort-of' fast running mixed in. Looking at it from that perspective, for base building, what does it matter if the rest is 3minutes, giving longer time for lactate clearance? And if I just keep the rest at 3 minutes when I notch up the average heart rate for the rep, then that is one less variable getting changed in the process, (for the purposes of evaluation) right? I should see the trend in heart rate recovery during the interval periods to provide some further insight which direction fitness is going.

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

I should see the trend in heart rate recovery during the interval periods to provide some further insight which direction fitness is going.

Indeed, going forward, maybe I should also note the average Heart Rate of the interval period (i.e., the time between reps). That is fine, if I consistently slow jog the interval periods, but today, I sometimes came to a complete stop in order to change shoes (Speed 6's, to VF's, back to Speed 6's).

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

...but today, I sometimes came to a complete stop in order to change shoes (Speed 6's, to VF's, back to Speed 6's).

EDIT: I meant AF's instead of VF's, for the session.

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

Well, here is something to consider. The total running time from today's session was ~75 minutes, with 28 of those minutes being at 'repetition intensity'. I could have instead gone out and spent this time slogging through a 75 minute easy run, for base building, but instead, I got some 'sort-of' fast running mixed in. Looking at it from that perspective, for base building, what does it matter if the rest is 3minutes, giving longer time for lactate clearance? And if I just keep the rest at 3 minutes when I notch up the average heart rate for the rep, then that is one less variable getting changed in the process, (for the purposes of evaluation) right? I should see the trend in heart rate recovery during the interval periods to provide some further insight which direction fitness is going.

I may be biased that my brain thinks long rest equals lost endurance benefits. I am wrong. Basically we strive for running continuous in any race distance. Never do we strive to be good at intervals. But intervals have shown to be superior to continuous training at fast paces, such as above threshold pace. The specificity/quality is on the spot, the volume can be held high and the impact can be minimized, meaning less recovery. But if the repetition pace is below or even at threshold pace, it is possible to do continuous training at the specific pace without risking long recovery. I think threshold pace is also well suited for repetitions and also at a step slower pace it can work well.

This all needs a well developed aerobic capacity so if this somewhat lacks, repetitions can work well for much slower paces, but eventually the rest is not really needed and as such is an opportunity to increase the quality of the workout by cutting unnecessary rest. Now, I like alternations and marathon training often do on/off work around M-pace. I also like mixing stuff such as you just did. that is excellent.

My point is that I would, when the aerobic capability is good, not waste 3min on slow recovery when I could start the next repetition earlier or do a slightly slower pace in the 3min as alternations. this all is given the pace you refer to now being below threshold

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:

....this all is given the pace you refer to now being below threshold

But this is one key point I hope to nail down: forgive me for being distracted enough to not be able to go out on the internet and try and get some concrete answers (and I don't follow social media), but it seems everybody around here seems to know what Ingbretsens are doing (besides me).

Can you, or someone, please point me to a document that specifically lays out what they are doing?? I'm venturing to say, that during winter training, their so-called 'lactate threshold training', is actually at relative paces to what I'm doing here, no?!?

I once heard Joe Vigil say at a clinic that top runners should run at least 35% of their weekly volume at 85% of vVO2 max.

This is slower than OP’s pace musings, probably more similar to M pace or easy tempo or Sub T or whatever people call fast comfortable runs these day, but its still a large number.

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:

....this all is given the pace you refer to now being below threshold

But this is one key point I hope to nail down: forgive me for being distracted enough to not be able to go out on the internet and try and get some concrete answers (and I don't follow social media), but it seems everybody around here seems to know what Ingbretsens are doing (besides me).

Can you, or someone, please point me to a document that specifically lays out what they are doing?? I'm venturing to say, that during winter training, their so-called 'lactate threshold training', is actually at relative paces to what I'm doing here, no?!?

Excellent share Seppo.

I believe they also try to keep a somewhat lower lactate the first of two sessions on the double days, but always lower than 3.

I have no meter so I base it on feel and some observation of the pace I can achieve over time, as well as HR. Earlier the FR645 gave me a LT HR estimate when I did hard workouts, but it stopped with that. Also my HR seems to have declined some, but my pace has not.

I just feel the possible onset of lactate and the feel of muscular work in my legs and the effect on the breathing. I have raced a lot in the range of 40-80 min so I kindof know some what a 30-40-50-60-70-80min race effort is by feel.

I think based on your watch and feel you are not quite certain of your threshold or 5k time just now. I would rather continue the "easy interval" concept at around 7.30 with the rest you feel you need and then progress IMO to lower rest (to 1min) and then progress them faster. In that process the threshold will move or your endurance at that pace improves. I would learn the feel over time, observe the HR, breathing, etc. If you race and break 20 for 5k it might be a good indication you should go faster at the thresholds.

CoachB wrote:

I once heard Joe Vigil say at a clinic that top runners should run at least 35% of their weekly volume at 85% of vVO2 max.

This is slower than OP’s pace musings, probably more similar to M pace or easy tempo or Sub T or whatever people call fast comfortable runs these day, but its still a large number.

You're missing the target; your post is incorrect.

adsfdasfasfsafadfa wrote:

Pretty sure Billat (i.e. the person who coined vvo2) used a 6 min test for vvo2 pace. But you are sort of splitting hairs.

Billat may have used 6min's but that is not to say Billat is correct in doing so. The previous standard was a 12 min test. The difference in velocity between a 6min test versus a 12min test is more than "splitting hairs". Consequently, any coach basing vVO2max off of the 6min test instead of the 12min test to structure their program might run into the prospect of over-training their athletes.

Here is a video from a fine high school coach, obviously steeped in USATF coaching principles, and he refers to the Cooper test:

Seppo Kaitenenn wrote:

https://www.sweatelite.co/ingebrigtsen-brothers-key-training-sessions/

Thanks, but that web page states, "[Important note: the example training blocks are leading up to races, so they’re the final 14 days leading into a key race.]"

So do you have information on their training during base (winter) phase, since the pacing is possibly different?

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:

I just feel the possible onset of lactate and the feel of muscular work in my legs and the effect on the breathing. I have raced a lot in the range of 40-80 min so I kindof know some what a 30-40-50-60-70-80min race effort is by feel..

You actually feel the onset of lactate creeping above 2mmol?!?

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:I think based on your watch and feel you are not quite certain of your threshold or 5k time just now.

No, instead, what I'm arriving at is that although people may THINK they know what is meant by 'Lactate Threshold training', in reality, the resultant paces of Lactate Threshold training as done by the Ingebrigtsen's are not necessarily what is classically thought of as Lactate Threshold paces in the United States, and it can make all the difference in the world! It is NOT splitting hairs, by any means, and it contradicts the old-school Daniels concept of 'ineffectively training in no-man's land'. This is not Lydiard, or Daniels training, and certainly not Critical VELOCITY training!

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:

I support that "easy interval" thought. You might manage a lot of it and as I say, I would consider progressing the rest down first before the speed goes up

But you are neglecting the fact that as one gets fitter, the speed (and distance covered in the same 4min time interval) goes up without even changing the HR targets of the rep.

bengel wrote:

Someone has already explained how the Ingebrigtsens are training, with a lot of threshold stuff.

Wisløff suggested to do 4*4 4-5 times a week to get high volume of interval. Be my guest.

What they suggest works extremely well for people who have suffered a heart attack or want bang for their bucks training three times a week. But they seem to claim that elites should be training this way. And btw 4*4 has been around for decades.

bengel also wrote on another thread:

In a 2012 interview (in Norwegian), he stresses that volume is important (95mpw) is important

in contrast to "some claims that high intensity interval training can be replace it).

This is what I meant by the remark that they don't take 4*4 seriously.

You may be getting lost in the definition of what exactly is "high intensity", when the term gets conflated with "Lactate Threshold" training, because historically in the United States, Lactate Threshold training is around the classic 4mmol point, which is typically around 91-92% HRmax. However, it appears Ingebrigtsen's guys are doing base 'Lactate Threshold repetitions' well below that intensity, (at least sometimes during the year) if they are keeping their Lactate below 3mmol!

This is a major point of confusion on this topic, evidence by the many questions regarding how they can do multiple lactate threshold reps and sessions per day, and on successive days! The answer is because the intensity of those reps is lower than what is generally assumed to be 'Lactate Threshold Pace'!

The 4x4min Protocol according to 'The Norwegian Method' can accommodate a tremendous range of paces (lactate values), since it prescribes anywhere from 85-95% HRmax. In addition, the relatively long 3minute period of recovery, according to the protocol, further modulates rise in lactate.

From that other thread, this study was cited, which looks at Ingebrigtsen's training:

A Longitudinal Case Study of the Training of the 2012 European 1500 m Track Champion

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257303297_A_Longitudinal_Case_Study_of_the_Training_of_the_2012_European_1500_m_Track_Champion

Table I of that study has some very interesting info, germane to this thread:

Zone 1: 0.7 -2.0 mmol = 62 - 82% HRmax (Easy Distance)

Zone 2: 2.0 - 4.0 mmol = 82-92% HRmax (Threshold)

Zone 3: 4.0 - 8.0mmol = 92-97% HRmax (Intervals/Hilwork)

Zone 4: >8.0 mmol = >97% HRmax (Anaerob)

Zone5: Speed work/Max speed

https://ibb.co/yB079Tv

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

Of note, my Garmin tells me (updated after yesterday's session) that my Lactate Threshold is 7:30/mile, 156bpm. It says my VO2max is 52, and here are predictions from its Race Predictor:

5k...20:04;

10k...42:20;

Half...1:37:21;

Marathon...3:46:34.

Conclusion: The Lactate Threshold of 7:30/mile prediction is 11.4% slower than current 5k fitness, and more in-line with the suggestion of 10-20% slower for LT reps. The 5k prediction is quite optimistic.

A little anecdotal data for you - I'm 71, run about 45-55 mpw with one hard threshold session per week of about 60 min, but I also was racing 5k-10k about once a month in 2019. My Garmin says my VO2max is 51. At 69, I ran 20:10 for 5k and 42:25 for 10k. At 70 (with some training hiccups) I ran 20:30 for 5k. The Race Predictor looks reasonably close to me. As someone said earlier in the thread, I find that recovery from the hard days is the most challenging training issue, and slightly more hard effort volume at a slightly lower intensity seems to be a more sustainable training approach. Great thread and discussion and lots of food for thought.