Norwegian Endurance Training

I think there is a misconception about the polarized method that it should be easy volume and HARD intensity. I see that many use a polarized model but not doing HARD, but threshold. I think most actually do easy volume + a smaller part with intensity, but more in a wider specter from threshold and into hard.

I do not see a lot of moderate training though. Maybe someone brings their easy volume into moderate or that some ease down the thresholds towards moderate, but mostly it is a more or less easy volume + smaller volume of faster work. It is different based on competition time. Triathlon is long endurance, while nordic skiing or running is shorter.

Skiing and cycling can train much more time due to low impact and running is special there.

Completely agree with Jon Arne Glomsrud on the polarized model used by the likes of Tveiten and Ingebrigtsen groups is different from the one proposed by Seiler. There is quite a bit of work done by Leif Inge Tjelta on Ingebrigtsen training, although it maybe focuses more on the base (preparation) period training. According to data in papers they do around 70-75% of training below AeT (aerobic threshold) and 25-30% mostly around AnT (anaerobic threshold), where one session (hills) would be above AnT and 4 sessions would be in between AeT and AnT during preparation week. According to latest Gjert's interview and his latest book, that has changed a bit for Jakob as he is at the level where it's difficult to further improve.

For Tveiten/Bu, I think there are some related studies published at least related to heat adaptation (or so he told in one of the podcasts), but not sure if there is much more. Their training is also similar to Ingebrigtsens in terms of focusing most of quality sessions in between AeT and AnT. From the podcasts, they do around 7-8 quality sessions a week. Coaches also stress specificity, ie if they are preparing for IM, they will do more work at AeT, if for 70.3, then more on AnT. Athletes are available on Strava, so you can look there as well. They also do some sandwich workouts, ie start with some volume at threshold and then add some at VO2max intensity which is more specific to OD. I would also look at slowtwich boards for some discussions on Tveiten/Norwegian triathletes.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Leif-Inge-Tjelta

https://scientifictriathlon.com/category/podcast/

- at least 4 podcasts with Arild Tveiten and Olav Aleksander Bu, also multiple with the athletes themselves.

Just to add an unrelated but at the same time, I feel, very relevant quote from Alistair Brownlee on his training. was that he basically does as much volume as he can, as long as he can recover and do the key sessions properly. Which is consistent with Norwegians, although they are more scientific and advanced in their intensity control.

User5522Norway wrote:

Hello Guys,

I have a question regarding norwegian endurance training. (not just the ingebrigsten)

Like all norwegian endurance training.

Do you know, are there any good books / information online, that I can read?

Could also be on norwegian triathlon training, skiing etc...

Would love some help :)

Take care guys

Here is one reading for you.

Maybe including a link would be helpful:

https://www.mariusbakken.com/training-corner/kenyan-training/kenyan-training-a-practical-guide.html

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:

I think there is a misconception about the polarized method that it should be easy volume and HARD intensity. I see that many use a polarized model but not doing HARD, but threshold. I think most actually do easy volume + a smaller part with intensity, but more in a wider specter from threshold and into hard.

I do not see a lot of moderate training though. Maybe someone brings their easy volume into moderate or that some ease down the thresholds towards moderate, but mostly it is a more or less easy volume + smaller volume of faster work.

How would you define "moderate training" in terms of HR?

Norwegians define moderate as zone 3 (12-13 out of 20 in perceived effort / "comfortably hard".)

Source:

https://olt-skala.nif.no/

https://olt-skala.nif.no/ung

(simplified)

Run6556 wrote:

Norwegians define moderate as zone 3 (12-13 out of 20 in perceived effort / "comfortably hard".)

Source:

https://olt-skala.nif.no/https://olt-skala.nif.no/ung

(simplified)

Thanks.

Is zone 3 not threshold?

What I am querying, is that they do lots of threshold , but no moderate training? Not sure how the difference between moderate and threshold is defined, are they not close together?

Per podcasts with Tveiten he states that for easy runs/rides the goal is for lactate to be below 1.0mmol. Moderate from his view (my understanding) would be the intensity between 1.0 and 2.0mmol. However, here is caveat, I used 2mmol as marker for AeT (aerobic threshold), however, the actual value can and will vary between individuals, same applies to generalized usage of 4mmol as AnT marker.https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/Low_intensity_vs_high_intensity__P7097709-2/ poster in above post provided Arild's quote from one of the podcasts:

I disagree about your description of their LT2 being “sweet spot” instead of MLSS.

I think they believe (as does Gjert clearly), that their MLSS = LT2 is much lower than 4. This is because they do so much long easy training their threshold lactate value is lower than the 4.0 found in untrained subjects. I think this is because VLa max is lower but I don’t understand that concept that well.

It is not important what the exact value is, as that will differ from person to person. What matters is that it is just under the individuals threshold value so that they can accumulate a lot of volume and still recover from it for the next session.

Alfie wrote:

Run6556 wrote:

Norwegians define moderate as zone 3 (12-13 out of 20 in perceived effort / "comfortably hard".)

Source:

https://olt-skala.nif.no/https://olt-skala.nif.no/ung

(simplified)

Thanks.

Is zone 3 not threshold?

What I am querying, is that they do lots of threshold , but no moderate training? Not sure how the difference between moderate and threshold is defined, are they not close together?

As I understand, some of the best skiers in Norway do threshold work in the moderate zone rather than in the hard zone. So, I guess also zone 3 is considered threshold for some in Norway.

Max HR 82-87 is zone 3 in Norway. For my own sake, if I'm running a 5 x 2 km threshold session, I will often start by zone 3 and be moving over in zone 4 during the laps. Perhaps the two last laps will be mostly zone 4.

Something like this example:

Lap 1 - starting in 82 %, gliding up towards 87 % (i.e. pure zone 3)

Lap 2 - starting in 84 %, gliding over 87 (mostly zone 3)

Lap 3 - maybe begin in zone 3 but mostly zone 4 (up to 88 %, i.e. into zone 4)

Lap 4 - maybe one minute in zone 3, thereafter zone 4)

Lap 5- pure zone 5

Alfie wrote:

How would you define "moderate training" in terms of HR?

For me approx: 78-85% of max HR. In terms of pace, from 7-17% slower than 1h threshold pace. I do the easiest thresholds in the transition towards high moderate.

peekay wrote:

I disagree about your description of their LT2 being “sweet spot” instead of MLSS.

I think they believe (as does Gjert clearly), that their MLSS = LT2 is much lower than 4. This is because they do so much long easy training their threshold lactate value is lower than the 4.0 found in untrained subjects. I think this is because VLa max is lower but I don’t understand that concept that well.

It is not important what the exact value is, as that will differ from person to person. What matters is that it is just under the individuals threshold value so that they can accumulate a lot of volume and still recover from it for the next session.

I suspect 3.5 comes also partly from Marius Bakken (13.06 5k) who have inspired the training. Gjert recently explained he had talked to Marius on several occations, listening especially to his wrongdoings in his training. Marius has himself said that he investigated the lactate levels of top athletes when they were in great shape and found it was more 3.5 than 4. When Marius targeted 3.5 max in threshold training, his performance improved well and he quickly reached 3.5 as threshold. I guess Ingebrigtsens have observed their level and the effect themselves to confirm 3.5 max.

peekay wrote:

I disagree about your description of their LT2 being “sweet spot” instead of MLSS.

I think they believe (as does Gjert clearly), that their MLSS = LT2 is much lower than 4. This is because they do so much long easy training their threshold lactate value is lower than the 4.0 found in untrained subjects. I think this is because VLa max is lower but I don’t understand that concept that well.

It is not important what the exact value is, as that will differ from person to person. What matters is that it is just under the individuals threshold value so that they can accumulate a lot of volume and still recover from it for the next session.

That was not my comment but comment from slowtwitch.

I agree and it seems consistent with Tveiten’s comments in podcasts, that their (Blu, Iden) AnT threshold lactate values are closer to 3 than 4, while AeT is closer to 1 rather than 2. Part of me wonders if it is at least partialy due to them being pretty long (in terms of duration which will be around 110min+ for anything from OD) endurance athletes and that it could look different for others. Not sure if say Ingebrigtsen threshold is closer to 3 or 4 or other number since their focus is on 3.5 to 13 minutes duration races.

Side note, my threshold intervals (ie 8-10 x 3’ eith 1’ rest) will have an average HR of around 84% hrmax and HR will get to around 90% hrmax at the highest. Admittedly, I am not a highly trained individual, with larger portion of FT fibers (some studies on cyclists showed that for cyclist with the same vo2max, threshold will be lower for those with more FT) and I have only been able crosscheck intensity with lactate meter handful times. I also do not like to push in the workouts :)

Got it. Yes I agree with you.

My guess is those triathlon guys are lower and the Ingebrigtsen brothers are closer to 3.5 because they are training for the 1500m and including the hills etc to maintain their ability to produce some lactate.

The translated interview with Gjert in the other thread shows him talking about a variety of reasons that the threshold lactate level could be lower. All very interesting.

Have you had success with this type of training?