People have been doing double workouts for decades.
Everybody is now trying to run double threshold days even though they only run 30 miles per week. This is getting silly.
There is very little fundamental innovation in training principles. As you said, “double threshold” is pure sophistry. Old wine in a new bottle, a smoke and mirrors shell game. A prime example - “critical velocity”.
People have been doing double workouts for decades.
Everybody is now trying to run double threshold days even though they only run 30 miles per week. This is getting silly.
There is very little fundamental innovation in training principles. As you said, “double threshold” is pure sophistry. Old wine in a new bottle, a smoke and mirrors shell game. A prime example - “critical velocity”.
Double threshold is great to squeeze in extra volume at threshold but you can do that in several different ways. A lot of people would benefit more by simply running more mileage and getting stronger.
There is very little fundamental innovation in training principles. As you said, “double threshold” is pure sophistry. Old wine in a new bottle, a smoke and mirrors shell game. A prime example - “critical velocity”.
In cycling FTP is quite established, this is not so the case with running. Running could use CV and provide the running intensities in %CV, instead of %FTP for cycling.
With that idea, the discussions would stop what another guy means with tempo or threshold run. This forum is a great example. They had the same problematic in cycling and FTP was a solution.
You can tell by the up and down votes in this thread and any other thread on double threshold training that everybody thinks it is the holy grail. People are obsessed with double threshold because Jakob is doing it. I’m seeing a ton of people trying double threshold and most of them aren’t having nearly the same success as Jakob. Many are only getting marginally faster. A lot are getting injured. Some are getting worse.
I think what is more important than "double threshold" is the measurement of lactate levels during a workout. Fine tuning training to where an athlete is actually running repetitions in their actual threshold range is the key.
If one is running a double "threshold" day without measuring lactate and trying to hit a given "threshold pace" is missing the point.
Yes, a double workout day will generally improve fitness, but optimizing lactate threshold training by measuring lactate levels will precisely improve fitness.
People are still doing CV workouts, they just consider them to be "threshold" work now.
But CV is supposed to be a tad faster than lactate threshold. The rationale with CV (whether right or wrong) is that it is a pace between LT & VO2 Max, and theoretically improves both at once.
There is no Holy Grail in running. Most runners benefit most (improve more, stay healthier) from consistency and plenty of variety.
You can tell by the up and down votes in this thread and any other thread on double threshold training that everybody thinks it is the holy grail. People are obsessed with double threshold because Jakob is doing it. I’m seeing a ton of people trying double threshold and most of them aren’t having nearly the same success as Jakob. Many are only getting marginally faster. A lot are getting injured. Some are getting worse.
Agreed. People need to remember that Jakob started serious training at 9-10 years old. He has a huge foundation of solid training (even at age 22), so he can handle workloads that your average runner (and even many elites) can't handle.
With that said, I think for most competitive runners that a Threshold focus for most of the year may be a good thing. For your average competitor, a couple of threshold sessions + one higher quality workout (like Jakob's hill reps, or possibly some 200s at mile effort), and a longer run, would be good, but most runners would probably benefit from spreading these workouts out over 9-10 days (rather than using the typical 7 day week). This kind of training should be sustainable indefinitely for most competitive runners. If you want to sharpen-up for a goal race(s), you could do a few weeks of some specific workouts.
I think what is more important than "double threshold" is the measurement of lactate levels during a workout. Fine tuning training to where an athlete is actually running repetitions in their actual threshold range is the key.
If one is running a double "threshold" day without measuring lactate and trying to hit a given "threshold pace" is missing the point.
Yes, a double workout day will generally improve fitness, but optimizing lactate threshold training by measuring lactate levels will precisely improve fitness.
How did Bekele manage without measuring his lactate level every few minutes?
Lactate threshold is a metabolic state, not a single pace. A lot of what is considered threshold work now is short intervals faster than traditional LT pace. Otherwise, I completely agree with you.
Lactate threshold is a metabolic state, not a single pace. A lot of what is considered threshold work now is short intervals faster than traditional LT pace. Otherwise, I completely agree with you.
Agreed! That's why lactate measurement is a nice tool. On a day to day basis, lactate threshold can occur at different paces.