Also, did Gault (and Letsrun) just steal this idea for a story from Outside? yes..yes they did
-
95
-
Today we can conclude that Norwegian training method is working , 4 norwegian guys ran :
3:27.95 - today
3:29.47 - today
3:31.46
3:30.01
under 1 coach, bear in mind that this country with population of 5.5 milion and elevation a bit more than Atlantic ocean211 -
nothing new wrote:
double threshold is nothing new. it's just become a trendy fad recently.
a few years from now we'll be talking about something totally different.
Yes.10 years from now we will all admire the Dancan system by JS .Most of us will be surprised when suddenly all world records will be beaten by JS runners on 6 sessions per week.
1317 -
Runner10287 wrote:
Iron Bars wrote:
College programs are blindly adapting this. Well, double Threshold = Double injuries.
I would be interested in how and if colleges are incorporating this into the schedule. How they manage it with the NCAA rules on how much a team can officially be together, kids class schedules, less time available etc.
It's not that complicated. You have 20 hours a week. If you do workouts Tuesday and Friday, then adding an evening session means removing a day you'd meet for easy days. You call those "captain practices" and don't show up or take attendance. The team will show up if they want to that one day.
10 -
coachy wrote:
It's funny how everyone wants to talk about this. Maybe you get like an extra 1-5% better out of this? I think maybe you should focus on the other 95% first.
1% is probably 8-10 seconds in a 5k. So no, maybe this is part of the "95%" you describe.
10 -
I agree that running is moving away from that mentality (as shown with the double threshold days) but its still far from the norm and late to the party.
Perhaps "targeted" cross training is a better phrase. I'm talking getting on the bike with specific workouts targeting stuff like threshold, aerobic, VO2, max output.
As you said, running is weight bearing and therfore limits total volume and quality. Cycling, triathlon, swimming get in 20-30 hrs per week while us runners max out at 11 or 12. By doing something like cycling you can spend a lot more time in each training zone without risk of injury. This improves cardiac output, recovery ability, power, lean muscle mass, etc.
This guy used the bike to build a massive aerobic base that made him unstoppable. If 30+ hrs/week of aerobic training is useful for a 12 minute race imagine what it could do for a marathon?
Its a theory, but it just seems to me a lot is left on the table. It's proven that our bodies can handle significantly more stimulus than pure running can offer.
157 -
running is in the stone age wrote:
As you said, running is weight bearing and therfore limits total volume and quality. Cycling, triathlon, swimming get in 20-30 hrs per week while us runners max out at 11 or 12. By doing something like cycling you can spend a lot more time in each training zone without risk of injury. This improves cardiac output, recovery ability, power, lean muscle mass, etc.
Massively agree. Occasionally we see someone running 200mpw which is probably around 22hrs per week. But they're real outliers and rarely manage to do that for long. Now if you can run 13-15hrs per week relatively injury free, covering say 120 miles, why is no one bumping that up to 25hrs with cross training? Why is no one doing triple thresholds where the middle session is performed on a bike? The only people I see cross training are low mileage runners but I suspect something interesting could happen if high mileage runners start to add even more aerobic stimulus to their weeks as non-weight-bearing activities.
42 -
No runner has done more cross training than Galen Rupp under salazar (it seems).
No one has his training log, but he would do lots of afternoon sessions at 60% weight on the treadmill.
80 -
AndySmith wrote:
running is in the stone age wrote:
As you said, running is weight bearing and therfore limits total volume and quality. Cycling, triathlon, swimming get in 20-30 hrs per week while us runners max out at 11 or 12. By doing something like cycling you can spend a lot more time in each training zone without risk of injury. This improves cardiac output, recovery ability, power, lean muscle mass, etc.
Massively agree. Occasionally we see someone running 200mpw which is probably around 22hrs per week. But they're real outliers and rarely manage to do that for long. Now if you can run 13-15hrs per week relatively injury free, covering say 120 miles, why is no one bumping that up to 25hrs with cross training? Why is no one doing triple thresholds where the middle session is performed on a bike? The only people I see cross training are low mileage runners but I suspect something interesting could happen if high mileage runners start to add even more aerobic stimulus to their weeks as non-weight-bearing activities.
nobody is doing it because it doesn't work. running is a very complex, dynamic movement, and it's necessary to train specifically for the event. many people have tried hours of cross training and it can help with shedding weight and low level fitness but it doesn't help in improving the final 10%.
190 -
Surely if massive volume cross training equalled running success then triathletes would all be world beating runners?
190 -
Nice tri wrote:
Surely if massive volume cross training equalled running success then triathletes would all be world beating runners?
Triathletes only run about 40mpw, and do most of their aerobic work on the bike - lower risk, most of the reward. I don't see any triathletes emphasizing run training
23 -
what but I thought wrote:
Burrito Track Club fan wrote:
Always amuses me to read that Bakken's approach ("double threshold") is nothing new in training. It absolutely is something new and before Bakken nobody ever trained like this.
It isn't new. Bakken used it 20 years ago. People have been running multiple threshold runs for a very long time. Paavo Nurmi was doing multiple hard efforts in the same day in the 1920's. There is nothing new.
Perhaps, but we shouldn't minimize what Bakken did, which was to carefully study this approach as applied to himself, and figure out what really worked.
That said, there is more that Bakken has only hinted at -- not many specifics about in-season training and race prep, his use of strength training and plyos, etc.
90 -
drinkmorewine wrote:
Nice article. One thing that I haven't been able to find good discussion on is how double thresholds can be used in marathon training. Most of the discussions are on 1500m-10000m runners. Would be curious to know if anyone has links or thoughts on the application of this to marathon training, including changes to volume for the sessions.
Wouldn't it be something similar to Canova training (long reps AND fast)? I may be wrong, I'm just guessing here. I know very little.
00 -
I did like the breakdown for this. For marathon volume they would probably change it to longer reps (recovery dependent on other factors)
In the sample training week provided in the paper, the four threshold interval workouts are:
-Tuesday morning: 5 x 6:00 at 2.5 mmol/L with 1:00 recovery
-Tuesday evening: 10 x 1,000 meters at 3.5 mmol/L with 1:00 recovery
-Thursday morning: 5 x 2,000 meters at 2.5 mmol/L with 1:00 recovery
-Thursday evening: 25 x 400 meters at 3.5 mmol/L with 0:30 recovery
For that last workout, the authors report observing “international level distance runners” running the 400-meters reps in 64 seconds while keeping lactate below 4.0 mmol/L. That’s just over 4:16 mile pace, which is quite a bit faster than what we usually think of as “threshold,” even for top runners. But the interval structure keeps it from becoming a sufferfest that will take too long to recover from.This post was edited 45 seconds after it was posted.60 -
Emo Zapotec wrote:
Middle aged hobby jogger (from Cali) wrote:
great article! Think I'm gonna start doing this and get hella fast. The guys at the park run won't know what hit em!
Did you chuckle to yourself as you typed this out?
Tell us what life is like in Des Moines, IA.
The ‘S’s are silent, but the city is buzzing
20 -
nothing new wrote:
most important part of the article:
“Good athletes are going to run well when they believe in the system in which
they’re training and they’re healthy and ready to go on race day,” Rosario
says. “There’s no magic bullet. There never was and there never will be. You
can see that with Ingebrigtsen vs. Wightman. They train very differently and
yet they’re the two best in the world.”If we classify 1500m athletes by their 800m PB, we find that both Wightman and Kerr are right up there with the best of the best for their ability to convert 800m speed to 1500m speed (see linked chart):
Yet no one is showing the same interest in Wightman or Kerr's training, which is perhaps understandable given that the Double Threshold approach appears to be well suited to those without elite 800m speed, needing to convert at a very high percentage (e.g. the Ingebrigtsens and the OAC boys).
60 -
Maybe I'm slow but I don't understand where they get the speed from. From what I understand the double threshold training is doing two workouts in a day at 'threshold pace'. From what I read Jakob does this twice a week and a hill workout but I don't see where he would get that 1500 speed. Can anyone please explain this to me?
04 -
just trying to understand wrote:
Maybe I'm slow but I don't understand where they get the speed from. From what I understand the double threshold training is doing two workouts in a day at 'threshold pace'. From what I read Jakob does this twice a week and a hill workout but I don't see where he would get that 1500 speed. Can anyone please explain this to me?
the hill workout of 200s is in the base phase. in season they do more specific track work like 10x300m at 1500m pace. or 400s even at 1500 pace (and faster). they compensate for this by reducing the amount of double threshold they do. oftentimes the double threshold sessions become single threshold sessions, just enough to maintain the base that was built in the winter.
91 -
I suspect that Daniel Komen ,Noah Ngeny and Moses Kiptanui were using double threshold in 1990s,perhaps in a less sophisticated way.In anycase,they trained 3 times a day instead of the now common twice a day.I suspect Kenenisa Bekele did too.Perhaps more research should be done to correctly trace the origin and not just make quick conclusions and assumptions.
04 -
running is in the stone age wrote:
I agree that running is moving away from that mentality (as shown with the double threshold days) but its still far from the norm and late to the party.
Perhaps "targeted" cross training is a better phrase. I'm talking getting on the bike with specific workouts targeting stuff like threshold, aerobic, VO2, max output.
As you said, running is weight bearing and therfore limits total volume and quality. Cycling, triathlon, swimming get in 20-30 hrs per week while us runners max out at 11 or 12. By doing something like cycling you can spend a lot more time in each training zone without risk of injury. This improves cardiac output, recovery ability, power, lean muscle mass, etc.
This guy used the bike to build a massive aerobic base that made him unstoppable. If 30+ hrs/week of aerobic training is useful for a 12 minute race imagine what it could do for a marathon?
Its a theory, but it just seems to me a lot is left on the table. It's proven that our bodies can handle significantly more stimulus than pure running can offer.
Well, I don't see any triathletes running sub 27 in the 10k...
20
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun