Its different because you only tested once the lactate in the second workout.. so you don't get the evolution through the reps as you do with HR and pace. So your lactate testing on workout 2 is absolutely meaningless for the purpose of your study ( though it made sense for you since you want to control your threshold via lactate)
HR and lactate value several month aparts I don't remember anyone pretending there should be any correlation so you are not disproving or proving anything. Your lactate curve and HR curves have shifted in the meantime.
Its different because you only tested once the lactate in the second workout.. so you don't get the evolution through the reps as you do with HR and pace. So your lactate testing on workout 2 is absolutely meaningless for the purpose of your study ( though it made sense for you since you want to control your threshold via lactate)
HR and lactate value several month aparts I don't remember anyone pretending there should be any correlation so you are not disproving or proving anything. Your lactate curve and HR curves have shifted in the meantime.
I also question whether lactate is useful at all other than delineating metabolic phase changes. Also, you have to take so many samples to actually get a picture of what happened during a workout. Like you say, you can’t see anything from a si gel data point.
When I do a workout at constant power, lactate never stabilizes during the workout, if above LT1. So doing sub threshold work (work between LT1 and LT2) and guiding by lactate is dubious.
I just don’t think commercially available meters are precise enough for this level of granularity. I’ve only collected a few hundred lactate sample on myself for analysis.
This confirms what I always suspected, despite your claims you have never actually lactate tested!!!!
Nope (haha), the truth is i posted here exatcly in this thread my two graded lactate testings as well as the training intervention i did. You will rarely find any better executed an reliable lactate testing data on any board. It is easy and trivial for me.
You are welcome, boy from the Strava group :) You can search it for yourself.
This post was edited 32 seconds after it was posted.
He's too busy doing secret speed reps for any lactate testing. Ha!
On a serious note though, he hasn't tested in a long long time, but he's still adhering to the initial pace-recommendations, i.e. he's still confident of the lactate range he would target and hit with his current paces.
Indeed the original relationship did not account for HR, and it shouldn't. You can be way under/over shooting with HR as I've seen, and by considerable margins.
Can't praise you enough for sharing your data Jiggy. I think that completely backs up the original guide sirpoc put up. This is incredibly helpful for those who are weighing up the option of going pace or HR when a meter is not possible.
Sirpoc originally said, lactate testing is best which is quite the obvious answer, but pace is a better indication than HR. I was skeptical of this, but I have come absolutely full circle to 100% agree with rgis.
The advantage of pace being that you can run the same route each week. If it's flat, even better. Even better still, run on a track. I suspect pace, as sirpoc posted a long time back, will not always work , but it'll get you where you want to be most of the time, or at least closer than going by HR will.
His unbelievable progression, with you confirming now he hasn't used lactate testing for a while, is testament to that pace is almost certainly the clear winner if it's a straight choice between pace or HR. Of course lactate testing is best, but it is certainly not practical for everyone. Especially if you run outside and not on a track.
I don't think this thread has all the answers, or that any of the main contributers would say they do, but it likely provides the average/above talented runner the absolute best opportunity to reach their potential , or as close to it as you can get, with the least risk.
I've been training like this since October now and have made a big jump from mid 18s in the last 5 seasons to a low 17 in the start of the summer 5k races. I'm 44 so I couldn't be happier as I just assumed the chance to ever break 18 was gone a few years ago.
I've been trying to get a couple of my local clubs teammates to adopt this training, but their old skool mentality just can't bring them to. Which is a shame, we could do with the extra points and we might even win this year's team series! However, the thought of no 5k pace work has them baulking at the postposition. Yet my 1+ minute PB they can't seem to correlate I wouldn't have probably got, had I not adopted this method. I think we runners we are so engrained and can't help ourselves and we must do interval or speed based work.
I hope this thread goes on and on. It's undoubtedly the most useful thread I've ever come across on letsrun and I've been here a while, as well as being the least toxic. Happy running everyone!
What is your weekly mileage and time spent at threshold?
Its different because you only tested once the lactate in the second workout.. so you don't get the evolution through the reps as you do with HR and pace. So your lactate testing on workout 2 is absolutely meaningless for the purpose of your study ( though it made sense for you since you want to control your threshold via lactate)
HR and lactate value several month aparts I don't remember anyone pretending there should be any correlation so you are not disproving or proving anything. Your lactate curve and HR curves have shifted in the meantime.
I also question whether lactate is useful at all other than delineating metabolic phase changes. Also, you have to take so many samples to actually get a picture of what happened during a workout. Like you say, you can’t see anything from a si gel data point.
When I do a workout at constant power, lactate never stabilizes during the workout, if above LT1. So doing sub threshold work (work between LT1 and LT2) and guiding by lactate is dubious.
I just don’t think commercially available meters are precise enough for this level of granularity. I’ve only collected a few hundred lactate sample on myself for analysis.
If you are looking for perfect stability at a given mmol, im not sure you are going to find that in any range.
What you are doing here is trying to stay under a given number or between two numbers.
I think there's a lot of to see even with a single data point especially coupled with good HR data over repeated workouts.
Agree with shirt boy. You can get away with just testing at the end of a session after you’ve been doing it for some time (Kristoffer Ingebrigtsen usually does this). If your lactate spikes, you’ll test high. If your lactate is under threshold at the end, it is likely that it was under threshold the entire session unless the pacing or terrain were all over the place.
Learn what feels right to you. Theo Quax on Coffee Club revealed he runs his thresholds waaaay slower than guys of comparable speed at NAU. Perhaps that’s altitude, but who knows. The point is he runs a pace that is repeatable and productive for him. If you are gassed by the last few reps, you’ve gone too fast. If you are actively holding back the entire workout it’s probably too easy. Unless you can measure your lactate do not be a slave to some arbitrary numbers that are close anyway.
I was a little shocked by what he said. He's a 13:20-ish guy running threshold at 78 seconds laps. Guys in my club who have PBs of 15:30 run 78s as their threshold pace. My guess is they're running too hard.
In any case, I'm going to commit to a threshold based programme for the rest of the year. I feel like I've plateaued with standard training and I'm just coming off a marathon block where I ran a good PB. I didn't do any speed sessions during that four months, all threshold, so I feel like I'm already on that road. I'll drop into the thread periodically to update on how things are going.
I was a little shocked by what he said. He's a 13:20-ish guy running threshold at 78 seconds laps. Guys in my club who have PBs of 15:30 run 78s as their threshold pace. My guess is they're running too hard.
In any case, I'm going to commit to a threshold based programme for the rest of the year. I feel like I've plateaued with standard training and I'm just coming off a marathon block where I ran a good PB. I didn't do any speed sessions during that four months, all threshold, so I feel like I'm already on that road. I'll drop into the thread periodically to update on how things are going.
Excited to see your progress! Yeah it is a pretty crazy thing. Granted we are talking at 6,800' altitude, so maybe that is impacting him a lot.
I see the few down votes, I’m curious what makes that not as efficient especially is coming back from serious injury?
The Norwegian approach is not about double T, which is only a product of trying to maximize *sustainable* (i.e., you can do it week after week without breaking down or burning out) work at sub-threshold effort (usually ~25% of total training volume). Maybe read the rest of the thread so you can ask more informed questions on these later pages. This training approach in general is great for returning from serious injury, but you have to understand it first. If you are not extremely careful about dialing into the right intensities and volumes, you will re-injure yourself. Also, no one should even attempt double T shortly after a period of injury, and this thread is about tailoring the Norwegian approach to lower mileage, which by definition means most if not all of us who take this approach do NOT use double T bc our mileage is not high.
The Norwegian approach is not about double T, which is only a product of trying to maximize *sustainable* (i.e., you can do it week after week without breaking down or burning out) work at sub-threshold effort (usually ~25% of total training volume). Maybe read the rest of the thread so you can ask more informed questions on these later pages. This training approach in general is great for returning from serious injury, but you have to understand it first. If you are not extremely careful about dialing into the right intensities and volumes, you will re-injure yourself. Also, no one should even attempt double T shortly after a period of injury, and this thread is about tailoring the Norwegian approach to lower mileage, which by definition means most if not all of us who take this approach do NOT use double T bc our mileage is not high.
I really agree with this post 😅 as I will confess I didn't properly read or understand this thread and went way, way too fast and even doubled some days. I just assumed it was doubled for amateurs, copying bakken and Jakob. It's actually vastly and hugely different. After a month I was trashed, but then re read in detail and finally understood it. Not ashamed to admit that.
It's only really when the discussion on TSS, CTL and load took place a bit further in than I actually kind of understood what was going on. Now I realise I really messed up, too much, too soon and paces way too aggressive. I personally think it's simple, but only once you understand the principles and what you are trying to achieve .
Not a troll post and not looking for reaction, but it's surprising how many people come to this thread for advice, when it really is all there if you want to read it all. I took all this with a pinch of salt at first, 5 months on for me the rewards are coming in and I would have to concede firstly I was wrong to skim read or just assume it's something it's not. Secondly, deep down I thought this was all a bit of a farce and really it's probably a dumb way to train. Boy was I wrong. It's nothing compared to the success or progress of sirpoc or others, but I have finally broken 1:30 for the HM. 6 years and 18 races later , 1:27 in the bag. I was the classic stagnated runner. This took me through that wall and beyond.
The Norwegian approach is not about double T, which is only a product of trying to maximize *sustainable* (i.e., you can do it week after week without breaking down or burning out) work at sub-threshold effort (usually ~25% of total training volume). Maybe read the rest of the thread so you can ask more informed questions on these later pages. This training approach in general is great for returning from serious injury, but you have to understand it first. If you are not extremely careful about dialing into the right intensities and volumes, you will re-injure yourself. Also, no one should even attempt double T shortly after a period of injury, and this thread is about tailoring the Norwegian approach to lower mileage, which by definition means most if not all of us who take this approach do NOT use double T bc our mileage is not high.
I really agree with this post 😅 as I will confess I didn't properly read or understand this thread and went way, way too fast and even doubled some days. I just assumed it was doubled for amateurs, copying bakken and Jakob. It's actually vastly and hugely different. After a month I was trashed, but then re read in detail and finally understood it. Not ashamed to admit that.
It's only really when the discussion on TSS, CTL and load took place a bit further in than I actually kind of understood what was going on. Now I realise I really messed up, too much, too soon and paces way too aggressive. I personally think it's simple, but only once you understand the principles and what you are trying to achieve .
Not a troll post and not looking for reaction, but it's surprising how many people come to this thread for advice, when it really is all there if you want to read it all. I took all this with a pinch of salt at first, 5 months on for me the rewards are coming in and I would have to concede firstly I was wrong to skim read or just assume it's something it's not. Secondly, deep down I thought this was all a bit of a farce and really it's probably a dumb way to train. Boy was I wrong. It's nothing compared to the success or progress of sirpoc or others, but I have finally broken 1:30 for the HM. 6 years and 18 races later , 1:27 in the bag. I was the classic stagnated runner. This took me through that wall and beyond.
Did you do the same workouts per week for X amount of weeks, normal 10-day taper, and then 1:27?
Did you do the same workouts per week for X amount of weeks, normal 10-day taper, and then 1:27?
Followed sirpoc sessions, almost identical. But did time over distance, as I'm slower. Taper was also as he suggested, full session Tuesday, scaled back session on the Thursday. Two days easy running then race. Felt great. Freshest I've felt going into my HM and also strongest I've felt in the race.
Small progress update - still going well, with some compromises... Fitness seems to be progressing nicely. It's track season! Regular races and club track workouts are just too much fun to skip for more sub-threshold running so I've opted to stop progressing the speed and distance of two out of three workouts for a while (getting gradually easier instead), with the third day being slightly harder than ideal. Recovery doesn't seem to be an issue at the moment and I'm not going all-out in any workout.
Anyway, still on 6 days a week, one longish run (9 miles), three quick runs and one day off per week, about 40mpw total. Most recent race was 3000m - a 10s PR and below 9:30 for the first time, which feels pretty consistent with my improvement over 5k and 10k. Now to have a go at the 1500m...
OK, well here's an interesting result. I did a 1500 over the weekend and went sub-4:20 for the first time in about 8 years. Slightly confusing that the improvement on last year (4:35 to 4:19) is even greater than over 3k and 5k despite the gap to training paces being much greater. I guess it makes sense given the original focus of the approach. But it's been much easier than before. A small handful of quick (but not 100% effort) track workouts seems to have been enough, if it was needed at all.
Did you do the same workouts per week for X amount of weeks, normal 10-day taper, and then 1:27?
Followed sirpoc sessions, almost identical. But did time over distance, as I'm slower. Taper was also as he suggested, full session Tuesday, scaled back session on the Thursday. Two days easy running then race. Felt great. Freshest I've felt going into my HM and also strongest I've felt in the race.
It seems like most people using this method have dropped the 400s and typically do longer reps instead. 2 miles, 2k, mile or k reps seem to be the most popular.