Sirpoc - I am curious with your consistent training over the years. How much does your CTL change week over week? Do you have a certain level of Form (TSB) that you aim for daily/weekly?
Well to give you an idea, 8 weeks ago my CTL was 56, now it's 62. It's been ramped up slowly but almost in a totally linear fashion when you plot it on a graph. 62 is the highest I've ever reached running and within the last few weeks have set PBs. TSB in that period ranges from -1 to about -8. Obviously you have to do more, to ramp up your CTL. One thing I've been very good over the years is how to increase the load very slowly, almost so it's unnoticeable in terms of impact on the body, but as the weeks and months go on you will see small performance increases. I was always good at that on the bike and really feel like this experience is paying off now running, hence this system working perfectly for me as it's so easy just to ramp it up here and there. For example I had a few weeks where I went from 425 TSS for the week, the next week I'll aim for 428, maybe 432 the week after and so on. Broken record incoming again, but these numbers only mean something to yourself and are then only useful to yourself if you are constantly updating zones etc to current fitness.
Complete side note. I raced the national 25 time trial champs in 2016, with the idea of going in fresh and targeting top 10 overall which was incredibly realistic based on my results. Tried to get my TSB/form into the green and fresh which I did. I can't even remember why I did this in retrospect. Probably the most horrible ride I ever did, thought the power meter was broken . Realised it wasn't when I saw the results and came about 37th. Honestly, probably the worst I've ever done in either sport, based on what I should have done. Ever since then I've totally not worried about or really paid much attention to my TSB. I did get it to -30 or maybe more I think once and did feel pretty terrible but it passed, as an extreme. I think that was in a January after I had taken my usual winter off and had got fat .
Based off this I’m assuming you don’t really have scheduled “down” weeks or much, if any, taper for races. Is that right?
Just a consistent, manageable training load that doesn’t beat you up enough to ever need much of a down week? Then gradually increase E run lengths or number of sub-t reps, keeping 25% “work” volume as the target?
Based off this I’m assuming you don’t really have scheduled “down” weeks or much, if any, taper for races. Is that right?
Just a consistent, manageable training load that doesn’t beat you up enough to ever need much of a down week? Then gradually increase E run lengths or number of sub-t reps, keeping 25% “work” volume as the target?
Yep spot on. As per my non running example, my only real attempt at a taper ended in total disaster. Some of the smarter guys here may well have an idea of why that is case. But I've also seen it with other time crunched cyclists, in particular. They go best when they just continue to do , what they are doing. Maybe it's because the overall load isn't actually that high, compared to an elite.
As for your other point, exactly that. I'm adding bits on here and there. For example, I've added some time onto my easy runs. This has got me over by a few minutes the 7 hour mark. That has allowed me to do the full compliment then of the sub threshold sessions. One I limited to 30 minutes in total. But now all are around 35-36 minutes. It doesn't sound like much, but over time, weeks, it slowly ramps things up. This is another reason I train everyday and rarely take a day off. I'm limited to about 7 hours really in my life and honestly this is just about the best way to fit it in. A 75 mins "long " run and now hovering around 55-60 mins on all the other days. Either easy or Sub threshold.
I'm thinking about keeping to push and could I get up to 8 hours a week. I think it would increase my pretty average running potential, but it would mean probably some days having to run before work to fit it in long term. Plus it's been easy ramping it up this summer, nice weather etc. Even 7 hours seems quite daunting when the UK cold, rain and darkness sets in. We will see. Pushing my CTL beyond where it is now I think is tricky.
Based off this I’m assuming you don’t really have scheduled “down” weeks or much, if any, taper for races. Is that right?
Just a consistent, manageable training load that doesn’t beat you up enough to ever need much of a down week? Then gradually increase E run lengths or number of sub-t reps, keeping 25% “work” volume as the target?
Seriously dude. Do yourself a favour and just run. Hobby joggers will always be hobby joggers just get out there and not over complicate your life like this thread. A basic training plan would be better and more practical for 99% of people than this garbage thread 💪🏻 worrying about running at 4:00 per km or 3:50 is seriously the dumbest thing I think I ever have read on this site lol
At 40mpw the Norwegian method isn't going to benefit you because you won't have the base to sustain it.
You need to build your base and get mileage up a bit, then you can make use of their method. Here's a good way to do it:
On Tuesday, do a single thresh session. Making this a continuous session like a fartlek is wise. Thursday, run a tempo or progression run. It'll be a tick easier than thresh but still a good quality day. Saturday, do another thresh session, perhaps some track reps this time.
After some time maintaining this model, you can increase mileage by introducing doubles on your easy days. Doing a 6-7 mile run in the morning and a 5-6 mile run in the evening is a great approach. At some point (when you feel ready for it) you can switch the Thursday progression run/tempo a progression long run. Once you're sustaining 65 miles per week or so on this model, you can start throwing in a second threshold session on Tuesday, and if you want, an easy long run on Sunday. That training model will come in at 65-75 miles per week. About six months past that point, provided you've stayed healthy, you'll be ready to implement the full Norwegian model at 85-95 miles per week and you'll be a completely different runner than you are today.
Have you even read this thread? We have pages and pages and literally more pages of amazing analysis. Nobody is doing doubles. That's not even what the 35+ pages are about? Not even Kristoffer and he's way above 65 a week at this point, is doing doubles. But the guys here have given plenty of ways you can probably fit this into 5-9 hours a week. With the same hobby jogger sub t system.
No, of course I didn't read through the whole thread. I don't have the time or energy to read through 35 pages on a site that runs slowly it threatens to crash my browser every five minutes. I gave my response to the initial post. The model and progression I suggested is based on an integration of the Norwegian model, the NN team's training, and the OAC training. I don't check LetsRun regularly so if you're at all interested in learning more about that, feel free to drop me a message on instagram (same username as my account here)
Based off this I’m assuming you don’t really have scheduled “down” weeks or much, if any, taper for races. Is that right?
Just a consistent, manageable training load that doesn’t beat you up enough to ever need much of a down week? Then gradually increase E run lengths or number of sub-t reps, keeping 25% “work” volume as the target?
Seriously dude. Do yourself a favour and just run. Hobby joggers will always be hobby joggers just get out there and not over complicate your life like this thread. A basic training plan would be better and more practical for 99% of people than this garbage thread 💪🏻 worrying about running at 4:00 per km or 3:50 is seriously the dumbest thing I think I ever have read on this site lol
This guy is running the same workouts and easy runs every week. This is about the least complicated running plan there is.
This guy is running the same workouts and easy runs every week. This is about the least complicated running plan there is.
I think the guys point was that this is so basic, just get out there and run. Not terrible advice.
For me this is a pretty bad thread with nothing but hearsay. No actual evidence. The guys in this thread are having moderate success and if they followed or hired a good coach or even a basic training plan incorporating all the things we know works for runners and has since the start of time, they would get better. This is the liberal minds taking over this site, trying to be different. When actually, they just need to train harder and properly.
At 40mpw the Norwegian method isn't going to benefit you because you won't have the base to sustain it.
You need to build your base and get mileage up a bit, then you can make use of their method. Here's a good way to do it:
On Tuesday, do a single thresh session. Making this a continuous session like a fartlek is wise. Thursday, run a tempo or progression run. It'll be a tick easier than thresh but still a good quality day. Saturday, do another thresh session, perhaps some track reps this time.
After some time maintaining this model, you can increase mileage by introducing doubles on your easy days. Doing a 6-7 mile run in the morning and a 5-6 mile run in the evening is a great approach. At some point (when you feel ready for it) you can switch the Thursday progression run/tempo a progression long run. Once you're sustaining 65 miles per week or so on this model, you can start throwing in a second threshold session on Tuesday, and if you want, an easy long run on Sunday. That training model will come in at 65-75 miles per week. About six months past that point, provided you've stayed healthy, you'll be ready to implement the full Norwegian model at 85-95 miles per week and you'll be a completely different runner than you are today.
Also not sure why this guy has been downvoted. A few things I would change , but overall this is the best contribution to the thread for a hobby jogger by far. This should roughly be the end of thread right here, unless you want to get into the debate of when to move to doubles.
3 threshold, 3 easy and a long WILL get you injured, sooner rather than later. You are a hobby jogger, not a pro. This thread is really full of such bad advice the more I think about it.
At 40mpw the Norwegian method isn't going to benefit you because you won't have the base to sustain it.
You need to build your base and get mileage up a bit, then you can make use of their method. Here's a good way to do it:
On Tuesday, do a single thresh session. Making this a continuous session like a fartlek is wise. Thursday, run a tempo or progression run. It'll be a tick easier than thresh but still a good quality day. Saturday, do another thresh session, perhaps some track reps this time.
After some time maintaining this model, you can increase mileage by introducing doubles on your easy days. Doing a 6-7 mile run in the morning and a 5-6 mile run in the evening is a great approach. At some point (when you feel ready for it) you can switch the Thursday progression run/tempo a progression long run. Once you're sustaining 65 miles per week or so on this model, you can start throwing in a second threshold session on Tuesday, and if you want, an easy long run on Sunday. That training model will come in at 65-75 miles per week. About six months past that point, provided you've stayed healthy, you'll be ready to implement the full Norwegian model at 85-95 miles per week and you'll be a completely different runner than you are today.
Also not sure why this guy has been downvoted. A few things I would change , but overall this is the best contribution to the thread for a hobby jogger by far. This should roughly be the end of thread right here, unless you want to get into the debate of when to move to doubles.
3 threshold, 3 easy and a long WILL get you injured, sooner rather than later. You are a hobby jogger, not a pro. This thread is really full of such bad advice the more I think about it.
Why?
what is this bad advice?
It's not that college running burns talent out, classic plans DOES injure runner’s, elites are injured more often than not, hear the interviews with athletes.
so we have a common thread, exercise is bad for people if we listen to the naysayers so don’t do it…
Based off this I’m assuming you don’t really have scheduled “down” weeks or much, if any, taper for races. Is that right?
Just a consistent, manageable training load that doesn’t beat you up enough to ever need much of a down week? Then gradually increase E run lengths or number of sub-t reps, keeping 25% “work” volume as the target?
Yep spot on. As per my non running example, my only real attempt at a taper ended in total disaster. Some of the smarter guys here may well have an idea of why that is case. But I've also seen it with other time crunched cyclists, in particular. They go best when they just continue to do , what they are doing. Maybe it's because the overall load isn't actually that high, compared to an elite.
As for your other point, exactly that. I'm adding bits on here and there. For example, I've added some time onto my easy runs. This has got me over by a few minutes the 7 hour mark. That has allowed me to do the full compliment then of the sub threshold sessions. One I limited to 30 minutes in total. But now all are around 35-36 minutes. It doesn't sound like much, but over time, weeks, it slowly ramps things up. This is another reason I train everyday and rarely take a day off. I'm limited to about 7 hours really in my life and honestly this is just about the best way to fit it in. A 75 mins "long " run and now hovering around 55-60 mins on all the other days. Either easy or Sub threshold.
I'm thinking about keeping to push and could I get up to 8 hours a week. I think it would increase my pretty average running potential, but it would mean probably some days having to run before work to fit it in long term. Plus it's been easy ramping it up this summer, nice weather etc. Even 7 hours seems quite daunting when the UK cold, rain and darkness sets in. We will see. Pushing my CTL beyond where it is now I think is tricky.
One thought I’ve had recently looking at KI strava:
I think his solution to your CTL problem is to increase the load on the weekend. The Saturday workouts are more often slightly longer, slightly higher lactate. The Sunday run has gotten significantly longer. This may be because as an adult with a job, he has similar challenges with progressing his CTL.
Of course this only is relevant if you have a standard M-F job.
Also not sure why this guy has been downvoted. A few things I would change , but overall this is the best contribution to the thread for a hobby jogger by far. This should roughly be the end of thread right here, unless you want to get into the debate of when to move to doubles.
3 threshold, 3 easy and a long WILL get you injured, sooner rather than later. You are a hobby jogger, not a pro. This thread is really full of such bad advice the more I think about it.
As a fan of this thread I'll acknowledge that the methods espoused here depart from conventional wisdom and established training philosophies. But that's what makes it interesting - nobody really wants to read a thread waxing lyrical about how someone got fitter following a Daniels training plan. There are many volumes of letsrun posts like that. The post you quoted is not a contribution, it's regurgitating very well-known information.
Ok - there aren't many coaches prescribing 3 threshold sessions a week with no VO2 stuff. No books written about it with thousands of success stories. But evidence has been drawn here from various sources (elite Norwegian training, concepts from academic papers, established cycling training methods, CTL, anecdotal reports) to form a pretty compelling logical approach. It is still unproven, in my opinion, but the concept is coherent enough to give it a crack and see what happens.
If you disagree, fair enough. No one is forcing you to do it. I would be very interested to see someone actually attempt to dismantle some of the assumptions made to construct the 'hobby jogger threshold' system. Preferably with some actual scientific evidence, rather than 'but this is how it's always been done!!!1!!' That Medium article posted earlier looks interesting, but it's paywalled for me.
As a fan of this thread I'll acknowledge that the methods espoused here depart from conventional wisdom and established training philosophies. But that's what makes it interesting - nobody really wants to read a thread waxing lyrical about how someone got fitter following a Daniels training plan. There are many volumes of letsrun posts like that. The post you quoted is not a contribution, it's regurgitating very well-known information.
Ok - there aren't many coaches prescribing 3 threshold sessions a week with no VO2 stuff. No books written about it with thousands of success stories. But evidence has been drawn here from various sources (elite Norwegian training, concepts from academic papers, established cycling training methods, CTL, anecdotal reports) to form a pretty compelling logical approach. It is still unproven, in my opinion, but the concept is coherent enough to give it a crack and see what happens.
If you disagree, fair enough. No one is forcing you to do it. I would be very interested to see someone actually attempt to dismantle some of the assumptions made to construct the 'hobby jogger threshold' system. Preferably with some actual scientific evidence, rather than 'but this is how it's always been done!!!1!!' That Medium article posted earlier looks interesting, but it's paywalled for me.
Nice post. I have the same fascinating with this thread and not make up mind fully yet but each day and new stuff come up I find it more and more interesting. Very fresh for this website.
The medium article I read. In my humble opinion it's not great. It's Seiler's daughter who is basically just double down on her dad's polarised. He has never been clear on the 20 portion and now sometimes he sort of say threshold is in that, sometimes not. He cannot decide. Basically his daughter the same. At this point the only thing Seiler consistent on is 80 or around it easy. Nothing revolutionary anymore with what he says. Oh and his daughter try Norwegian model and got crushed and busted. But you should read, very funny what she tries. Nothing like this thread . She's doing and jumping straight into doubles and nothing long like staple of this thread with weekly 2 or 3k repeat. She do 400s, twice she do 1000s and then she do 20x200 hill repeats on weekend. Nothing in that article is better than this thread, in fact worse. Plus I believe she deliberately set up to fail.
I think with combo of poster here this thread > medium article. Now we can put Seiler's to bed when it comes to hobby jogging 😊
Jiggy, I quoted a post from shirtboy from the beginning pages of the thread that lists the differences on the lactate readings. Maybe shirtboy would have more insight into this?
Not sure why the reactions are different, but for the same samples, the Lactate Pro 2 will be about .5-.7mmol higher than the Lactate Plus.
I usually just assume the Lactate Plus is the baseline based on control solutions ive used, and just look at my LP2 readings as assumed to be a little bit high per sample.
Your baseline was pretty solidly low, 1.0 until you hit 1.5 at 15k/m, so i would say your LT1 is somewhere in that 14.4-15.0 km/h range, between 147-154 heart rate.
1.7 mmol might be slightly above LT1 for you based on your ramp test
also your lt2 is probably 2.5-2.8 on the lactate plus probably right around 164-165 bpm
Thanks shirtboy.
Here's where it somehow confuses me. 147-154 bpm heart rate for me corresponds to 72.4-75.8% of Max HR. This is usually the top end of easy running for me. I would have assumed that LT1 is a bit higher than that in terms of % of Max HR?
Even the 164-165 bpm for LT2 sounds too low in relation to my Max HR (203 bpm).
I do have to note that my heart rate is considerably different outdoors in the current humid/heat combo. It was drastically lower on the treadmill (which again, I am confident of the its belt speed using the NPE Runn sensor).
Not sure why the reactions are different, but for the same samples, the Lactate Pro 2 will be about .5-.7mmol higher than the Lactate Plus.
I usually just assume the Lactate Plus is the baseline based on control solutions ive used, and just look at my LP2 readings as assumed to be a little bit high per sample.
Your baseline was pretty solidly low, 1.0 until you hit 1.5 at 15k/m, so i would say your LT1 is somewhere in that 14.4-15.0 km/h range, between 147-154 heart rate.
1.7 mmol might be slightly above LT1 for you based on your ramp test
also your lt2 is probably 2.5-2.8 on the lactate plus probably right around 164-165 bpm
Thanks shirtboy.
Here's where it somehow confuses me. 147-154 bpm heart rate for me corresponds to 72.4-75.8% of Max HR. This is usually the top end of easy running for me. I would have assumed that LT1 is a bit higher than that in terms of % of Max HR?
Even the 164-165 bpm for LT2 sounds too low in relation to my Max HR (203 bpm).
I do have to note that my heart rate is considerably different outdoors in the current humid/heat combo. It was drastically lower on the treadmill (which again, I am confident of the its belt speed using the NPE Runn sensor).
The LT1 HR makes sense to me. My LT1 is right around 75% of max HR. My college coach did lactate testing, including the step test. A lot of guys on the team had an LT1 around 75% max HR.
You said somewhere you aim for around 100 minutes of quality each week. How much were you doing before? I was thinking about it and it's quite a lot. Is it possible it's simply the large volume of faster running you're doing that has led to improvement?
This week I did 46 minutes of sub threshold and an 18:32 parkrun... so about 65 minutes total of "quality". It's going to take some doing for me to reach 100 minutes.
You said somewhere you aim for around 100 minutes of quality each week. How much were you doing before? I was thinking about it and it's quite a lot. Is it possible it's simply the large volume of faster running you're doing that has led to improvement?
This week I did 46 minutes of sub threshold and an 18:32 parkrun... so about 65 minutes total of "quality". It's going to take some doing for me to reach 100 minutes.
You said somewhere you aim for around 100 minutes of quality each week. How much were you doing before? I was thinking about it and it's quite a lot. Is it possible it's simply the large volume of faster running you're doing that has led to improvement?
This week I did 46 minutes of sub threshold and an 18:32 parkrun... so about 65 minutes total of "quality". It's going to take some doing for me to reach 100 minutes.
That is literally the whole point of the system…
No it's not. The point was to monitor your lactate levels with a monitor.
You said somewhere you aim for around 100 minutes of quality each week. How much were you doing before? I was thinking about it and it's quite a lot. Is it possible it's simply the large volume of faster running you're doing that has led to improvement?
This week I did 46 minutes of sub threshold and an 18:32 parkrun... so about 65 minutes total of "quality". It's going to take some doing for me to reach 100 minutes.
That is literally the whole point of the system…
Might as well toss all the fancy terminology out of the window.
If it's as simple as running as many fast miles as you can each week, then there's no need to overthink things.
No it's not. The point was to monitor your lactate levels with a monitor.
Lol, missing the forest for the trees, buddy. The point is to achieve the maximum sustainable training load, measuring your lactate is just one tool that helps you with that.