Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Getting to a point where easy doubles make sense is still a long ways away from having the fitness and durability to handle double threshold.

This will be a longer post, but I wanted to relay my experience using this method for a 9 week marathon build. For context I am 26m, 17:12 5k, 36:15 10k, and 1:20 half. I stagnated late last year and only improved my 5k from 17:27>17:12, but I know I have faster times in me. Races on the calendar this year for me are Grandmas Marathon (6/22) and The Bear 100M (9/27). Originally I was thinking 2:45ish should be possible for the marathon, and 22 hours for the Bear.

Fast forward to February where I got a stress fracture in one of my metatarsals on my left foot which left me unable to run until 4/24. I built from 10 miles to 64 in the last two weeks using the method outlined here. My weekly schedule looked like this M - easy, T - shorter reps (25x400, 10x1K), W - Easy, Th - MLR of 10-12 miles with longer reps (5x2k, 3x2mi), F- Easy, Sat - LR of 16-19 miles with 15-20K of work typically descending ladder of 2x5k, 3k, 2k or some version of that, sun - Easy bike. Things were starting to click and I was feeling so good in training that I almost didn't want to taper for the marathon given my half baked training leading in. I ended up running 2:55 and hitting a huge wall at mile 20. I was moderately happy with the result given the hiccups in the build, but at the same time it's hard for me not to think I have a lot more left in me. I am wondering whether people here think that I would have needed a more traditional buildup with more mileage to build the strength necessary for the marathon, or if what I was lacking was more straight MP runs like Pfitz or Daniels would prescribe?

Next, I am probably the first here to try and apply this training to a 100M ultramarathon where I will have a proper 16 week build. My plan here is going to be double subthreshold sessions on Tuesday and Thursday consisting of 10x1k, or 5x2k in the morning and a 30 minute uphill treadmill session at lunch (probably more like upper Z2 at 15% grade). I am wondering if anyone has thoughts here on how best to apply this to a mountain ultra. I do believe that I am getting very good results using this method and feel like I would be leaving something on the table training wise if I used the traditional ultra training that is exclusively slogging out long slow miles in the mountains (which I will do some of). Thanks in advance. Sirpoc84 you are my hero

I did my workout at a different place this afternoon. It was meant to be 5xmile at 6:10-6:20 but I totally screwed it up running 5:59, 5:54, 6:12, 6:17... didn't bother with the last one as schoolkids were getting in the way so jogged it home. I'm wondering what effect going too fast has.

Doing it on one workout, not a big deal. Doing it repeatedly 3x per week, your legs are gonna be toast pretty quickly

that said, 16-26 sec/mile is a huge whiff even for a one-off oops. I’d recommend setting some pace alerts on your watch to keep you in range, especially if you’re running on an unfamiliar route

I can't do that on forerunner 35 but it was a bad time of day to do the run. I did the warmup then there were lots of people getting in the way and the wind gusting. I don't have many flat areas around here to do repeats unfortunately.

A 9 week marathon build from no running at all just seems like too little regardless of which method you're using, no? 2:55 after 'hitting the wall' in this scenario (i.e. going out too fast for your level of fitness, could be that 2:50 would have been on the cards if you had paced it more evenly) seems like a strong performance to me, as well as more or less in line with your 10km/HM times. I'm sure you have more to give, just need a proper cycle with no 'hiccups', whether it's Pfitz/Daniels or the modified method you've used.

I may not have been super clear, I am pleased with my result given my build. My main question was whether large blocks of marathon pace work are essential when adopting this method for a marathon build. Will this help avoid hitting a wall, or was this mainly due to pacing and not enough mileage. I would guess mostly the latter, but I wanted opinions from others on this thread. It seems like the consensus is to do what I did, albeit for 12-16 weeks rather than the more traditional marathon type workouts.

Most on this thread have more experience than me but here are my thoughts.

Was this your first marathon? If so great work! The longer the distances, the less predictive the calculators are. Sounds like you got the most out of the day. Most people slow in the last 6 miles so that's pretty normal. Hard2find and others, correct me if I'm wrong, but the pace calculators are based on a rough prediction that as the distance doubles the race pace slows about 5%. If you're aerobically well trained that holds well, except it's VERY challenging to have your MP pace just 5% slower than HMP, so the model fails for many.

Not sure if you're familiar with Nate Jenkins but he's great to listen to about this. I believe he had a podcast with the poster who did the summary of this method (I recognized his voice but I think the podcast was under a different channel name). Nate thinks that highly specific marathon training from coaches like Canova is why many of the East African athletes compete well in the marathon (5% slow down) while many pros in the US can struggle to get 10-15% slow down. The specific work is needed to extend your existing fitness.

That said, if Canova was coaching a hobby jogger like you or me I'm not sure he would do that much differently than this method? One way Canova thinks of it is that the base phase has little amplitude between sessions and high global volume. The specific phase is the opposite, huge sessions with very little in between, global volume is not the top priority. I'm of the opinion that the highly specific work is more appropriate for the elites who are already operating, and have been for a while, at their maximal sustainable load. Canova may think the same. If all elites are practically at their maximal sustainable load, specificity becomes the difference maker. Specificity is like improving the wheels of a car. With better wheels you can hold up better and be more efficient within your aerobic limits. For us hobby joggers the aerobic conditioning (car engine) is the biggest determiner- the car not the wheels. You do still need enough of a long run to handle the distance, but not so much that it compromises global load.

About the MP block runs. I messaged Nate Jenkins on Strava a while back to see if he would give me feedback on my Canova/ Nate Jenkins inspired marathon plan. He was nice enough to take a look at it and send his feedback. I had 8,10,12, and 14 miles of straight MP tempos in the plan spread out over 12 weeks or so. His advice was to cut those into intervals and have float recoveries at 90% MP. Very similar to the ethos of this thread, his experience is that you get the stimulus and volume without the extra fatigue. This is coming from one of the hardest working and toughest runners around, so if the straight tempos made a difference that's certainly what he would advocate. People following this approach wouldn't do as much in one session, I am just giving this as an example of the straight tempo vs intervals decision.

So I think your suspicions are right, you just need more time accumulating load. Just don't get injured and stay consistent.

Regarding your ultra, is this your first one? If it's your first ultra, maybe do a few shorter ones first?

I've done a few 50ks and a 50 miler--they are tough! For training, my suggestion would be to settle in to your maximal sustainable load akin to what others are doing on this thread and what you have already done and every 3-4 weeks do a big adventure run. 30+ miles or back to backs. So much of ultras is getting the logistics figured out, hydration, nutrition, chafing, etc and you can only do that by doing it. It may be too much too soon to jump to doubles on your quality days. Like others have suggested, it may be wise to schedule doubles on your easy days (if doubles are needed at all), and only after you know how you respond to that add in the extra load on the quality days.

My other suggestion would be to drop the time goal. Just finish (survive)! I have friends who want me to do a hundred miler with them and I think they're nuts. That's so much suffering. Finishing would be an incredible achievement! You can always come back next year and try to beat your time.

Thanks for the thorough answer, I remember hearing about Nate Jenkins' special block on a podcast a few years back and being in awe of what he was able to do. He is certainly an animal.

Regarding the ultras I have done 3 50s and a 50k, my best performance being an 8:50 50 mile with ~11k of climbing. I have always thought I was better the longer an event goes, and was shocked at how hard the marathon was at the end. I am comfortable doubling on easy days and have been incorporating 60/30 doubles on my those days without excess fatigue. I will ease into this build but I will at least try the double workout days and report back on how that goes. It seems like 30 minutes climbing at 15% and 12-13 minute pace will not effect my legs too much, the variable will be the aerobic load. I am planning on doing enough volume to support this, and I keep a few hours of very easy cycling (100-110 bpm) in my week to balance things out further. Regarding the time goal, yes I will likely drop this, its better for me to go into a race without expectations and not trying to hit rigid time splits. Thank you for the advice!

Based on this post, sirpoc was doing km and mile repeats at 6:00 min/mile when he was in 17:27 fitness.

I am in similar fitness for 5k but have been doing 3 min, 4 min and mile repeats around 6:10-6:15 min/mile, loosely based on tinman/daniels.

Am I going too slow?

Roughly 15k pace for the short reps works well for sirpoc and some other people, me included. I tend to creep up on LTHR for the last rep. But it does not work for everyone. Someone in the strava group mentioned that the sirpoc paces are way too fast for them. So you should have some other way to measure what you are doing other than pace.

Thanks. I'm not sure what to do. I could do them a little faster.

No idea why someone would downvote me.

I upvoted your post. Now feel free to read some of this thread where your specific question was asked and answered at least six times.

Easy answer. You go too slow. You should run your threshold reps more close to around 6 min mile pace if you are in 17:27 5 k shape.What's also is a bit funny with Sirpoc running mile and km threshold reps @ 6:00 min/ mile when in 17:27 shape is that pace is equal to Daniels suggested threshold pace and not a sub threshold pace as this thread is about..... 😉😁🧙🏼‍♂️🇸🇪

How does training affect your LTHR? How often would you have to replicate the Friel test (30 min TR) to make sure you are training right under your threshold? Following sirpoc’s method, he runs a 5K TT every 4-5 weeks to update his training paces. Should one do a 30 min TT every 4-5 weeks to update LTHR or is that a more static figure?

I doubt the HR at LT will change much for a trained runner.

But velocity at LT will change as fitness changes.

Yes, but that wasn’t the question.