This is where you have let yourself be totally confused by the nonsense JS has posted. There is no thhreshold pace here. That's the point. It's a threshold state. It's all about what paces for sirpoc have created the desired lactate. That can be 12-15k pace for 1k reps or 20-30k pace for 3.2k reps. The pace is varied, the sun threshold state is the same.
It's pretty key to read the whole thread to understand all this in terms of an overall concept. If you look at recent races, sirpoc LTHR I would guess is around 178-180. You can see he's almost never working at this level. Maybe I've seen him post on Strava he busted a workout , even then he's maybe touched LTHR maybe for a couple of mins, on the last rep. Even then of course, HR is only telling a small part of the picture.
If you don't understand this concept (like coach JS, clearly) then probably it's not worth doing this method of training, as you'll likely mess it up. One thing for sure, this is probably actually more complicated for some people to understand than you'd think. In general, I think it fair to say a large but significantly minority are simply not understanding about what sub threshold actually is or what is trying to be achieved here.
Absolutely spot on. It's baffling to me so many people are not understanding this concept. It's totally irrelevant the pace of the reps. Some might be as slow as Marathon pace, some might be as fast as CS or 10k pace. There is no threshold pace. I genuinely am absolutely baffled people like JS do not understand this. Flabbergasted in fact that we are into however many pages and people STILL do not understand this concept.
What do you guys think about the fact that the LTHR has not moved up? Isn't this one of the tenets of Hadd's famed protocol? That LTHR will gradually move up with proper training?
Probably a dumb question given the intricacies of the info but can someone clarify what you mean by sub threshold? For instance my watch estimated threshold HR is 164, with my threshold zone being 157-167 bpm. Would that mean it’s more optimal to shoot for closer to 157 heart rate while doing the reps or even slower? Thanks in advance for the help!
If you know for sure (within a beat or 2) that your threshold is 164, then you have a starting point. It won't be perfect, but you can certainly so the 1k and up intervals probably by heart rate. I've never looked at heart rate during, as I do it on paced but this was married up to my lactate testing I did, which as a result I know will almost always keep my HR under threshold.
But you could aim for between 153-163 (absolute max) for longer reps, say 5x2k. If you start out the reps and try and keep the pace the same and after the first one you are nearer 153-155 by the end, you probably will keep the whole lot under. I've not really tried to do this, but you could experiment. Just looking at my runs, my LTHR is 175, I'm usually in the mid to high 160s by the end of the first couple, and the low 170s by the end of the 5th. Definitely don't start out too hard, what you don't want to do is go too far over your LTHR. It defeats the purpose. I posted way back on another page, but I purposely once went over by upping the pace in the last rep, spent almost 6 mins which doesn't seem like a lot, but I was trashed the next day compared to what I usually am. I couldn't have done that 3 times that week. So it's a fine balancing act, very controlled, very measured, as others have said, very boring.
Side note: you just wouldn't be able to control anything under 1km by heart rate. I've never tried but I don't see how you could really. Someone might be able to correct me on that. Even at 1k it might be tricky.
Once again some people are getting lost in the weeds here, this time with LTHR.
Keep in mind that LTHR is nowhere near a clean cut physiological variable that some of ya'll are trying to make it -it's a proxy of a proxy for the thing we actually care about, and there are a variety of different definitions and methods for determining it.
Will LTHR change much in response to training? That depends on a few things. How developed is the athlete? How are they determining LTHR? With a relatively untrained athlete it could change a lot. With a highly trained athlete probably not so much. It may also "change" as a reflection of getting better at executing the method used to determine it. I'm a fairly experienced runner of reasonably high ability, but I've never done a Friel LTHR test, so if you had me go out and do that right now there's decent odds I don't get it perfect the first couple attempts -out of context it may look like I improved my LTHR, but really I probably would just poorly pace the first couple attempts.
What I'm trying to get at is that speaking to this concept broadly across individuals is impossible and useless. The accuracy of a metric like LTHR is entirely specific to each individual and how they are able to refine their use of that metric with experience. The effectiveness of a training method to raise LTHR will depend largely on the context of the individual using it, and ultimately doesn't matter much because we care about race performance not physiological estimations.
What actually matters
However you want to determine pace/effort just make sure it's a sensible protocol for your current ability and something you can repeat a few times throughout the year.
Within reason control training variables so there isn't a ton of day-to-day variability. When in doubt err on the side of caution.
Most important: get out and actually run, see how you respond, refine, repeat.
With sirpoc (or any other anecdote of success) the utility of analyzing their numbers is only to understand the framework such that you can take that and run your own experiment, you probably don't want to get too caught up the numbers themselves. The framework here with how it relates to LTHR is that you should mostly stay under your estimation of strict LT so you can do more of it throughout the week and repeat that week after week. This is accomplished through a balance of taking it slightly easier and the interval scheme itself simply reducing the accumulation of stress. Certain interval schemes with allow for an instantaneous effort that is harder than strict LT pace/effort, but the breaks keep the cumulative stress across the workout below strict LT.
For what it's worth - Sirpoc's HR in his races has not budged one iota since he started racing. I looked at three 10ks of his - The first 10k was 35:41, the last 32:01 more than a year apart.
They all start with an HR around 170 to 174 and move up to 187 at the end of the race. In his first race his cadence was about 201 ave, 210 for the last 2. So as he got faster he just increased his cadence (maybe stride at the same time - can't tell from the data), lately it seems his cadence is pretty locked so his stride must be a bit longer.
So a 35+ second drop per mile in pace over a year in his 10k times and the HR has not moved an inch.
He is a great guy to check data on because he is so damn consistent and racing where he does everything is sea level flat and almost same weather.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
That's what has been confusing me all along. People keep talking about SUB threshold and electing to go slower than necessary, but sirpocs pace suggestions early on in the thread are actually quite hard (6:00 pace with 1 min rest for km and mile reps is hard when you are in 17:30 shape). I can do 5:50 for 10k and 6:00 reps are still pretty hard.
This is where you have let yourself be totally confused by the nonsense JS has posted. There is no thhreshold pace here. That's the point. It's a threshold state. It's all about what paces for sirpoc have created the desired lactate. That can be 12-15k pace for 1k reps or 20-30k pace for 3.2k reps. The pace is varied, the sun threshold state is the same.
It's pretty key to read the whole thread to understand all this in terms of an overall concept. If you look at recent races, sirpoc LTHR I would guess is around 178-180. You can see he's almost never working at this level. Maybe I've seen him post on Strava he busted a workout , even then he's maybe touched LTHR maybe for a couple of mins, on the last rep. Even then of course, HR is only telling a small part of the picture.
If you don't understand this concept (like coach JS, clearly) then probably it's not worth doing this method of training, as you'll likely mess it up. One thing for sure, this is probably actually more complicated for some people to understand than you'd think. In general, I think it fair to say a large but significantly minority are simply not understanding about what sub threshold actually is or what is trying to be achieved here.
JS never post nonsense here.You didn't read what he wrote.He just told Sirpoc ran at threshold and not SUB threshold when he was at 17.27 5 k shape with his 6 min mile pace running 1 k and mile reps .You and a few other guys here should start to listen to the great guru wizard.He is one of the most knowledgable coaches here on the boards, but that will you and many others here never come to understand.
For what it's worth - Sirpoc's HR in his races has not budged one iota since he started racing. I looked at three 10ks of his - The first 10k was 35:41, the last 32:01 more than a year apart.
They all start with an HR around 170 to 174 and move up to 187 at the end of the race. In his first race his cadence was about 201 ave, 210 for the last 2. So as he got faster he just increased his cadence (maybe stride at the same time - can't tell from the data), lately it seems his cadence is pretty locked so his stride must be a bit longer.
So a 35+ second drop per mile in pace over a year in his 10k times and the HR has not moved an inch.
He is a great guy to check data on because he is so damn consistent and racing where he does everything is sea level flat and almost same weather.
Just curious (be myself lol), what is his MHR? I suppose it's around 192-193?
I had the same question - I saw a paper a while back said that u could match perceived exertion to threshold state and MHR. They said it worked like this :
Medium Threshold : 4–5 out of 10 RPE 2–3 mmol 80–84% HRmax
Hard Threshold : 5–6 out of 10 RPE 3-4 mmol 85–87% HRmax
I also checked Sirpocs HR during T sessions and it generally ran about 168 - interestingly enough - so does KI's - almost identical - but one has a cadence of 210 and the other like 160 or 170. Crazy difference there. Recently tho his HR has climbed to 174 at the end of reps. That could just be summer heat maybe.
So pick the middle and use 168 / 0.845 = 199 MHR
Personally I think MHR is a relatively useless number in the sense u never see it in real life unless you are wearing a smartwatch while running up a mountainside from some slasher trying to kill u while taking cocaine or something.
LTHR is the most important HR number and since Sirpocs race HR has not changed have to assume LTHR has not changed either. 175. Note the 174 above.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
JS never post nonsense here.You didn't read what he wrote.He just told Sirpoc ran at threshold and not SUB threshold when he was at 17.27 5 k shape with his 6 min mile pace running 1 k and mile reps .You and a few other guys here should start to listen to the great guru wizard.He is one of the most knowledgable coaches here on the boards, but that will you and many others here never come to understand.
Go away, Jan. You are ridiculous. We all know this is you, you scamming clown.
JS never post nonsense here.You didn't read what he wrote.He just told Sirpoc ran at threshold and not SUB threshold when he was at 17.27 5 k shape with his 6 min mile pace running 1 k and mile reps .You and a few other guys here should start to listen to the great guru wizard.He is one of the most knowledgable coaches here on the boards, but that will you and many others here never come to understand.
Tell me you don't understand this thread, without saying "I don't understand this thread".
Jan, you are absolutely an idiot, as per usual. But this time you are embarrassing yourself in front of everyone (as lots of people read this thread, not yours!). There IS NO THRESHOLD PACE. What on earth don't you understand about that? It does not matter it the pace is threshold pace of Daniel's, it could be tinman CS. IT DOES NOT MATTER. The paces have been set up by sirpoc (very cleverly) with use of a lactate meter, to then have the paces roughly act as a proxy for lactate. He originally posted that this works he thinks for the vast majority of runs, although as it's just a proxy, obviously not always. He has improved more than anyone you have ever coached most likely in terms of age group and there's actual data and evidence to back up this thread (unlike yours!).
On another note , great posts John Whelan by the way. I've seen sirpoc post a few times on his page and some other guys + the Strava board about using respiratory rate as a proxy piece of data to use as well (it's a Garmin metric). Anyone know anything about this? Seems sirpoc is often thinking outside the box and a step ahead so I was curious if he or anyone else has data they could share on this.
LTHR is the most important HR number and since Sirpocs race HR has not changed have to assume LTHR has not changed either. 175. Note the 174 above.
We discussed here several times that HR is not a good indicator during reps. One reason is the slow component of the HR, it takes some time to raise HR, another is the HR drift, which is always there. HR is also influenced by hydration, ambient temperature and humidity.
Going by perceived effort is also not so optimal, because the first rep feels easier as the last reps. But some people are good at it, some not.
Which leads to pace/power as the best control option during a rep. How do you feel the next day is important, you can do lactate testing after the last rep, or check the avg HR of the last min of the last rep (not so optimal but better than nothing) to adjust for the next quality session.
Starting point:
-> training execuction -> adjusting for the next time -> training execuction -> repeat
Training is in general a flexible, and not a rigid system.
If you know for sure (within a beat or 2) that your threshold is 164, then you have a starting point. It won't be perfect, but you can certainly so the 1k and up intervals probably by heart rate. I've never looked at heart rate during, as I do it on paced but this was married up to my lactate testing I did, which as a result I know will almost always keep my HR under threshold.
But you could aim for between 153-163 (absolute max) for longer reps, say 5x2k. If you start out the reps and try and keep the pace the same and after the first one you are nearer 153-155 by the end, you probably will keep the whole lot under. I've not really tried to do this, but you could experiment. Just looking at my runs, my LTHR is 175, I'm usually in the mid to high 160s by the end of the first couple, and the low 170s by the end of the 5th. Definitely don't start out too hard, what you don't want to do is go too far over your LTHR. It defeats the purpose. I posted way back on another page, but I purposely once went over by upping the pace in the last rep, spent almost 6 mins which doesn't seem like a lot, but I was trashed the next day compared to what I usually am. I couldn't have done that 3 times that week. So it's a fine balancing act, very controlled, very measured, as others have said, very boring.
Side note: you just wouldn't be able to control anything under 1km by heart rate. I've never tried but I don't see how you could really. Someone might be able to correct me on that. Even at 1k it might be tricky.
PAGE EIGHT
STOP DOWNVOTING ME
Thanks spoc! 5x2k, 3x3k sounds solid in terms of using the HR training you just mentioned. My LTHR is also 175. Is 6x1600m w/in that as well? (At slower than 10M pace, per your chart).
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
I agree. He was a sub-elite TT cyclist who turned into a sub-elite runner. Way better than "average".
The weird thing however is that Daniels training did not work for him, and this sub-treshold model did.
Sirpoc explained it himself. In a nutshell, Daniels was overcooking him:
Progressed nicely really quickly at first, but just got to the point where the hard stuff was meaning I could never actually increase time on feet / load. I just felt so beat up. [...] I used to dread the long run, the easy runs, everything. A lot of it was just too fast looking back, comical in fact. No wonder I was so tired.
jecht, why are you copying sirpoc's workouts? you're not running anywhere near his mileage. 5x2k, 3x3k, 10x1k, 6x1600 and so on are meant for 90-100km weeks, not 40-70
jecht, why are you copying sirpoc's workouts? you're not running anywhere near his mileage. 5x2k, 3x3k, 10x1k, 6x1600 and so on are meant for 90-100km weeks, not 40-70
Even though a lot of posts here suggest that a runner has to be incredibly disciplined and regimented in following the method to get good results (following sirpoc/KI closely, with modifications arising from what you see in the spreadsheet), maybe the guy wants to see how it translates when modified even more — I.e., to see if picking and choosing these workouts to replace other workouts in his training might yield at least a little bit of benefit.
jecht, why are you copying sirpoc's workouts? you're not running anywhere near his mileage. 5x2k, 3x3k, 10x1k, 6x1600 and so on are meant for 90-100km weeks, not 40-70
Scaling it down, ie. something like 3x2k, 2x3k, 6x1k (or even time-based 5x6 min, 6x5 min, etc.) would dovetail with my 40-43 mpw set. I wanted to see if the HR baselines would still apply. If they don't, they don't.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
JS never post nonsense here.You didn't read what he wrote.He just told Sirpoc ran at threshold and not SUB threshold when he was at 17.27 5 k shape with his 6 min mile pace running 1 k and mile reps .You and a few other guys here should start to listen to the great guru wizard.He is one of the most knowledgable coaches here on the boards, but that will you and many others here never come to understand.
Tell me you don't understand this thread, without saying "I don't understand this thread".
Jan, you are absolutely an idiot, as per usual. But this time you are embarrassing yourself in front of everyone (as lots of people read this thread, not yours!). There IS NO THRESHOLD PACE. What on earth don't you understand about that? It does not matter it the pace is threshold pace of Daniel's, it could be tinman CS. IT DOES NOT MATTER. The paces have been set up by sirpoc (very cleverly) with use of a lactate meter, to then have the paces roughly act as a proxy for lactate. He originally posted that this works he thinks for the vast majority of runs, although as it's just a proxy, obviously not always. He has improved more than anyone you have ever coached most likely in terms of age group and there's actual data and evidence to back up this thread (unlike yours!).
On another note , great posts John Whelan by the way. I've seen sirpoc post a few times on his page and some other guys + the Strava board about using respiratory rate as a proxy piece of data to use as well (it's a Garmin metric). Anyone know anything about this? Seems sirpoc is often thinking outside the box and a step ahead so I was curious if he or anyone else has data they could share on this.
As always when people call others to be idiots it tells everything about themselves
By the way I'm not the magic wizard as you think.Just an admirer of the great Swede.