Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

Normod wrote:

Regarding the original question -- how to modify the Norwegian approach to lower mileage -- I've had pretty good luck with the following:

1st 3-day block:

Day 1: Threshold session. These are typically repeat 800s or 1ks with 1min rest. For pace, I aim for the threshold pace from Tinman's calculator and adjust for feel on the particular day. If I'm short on time, I do fewer reps at CV pace. Occasionally I'll mix in a 25-30min tempo in place of repeats. I end the session with strides.

Day 2: Easy run. Leg strengthening exercises.

Day 3: Long run. Strides.

[Rest day]

2nd 3-day block:

Day 1: Threshold session. See above. Strides.

Day 2: Easy run. Leg strengthening exercises.

Day 3: X workout. Typically 12-16 hill repeats of at least 1 min, followed by 4-6 shorter hill sprints. This can also be more of a speed/VO2max session if I'm not feeling the hills.

[Rest day]. Repeat.

sirpoc84 wrote:

Training Stress? wrote:

I'm using a Forerunner 35 watch. I don't want to buy or run with a chest strap, I'm assuming most people are in the same boat.

Idk about most people but I tend to race at a much higher level than I can train, so I struggle with using calculators to determine training paces. Maybe more importantly and in the spirit of this thread, I'm a regular person, some days I'm stressed or tired, or I had a few pints the night before, so for a given effort level my pace can vary a lot depending on the day. On the other hand, my effort level vs heart rate feels a lot more consistent. Maybe that's just me, but it makes it a lot easier to base my training on HR as opposed to pace.

Hey there mate. Would you consider getting a soft strap HR for your Garmin? I got one off eBay ages ago for like £15. I know money is tight for everyone but it's probably a good investment. FWIW I've compared data, it's hard to use the data for analysis after or for the intervals in real time, with my wrist sensor.. It takes quite a bit longer to catch up, compared to the strap. Which is problematic especially when working up to a pace and even more so when you are right on your LTHR limit. For me, this is why I go by pace and look at the HR data after. But I still use the strap.

I got used to wearing it after a while and only run with it on the workout days. My wrist and strap on easy runs are almost identical and that low steady pace and as I'm only looking to just stay under 70% heart rate, there's not much that can go wrong, so I don't even bother putting the strap on. So I'm only wearing it 3 days and cost me the equivalent of about 2 pints down my way these days 😂😂

Hard2Find wrote:

Wow! This thread has really taken off again in the last two days, awesome! There are some interesting details being shared and ideas floated! I don’t want to turn this into a training manifesto (LOL), but I have a concept to pose to the group.

The idea of blood lactate readings vs intensity and duration. If LT1 and LT2 are defined as a pace for a specified duration, those durations can be fairly accurately estimated using a race result. I’d even propose using a time trial as that will probably not result in as fast a time as a race but could actually prove more useful for training. Sirpoc has said, and I agree, the fatigue you carry during training usually results in a small percent reduction in training paces when compared to what you actually race at, assuming you are running consistently. It’s not that hard to find a consistent route or hit the track and do a 3K-10K time trial. Nut up folks! LOL

I brought up Daniels and mentioned how I found his T pace sightly too intense when doing regular tempo interval sessions, so I ran at or slightly slower than half marathon pace instead. Well, for me, a few seconds slower per mile than my half marathon pace is a pace I could hold for 90 minutes. I mention this because the pace also correlates to about a 3.5 mmol blood lactate value for me. Which, when I was using a lactate meter, is where I settled into for my tempo interval sessions, 3.0-3.5 mmol.

Tinman on a thread from YEARS ago (perhaps before I was born LOL), provided a conversion table for tempo training as follows:

4.0 mmol = 1.07*(5K_Race_Pace)
3.5 mmol = 1.10*(5K_Race_Pace)
2.5 mmol = 1.13*(5K_Race_Pace)

Tinman knows there can be variations in those readings, but I believe he provided them as a general guide (this may have been before he created his calculator even). If memory serves me correct, he said the paces would approximately work out to LT, half marathon, and marathon, respectively.

If you read Marius Bakken’s training page, not only does he detail his training and experience, he provides the general outline of the Ingebrigsten’s training and a link to an interview with Kristian Blummenfelt’s coach, Arild Tveiton. They all reference plenty of threshold work in the 2.5-3.5 mmol range. Brad Hudson in his book, Run Faster, references using 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace for threshold sessions.

Guess what, if you do the math (and I did LOL), the multiples Tinman gives, the lactate values we see being cited by the Norwegians, the Zone 2 range commonly currently referenced… all of those work out to 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace. To associate those times with the current language, 60 minute race pace is LT1 and 150 minute race pace is LT2, with 90 minute race pace falling in between of course.

Now, I tend to think most runners are not going to buy a lactate meter, lancets, and test strips. Whether it is the cost, practicality of use, or general lack of interest in being that technical. However, the associated paces are close enough. In fact, I’d call them speed barriers. Meaning, don’t see them as paces you have to hit, but paces to not exceed!

Bringing this back to Jack. In 1979, Jack Daniels and Jimmy Gilbert published Oxygen Power. In it, he provides the regression equation he uses to derive his race prediction times. From that equation, you can calculate exactly your 60, 90 and 150 minute race pace if you know your vVO2Max. vVO2Max can be obtained by running a time trial (or race) that takes 8-10 minutes. It’s an estimate of course, but one that gives you a quantifiable starting point to gauge your sessions.

Last point, and sorry for such a long post, even if YOUR lactate at those aforementioned race times varies from the standard BLa values, it is still a 60 minute, 90 minute, and 150 minute effort that is used to define the zones we see. Daniels amassed an incredible amount of research data. He states in his book while most runners will average a BLa of 4.0 mmol for their 60 minute pace, he’s measured runners with a range of, I believe, 2.8-7.2 mmol.

I hope this reads as clear and robust as it plays in my head. Mainly, I hope it gives a different perspective and sparks further debate.

P.S. Daniels derived a point system based on the intensity of your run and accumulated duration, so that you could standardize and track your training. That was published in his second edition in 2005. Just wanting to point out what a tremendous resource he’s been.

Hard2Find wrote:

Wow! This thread has really taken off again in the last two days, awesome! There are some interesting details being shared and ideas floated! I don’t want to turn this into a training manifesto (LOL), but I have a concept to pose to the group.

The idea of blood lactate readings vs intensity and duration. If LT1 and LT2 are defined as a pace for a specified duration, those durations can be fairly accurately estimated using a race result. I’d even propose using a time trial as that will probably not result in as fast a time as a race but could actually prove more useful for training. Sirpoc has said, and I agree, the fatigue you carry during training usually results in a small percent reduction in training paces when compared to what you actually race at, assuming you are running consistently. It’s not that hard to find a consistent route or hit the track and do a 3K-10K time trial. Nut up folks! LOL

I brought up Daniels and mentioned how I found his T pace sightly too intense when doing regular tempo interval sessions, so I ran at or slightly slower than half marathon pace instead. Well, for me, a few seconds slower per mile than my half marathon pace is a pace I could hold for 90 minutes. I mention this because the pace also correlates to about a 3.5 mmol blood lactate value for me. Which, when I was using a lactate meter, is where I settled into for my tempo interval sessions, 3.0-3.5 mmol.

Tinman on a thread from YEARS ago (perhaps before I was born LOL), provided a conversion table for tempo training as follows:

4.0 mmol = 1.07*(5K_Race_Pace)
3.5 mmol = 1.10*(5K_Race_Pace)
2.5 mmol = 1.13*(5K_Race_Pace)

Tinman knows there can be variations in those readings, but I believe he provided them as a general guide (this may have been before he created his calculator even). If memory serves me correct, he said the paces would approximately work out to LT, half marathon, and marathon, respectively.

If you read Marius Bakken’s training page, not only does he detail his training and experience, he provides the general outline of the Ingebrigsten’s training and a link to an interview with Kristian Blummenfelt’s coach, Arild Tveiton. They all reference plenty of threshold work in the 2.5-3.5 mmol range. Brad Hudson in his book, Run Faster, references using 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace for threshold sessions.

Guess what, if you do the math (and I did LOL), the multiples Tinman gives, the lactate values we see being cited by the Norwegians, the Zone 2 range commonly currently referenced… all of those work out to 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace. To associate those times with the current language, 60 minute race pace is LT1 and 150 minute race pace is LT2, with 90 minute race pace falling in between of course.

Now, I tend to think most runners are not going to buy a lactate meter, lancets, and test strips. Whether it is the cost, practicality of use, or general lack of interest in being that technical. However, the associated paces are close enough. In fact, I’d call them speed barriers. Meaning, don’t see them as paces you have to hit, but paces to not exceed!

Bringing this back to Jack. In 1979, Jack Daniels and Jimmy Gilbert published Oxygen Power. In it, he provides the regression equation he uses to derive his race prediction times. From that equation, you can calculate exactly your 60, 90 and 150 minute race pace if you know your vVO2Max. vVO2Max can be obtained by running a time trial (or race) that takes 8-10 minutes. It’s an estimate of course, but one that gives you a quantifiable starting point to gauge your sessions.

Last point, and sorry for such a long post, even if YOUR lactate at those aforementioned race times varies from the standard BLa values, it is still a 60 minute, 90 minute, and 150 minute effort that is used to define the zones we see. Daniels amassed an incredible amount of research data. He states in his book while most runners will average a BLa of 4.0 mmol for their 60 minute pace, he’s measured runners with a range of, I believe, 2.8-7.2 mmol.

I hope this reads as clear and robust as it plays in my head. Mainly, I hope it gives a different perspective and sparks further debate.

P.S. Daniels derived a point system based on the intensity of your run and accumulated duration, so that you could standardize and track your training. That was published in his second edition in 2005. Just wanting to point out what a tremendous resource he’s been.

Hard2Find wrote:

Hard2Find wrote:

Wow! This thread has really taken off again in the last two days, awesome! There are some interesting details being shared and ideas floated! I don’t want to turn this into a training manifesto (LOL), but I have a concept to pose to the group.

The idea of blood lactate readings vs intensity and duration. If LT1 and LT2 are defined as a pace for a specified duration, those durations can be fairly accurately estimated using a race result. I’d even propose using a time trial as that will probably not result in as fast a time as a race but could actually prove more useful for training. Sirpoc has said, and I agree, the fatigue you carry during training usually results in a small percent reduction in training paces when compared to what you actually race at, assuming you are running consistently. It’s not that hard to find a consistent route or hit the track and do a 3K-10K time trial. Nut up folks! LOL

I brought up Daniels and mentioned how I found his T pace sightly too intense when doing regular tempo interval sessions, so I ran at or slightly slower than half marathon pace instead. Well, for me, a few seconds slower per mile than my half marathon pace is a pace I could hold for 90 minutes. I mention this because the pace also correlates to about a 3.5 mmol blood lactate value for me. Which, when I was using a lactate meter, is where I settled into for my tempo interval sessions, 3.0-3.5 mmol.

Tinman on a thread from YEARS ago (perhaps before I was born LOL), provided a conversion table for tempo training as follows:

4.0 mmol = 1.07*(5K_Race_Pace)
3.5 mmol = 1.10*(5K_Race_Pace)
2.5 mmol = 1.13*(5K_Race_Pace)

Tinman knows there can be variations in those readings, but I believe he provided them as a general guide (this may have been before he created his calculator even). If memory serves me correct, he said the paces would approximately work out to LT, half marathon, and marathon, respectively.

If you read Marius Bakken’s training page, not only does he detail his training and experience, he provides the general outline of the Ingebrigsten’s training and a link to an interview with Kristian Blummenfelt’s coach, Arild Tveiton. They all reference plenty of threshold work in the 2.5-3.5 mmol range. Brad Hudson in his book, Run Faster, references using 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace for threshold sessions.

Guess what, if you do the math (and I did LOL), the multiples Tinman gives, the lactate values we see being cited by the Norwegians, the Zone 2 range commonly currently referenced… all of those work out to 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace. To associate those times with the current language, 60 minute race pace is LT1 and 150 minute race pace is LT2, with 90 minute race pace falling in between of course.

Now, I tend to think most runners are not going to buy a lactate meter, lancets, and test strips. Whether it is the cost, practicality of use, or general lack of interest in being that technical. However, the associated paces are close enough. In fact, I’d call them speed barriers. Meaning, don’t see them as paces you have to hit, but paces to not exceed!

Bringing this back to Jack. In 1979, Jack Daniels and Jimmy Gilbert published Oxygen Power. In it, he provides the regression equation he uses to derive his race prediction times. From that equation, you can calculate exactly your 60, 90 and 150 minute race pace if you know your vVO2Max. vVO2Max can be obtained by running a time trial (or race) that takes 8-10 minutes. It’s an estimate of course, but one that gives you a quantifiable starting point to gauge your sessions.

Last point, and sorry for such a long post, even if YOUR lactate at those aforementioned race times varies from the standard BLa values, it is still a 60 minute, 90 minute, and 150 minute effort that is used to define the zones we see. Daniels amassed an incredible amount of research data. He states in his book while most runners will average a BLa of 4.0 mmol for their 60 minute pace, he’s measured runners with a range of, I believe, 2.8-7.2 mmol.

I hope this reads as clear and robust as it plays in my head. Mainly, I hope it gives a different perspective and sparks further debate.

P.S. Daniels derived a point system based on the intensity of your run and accumulated duration, so that you could standardize and track your training. That was published in his second edition in 2005. Just wanting to point out what a tremendous resource he’s been.

Correction. I meant to say 150 minute race pace is LT1 and 60 minute race pace is LT2.

Hard2Find wrote:

Wow! This thread has really taken off again in the last two days, awesome! There are some interesting details being shared and ideas floated! I don’t want to turn this into a training manifesto (LOL), but I have a concept to pose to the group.

The idea of blood lactate readings vs intensity and duration. If LT1 and LT2 are defined as a pace for a specified duration, those durations can be fairly accurately estimated using a race result. I’d even propose using a time trial as that will probably not result in as fast a time as a race but could actually prove more useful for training. Sirpoc has said, and I agree, the fatigue you carry during training usually results in a small percent reduction in training paces when compared to what you actually race at, assuming you are running consistently. It’s not that hard to find a consistent route or hit the track and do a 3K-10K time trial. Nut up folks! LOL

I brought up Daniels and mentioned how I found his T pace sightly too intense when doing regular tempo interval sessions, so I ran at or slightly slower than half marathon pace instead. Well, for me, a few seconds slower per mile than my half marathon pace is a pace I could hold for 90 minutes. I mention this because the pace also correlates to about a 3.5 mmol blood lactate value for me. Which, when I was using a lactate meter, is where I settled into for my tempo interval sessions, 3.0-3.5 mmol.

Tinman on a thread from YEARS ago (perhaps before I was born LOL), provided a conversion table for tempo training as follows:

4.0 mmol = 1.07*(5K_Race_Pace)
3.5 mmol = 1.10*(5K_Race_Pace)
2.5 mmol = 1.13*(5K_Race_Pace)

Tinman knows there can be variations in those readings, but I believe he provided them as a general guide (this may have been before he created his calculator even). If memory serves me correct, he said the paces would approximately work out to LT, half marathon, and marathon, respectively.

If you read Marius Bakken’s training page, not only does he detail his training and experience, he provides the general outline of the Ingebrigsten’s training and a link to an interview with Kristian Blummenfelt’s coach, Arild Tveiton. They all reference plenty of threshold work in the 2.5-3.5 mmol range. Brad Hudson in his book, Run Faster, references using 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace for threshold sessions.

Guess what, if you do the math (and I did LOL), the multiples Tinman gives, the lactate values we see being cited by the Norwegians, the Zone 2 range commonly currently referenced… all of those work out to 60, 90, and 150 minute race pace. To associate those times with the current language, 60 minute race pace is LT1 and 150 minute race pace is LT2, with 90 minute race pace falling in between of course.

Now, I tend to think most runners are not going to buy a lactate meter, lancets, and test strips. Whether it is the cost, practicality of use, or general lack of interest in being that technical. However, the associated paces are close enough. In fact, I’d call them speed barriers. Meaning, don’t see them as paces you have to hit, but paces to not exceed!

Bringing this back to Jack. In 1979, Jack Daniels and Jimmy Gilbert published Oxygen Power. In it, he provides the regression equation he uses to derive his race prediction times. From that equation, you can calculate exactly your 60, 90 and 150 minute race pace if you know your vVO2Max. vVO2Max can be obtained by running a time trial (or race) that takes 8-10 minutes. It’s an estimate of course, but one that gives you a quantifiable starting point to gauge your sessions.

Last point, and sorry for such a long post, even if YOUR lactate at those aforementioned race times varies from the standard BLa values, it is still a 60 minute, 90 minute, and 150 minute effort that is used to define the zones we see. Daniels amassed an incredible amount of research data. He states in his book while most runners will average a BLa of 4.0 mmol for their 60 minute pace, he’s measured runners with a range of, I believe, 2.8-7.2 mmol.

I hope this reads as clear and robust as it plays in my head. Mainly, I hope it gives a different perspective and sparks further debate.

P.S. Daniels derived a point system based on the intensity of your run and accumulated duration, so that you could standardize and track your training. That was published in his second edition in 2005. Just wanting to point out what a tremendous resource he’s been.

sirpoc84 wrote:

Hi mate, FWIW the paces I posted back on the first page, I have no problem with using those as a calculation from a race, I do that all the time. It was to the people talking about LTHR race from an estimation. Not just the motivation from increased effort, it's the fact of nerves, all sorts that lead to an increased HR. As i said, there is zero chance my LTHR from the last 20 mins of my 10k race was correct. I was clearly way over LTHR. In fact, if you took my average for the entire race, it's clearly over LTHR. Until someone suggests something better, it's 20+ years old but Friel is the best solution for those wanting to do all of this with just a HRM.

I don't generally hate the idea of these estimates of locked in % of paces etc, or Lexel converting them to a %of CV. The issue becomes when people run different numbers of reps, or run them different distances, different times. There is then endless variables. For instance, I can create the same level of lactate, for 25x400, through 10x1k up to 3x3k and even 4x10 mins, but the paces will be all varied. Yes you can index them to a pace, or a % of CV, but in my experience testing it doesn't create a nice linear graph, as in the easier slower reps generate less lactate and the harder/faster but shorter ones would create more.

The one thing I can say for sure , is if I follow the pace guides I posted up (which are a guide , I hope people don't think they are the bible lol) that for me I will DEFINITELY be under 4mmol, I've tested this extensively. That's all I care about. I can without doubt handle that , 3 times a wee, no matter what. I also know that as I'm balls deep now for almost a year now.

The one thing I think everyone has to remember, in this thread. Is just about absolutely everyone is agreeing probably 3 x sub threshold is going to probably get quite good, as it's a relatively heavy training load but also falls into that zone you can repeat multiple times a week and recover from.

Hard2find, your scientific approach , along with shirtboys I really enjoy ( he clearly knows his stuff as well) I have zero academic background but I'm a very good trainer. Always have been. Going full circle back to cycling I knew I had less talent, so knew I can go get every last drop out of what I had.