Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

I literally just read the first post of Coggan with the article link that connects to training peaks this past weekend! haha

I'll try and work through the thread though, thanks!

And sure, I'm open to a separate email/group exchange. Shirtboy has shared some things that have got me thinking about lactate readings and if using the LT curve in a similar way to TSS would prove more "representative" of training stress. Especially if a model based on pace, HR, and perhaps a few other biometrics could closely approximate BLa levels so that you aren't having to order lancets and strips so frequently that Amazon can't determine if you're an individual or clinic haha. That may be unrealistic though.

There's a lot of good stuff over on the time trial forum. Those guys understand and debate TSS and CTL a lot. I think it's (or was) Coggan's favourite hang out spot. Mainly because he gets a lot of debate and liked s golf argument.

Shirtboy has shared some gems with me over email. A lot of it is really digging around in the weeds but I find it interesting. I think to implement this system we've done 40 pages on now, for the general user who just wants to run - we are probably over complicating it. As, you basically are just creating as much load as you can, without breaking - which is to run sub threshold as much as you can. We are kind of all in a broad agreement of a rough way to do that. That doesn't mean those who want to know more or to improve it shouldn't, but I'm always wary I'm way over complicating things ha ha I still stand by an original post, someone can likely get the majority of the gains they need from this just following rough , converative paces right back on the first page.

I rarely use telegram and have no idea how to even set up groups, but I'll drop my username and anyone who is interested can drop me a message and we could try and set something up. I think shirtboy checks in here now and again still but if he doesn't I'll suggest the same to him next time he emails me.

@james_c84

You say about Overtraining, but I think you also mentioned before that you thought you were maxed out and really tired when you had weekly vo2 max and longer tempos? Maybe I misunderstanding?

Just caught this before I am going to lunch.

What I meant was, actual over training syndrome , which is a pretty serious medical condition that, in all honesty, a hobby jogger doesn't need to worry about. I've seen a friend , who was riding for a neo pro cycling team who actually suffered from it. Was pretty serious business, but that was on 25+ hours a week.

In terms of being tired after vo2 max sessions, I'm talking general fatigue. As in, it just leaves you a bit too tired to do the next session with the best quality. As well as how, for a hobby jogger, there seems to be unreasonable recovery time versus the benefits of the vo2 session, compared to sub threshold. Also, the fact that because it actually doesn't even create as much training load, on time limited hours, its hard to find the time with the extra recovery needed to up the training load. So, in my experience, the training load ceiling is lower - meaning it's harder to then push the envelope, hence greater chance of stagnation or not being able to go beyond that training cap.

I mean to reply to you way back in the thread about your transformation, inspiring! Makes me think of that British documentarian, Alex Vero. He went from ~100kg, inactive lifestyle to a 1:14 half marathoner. It’s a good reminder to never underestimate the potential in people.

I’ve run some in Arizona, which is hot but arid. That environment compared to Florida, hot and humid, makes quite a difference to me too. Compared to hot and humid, hot and arid feels much better and performance doesn’t seem to be as negatively impacted. I definitely relate to the performance boost that accompanies a change in the seasons. Also, the general decline in overall fatigue, even though volume and intensity increase for me during the fall and winter. It's pretty incredible.

I can definitely relate to that level of interest in detail and quest to optimize training. While putting those plots together, I kept thinking how I would never go into that level of analysis or calculation for myself haha. Yet, find it alluringly addictive to undertake. I think there is just something aesthetically pleasing, for me, in regard to viewing performance and physiological data graphically presented or mathematically described. Even though it may not bear fruit.

I would argue, a higher stress score over 6 weeks, or 12 weeks (or whatever) has the potential to create a higher performance. However, if you can't recover well between the units, the best score does not help long term. Supercompensation principle is not fullfilled. So it is not so simple to put it only on a score value, whatever we use. -> More variables and rules must be applied to compare 2 different training concepts. I am sure this is possible up to a point.

Below paper is interesting in a way as it can predict a marathon race time based on training data only. It shows that marathon race time depends on training distance per week (basically volume per week) and mean training pace. Mean training pace and volume has some correlation to a training stress score. It indicates also the importance of volume, already mentioned by me.

Same here, as it requires to have VPN on for it to work where I live.

However, I don't mind using it, or Signal? WhatsApp?

Let's see what the majority prefers.

Cheers buddy, I'll look up that Alex Vero. I always love me a good motivating transformation story.

Humid heat is the worse. I can tolerate a dry 40 deg C run much better than a very humid 32 deg C one!

I was simply running those simulations to demonstrate how ones weekly TSS distribution would (or would not) impact CTL and ATL. Purely out of curiosity. I wouldn’t suggest to train based on a simulated process which takes no account of the individual response to training. I also pointed out that the time series is generated strictly by the TSS value so one could do a variety of runs to achieve that value. I actually thought the randomly generated values example demonstrated how CTL could be misused, if one is just chasing a number and giving no thought to structure. Reminded me of The Big Bang Theory episode when Sheldon resorts to coin flipping to make life decisions haha

You seem really tuned in on the research occurring, so I imagine you’ve seen the impulse response models and even deep learning methods being used to better model training stress systems. Whether or not it results in an applicable break through, remains to be seen, I suppose.

Basing training off simulation feels a bit too disconnected for me, if it's not tied to a firm foundational model of the underlying mechanism driving improvement, but I do like the idea of being better able to quantify what you're doing and determine if a positive adaption to training is occurring or if you’re overtraining and dismissing it as standard fatigue. To me, that's the frontier. Jack Daniels resolved any issue with race prediction and pace estimation in 1978!

Call me old school but I still see great value in the standard weekly long run. Perhaps this has been covered but curious to hear others thoughts on the idea of 2 sub threshold workouts per week and then the long run as the 3rd “workout.” perhaps as part of the long run I could include 30 minutes or so at threshold pace so to still achieve the 3 sub t efforts per week? Or do you think that would be overcooking myself? I’m speaking of a long run at around 2-2.5 hours. Thanks in advance!

I think the importance of the traditional long run (anything longer than 90 minutes) is contextual. Someone training for HM - Marathon should without a doubt incorporate them. 5K-10K runners could get away with doing less.

Mind you, some of the top 1500m runners are getting in long runs here and there, so they have their value even at much shorter distances.

It also depends on the individual. I myself cherish the long run for multiple reasons, one being the psychological boost I get from going +20 km at once. It is also nice to run a weekly long run with my group, going on different routes and enjoying (or suffering) them together. One last perk I must not deny is the guilt-free admission to the massive breakfast that ensues.

Regarding your question of incorporating a 30' sub threshold section into your + 2 hour long run, I think that this maybe overcooking things a bit. You might be better off doing a fartlek in the second part of the run.

Personally I think this would only really apply to marathon training. 2h+ long runs are probably less important for 5-10k than getting the threshold work in. You should search on here for old malmo posts about long runs.

Looking back at my own comment, I think even the fastest HM runners could get away without doing much of the traditional long runs. After all, HM physiology is closer to 10K than it is to the marathon.

One thing I would add though, is that for me ( and quite a few other cyclists) is that there's a pattern to FTP and CTL, no matter how you got there. I've reached my peak cycling CTL on a number of different training cycles, with totally different training to get there (sub threshold was the fastest way) but my 10 mile TT times were always mid to low 18s and my FTP around 315-20. If my CTL dropped off hugely in the winter, I could also roughly guess as a % of decrease what when I did my dreaded power test in January, the condition I was in. It's definitely not linear, but I'm seeing the same patterns now in running, using basically the same principles.

To make it clear, I think this basic way of looking at it is mostly limited to a time crunched athlete. As in, to take it to a basic level , I would be surprised if someone who was on 5-7 hours a week wasn't at their fittest, if they just maximised their training load whilst balancing recovery. We are 40 pages in and I still stand by that for me to do that on my 7 hours a week, sub threshold 3x a week is almost certainly the best way , whilst looking at the theory of the stress it will accumulate but also looking at my fitness progression in real life. Obviously that's only applicable to me over a year, but KI is also a very good case study anyway can go look at , because he's literally shared a couple of years of data.

Way back I shared the example of me just doing the turbo for a couple of hours a day or so 7 days a week, which also got me really fit (was probably just below sweetspot). I could have easily got even fitter doing that and throwing in one or two threshold or above work. But long term, I couldn't find the time. I only did it because I was off work with a broken collarbone so had limitless time. With limitless time, a more traditional approach with lots and lots of running and a lower % of harder work, will almost certainly be better. As in a pro might double and do 4x sub threshold sessions a week + some hill work, but % wise, almost certainly less than the 25% of weekly time proposed here. It's why I've always been iffy on Seiler the more I've thought about it. On 5 hours a week, I mean really, say 1 hour sub threshold is that really all one can handle? Not in my experience.

As I said yesterday, once you get into the elite territory, it's much more of a balancing act and issues like overtraining actually become genuine concerns.

You could try it. I definitely wouldn't though. As I know for me, would take me way too long to recover from. On an absolute basic level, I think this is working for me because nothing is particularly hard, so I'm never too tired to race or go again for a workout. Even reading this, makes me feel tired ha ha

As others have pointed out, if you were doing a marathon, it's a different conversation. But the long run, even if it's longer than the 80 mins I did on Sunday, should still be easy. As per my example weeks on the previous page, doing 3x sub threshold days is totally doable, but you have to make everything else really easy.

I get your points.

However, this might get you the best bang for your buck metabolically, but if you were preparing for say, a HM, I think you would need more stimulus that stresses and challenges your musculoskeletal system as well.

This is why some cyclists get injured when the pick up running. They have a big aerobic base and they are metabolically ready and fit to hit the pace, but their body cannot sustain the impact of the sport.

Running a race that lasts over an hour would need a traditional long run, even if not weekly.

For a 6days/week concept, and with your TSS provided in page 39, we have:

E=1 TSS/min, Q=75TSS

Concept 1): Q, E, Q, E, Q, E, OFF = 375 TSS

Concept 2): Q, E, Q, E, L (120min), E, OFF =420 TSS

Yes. That work work fine as well. But if I'm not doing a traditional "long" long run, but only 75-80 mins, the off day is where I'm going to do that in your concept 1 + the 3 easy runs and 3 quality and not have a day off. So to the 375 you can add another 75-80 TSS which is where I've been at for a the last few weeks (that is the current TSS numbers, it was obviously less before with less reps on workout days and less time on easy runs, hopefully that makes sense and shows how I've built up from maybe 380 TSS a week to around 440+ now). This is basically a very simplistic view of what I'm doing.

I think if you hit this right, you really don't need a day off. I've never felt the need for one and I don't think Kristoffer often if ever has one. That's the point, to cram as much as you can cram in. If for some reason you can't run everyday, you may as well do concept 2. But I totally concede there is not much difference to your concept two, than what I'm doing, other than I'm probably racking up 20 or so TSS a week more. Over time, I'm my experience, that is worth something. If I was doing a marathon, no doubt I would probably do a much longer run, that's without question. Then on the Monday , probably a very easy run. But still do 7 days a week.

If it makes for anyone's interest, I'll keep trying to creep up the length of my long run like Kristoffer. I went 80 mins and just over 10 miles this weekend, the longest I've done. Will require some life planning to keep increasing it, but might be doable. So far, my progress has been incredibly steady and I'm seeing PBs at a nice incremental increase in line with CTL. Making the long run longer gradually, will increase the training load slightly faster than it has been. Question will be if I can handle it or if PBs increase at the slightly quicker speed CTL increases. I'll see if I can plan something out that works around life.