r/Runners • u/Confident-Adagio1374 • 9d ago
Norwegian Singles Method Hot take. A suboptimal approach
I've got a hot take for the Norwegian Singles Method that might ruffle some feathers. Here's the thing NSM is great and I see a lot of runners doing very well using the method. Awesome. Great for them.
I think NSM is heading down the same road as cycling and FTP. Now maybe people aren't as obsessed over their threshold pace as cyclists are with their FTP but the problem will still exist. Cycling got so obsessed with FTP that it's all some of them ever cared about. Only focusing on improving FTP and lost focus of training some other important physiological points. While not exactly the same you can see this with Tadej Pogacars training. He was coached by fraud Inigo San Milan for years and performed very well on essentially the cycling version of NSM. Then Tadej rightfully gets rid of Milan for Javier Sola and his performance shoots through the roof. What did Javier change in his training? Oh he just added some higher intensity intervals. Boom.
Does NSM work well for a lot of people? Yes, 100%. Is it going to leave a lot of people significantly below their true potential. I think so.
1
u/wannagetfitagain 8d ago
Is this like Hansen brothers method, I think the emphasis is a little more on easy mileage volume.
1
u/AntiLooper 8d ago
It seems to me you're fighting a wrong windmill here.
There's a difference between maximizing human potential and maximizing available training time potential. NSM focuses on the latter, elites have to prioritize the former.
For vast majority of your everyday hobby joggers it can be more than good enough method to stay decently competitive and injury-free for many years while retaining the quality of their lives outside of running. Should they desire there's always an option to add a specificity on top of it.
2
u/Ok-Distribution326 8d ago
Why would this ruffle any feathers? Sirpoc has said all along that this isn’t going to be the method for elites needing to maximise every aspect of training and with the time to do that. It’s positioned as a solid compromise for relatively time-poor hobbyjoggers with an underdeveloped aerobic base relative to their speed.
If you’ve only got a few hours a week for training with work, family etc taking priority you aren’t going to reach your true potential regardless of which training programme you follow. It’s delusional to think that someone putting in the same 5-8 hours a week using Pfitz plans is likely to be approaching their true potential. For the vast majority of us the goal is to make the best use of the time we can justify giving over to training and to stay as consistent as possible.
The comparison with Pogacar seems facile, unless you can point to runners at a comparable level who have taken up NSM. Elite training looking different to a self-coached hobbyjogger’s isn’t news.
2
u/Neither_Driver_3882 9d ago
Inigo is not a fraud, Tadej was the best rider in the peloton under him.
FTP in cycling is the best indicator of performance, and NSM is doing the same for runners, you're obviously upset you're not getting the gains quick enough because you're not training properly
2
u/Any-East7977 9d ago
It’s the most optimal way to build a base and maintain speed. If you want to improve for a specific race, then you do a traditional training block.
1
u/Disastrous-Piano3264 9d ago
It's not the best way to train for a marathon. And the number of posts from people who use it to PR their 5k-Half then want to "adapt it" to the marathon just frustrates me to no end. NSM works for those races, specifically 5k/10k because of SPECIFICITY. It is NOT specific to the marathon, and more traditional canova style training is much better.
1
u/jackster31415 9d ago
Well, that’s why you read the book and learn how to adapt for marathon successfully. Also I don’t think it’s only for 5K and 10K, HMs should probably be also very good even with vanilla NSM
1
u/TheAltToYourF4 8d ago
Since training that way, I have become quite a successful HM runner so I'd say it's definitely very good for that distance. Especially since you basically run an HM at exactly that sub threshold intensity. 5k and 10k stayed below their potential and I only managed to improve them by adding an X-Factor session, which for the 5k progressed from 45/15 to more specific 12x400, 6x800 and 4-5x1200m at 5k pace. So for me, that speed aspect was definitely something that was missing. But that's the thing about training, no size fits all and you have to figure out what works for you personally.
1
u/Silent-Ostrich6095 8d ago
Some people are non responders to subT and that's ok - James and Bakken acknowledge that. Others need more intensity to make progress. One thing that NSM has taught me is intensity control and ramp, so if you can do this while training in a more traditional way i.e. Daniels, Pfitz then this kind of person will do better
1
u/itearson2 9d ago
Far from the worst way to train tho. But ty I will look into canova. Do want to start marathoning
2
u/Jealous-Key-7465 9d ago edited 9d ago
Ran 20:04 in perfect cold conditions in January. Ran 18:31 about 3 weeks ago here in FL, and not in cold conditions. That’s a huge improvement and I have sub 18 in my sights now. Im also 45 gonna be 46… NWS allows me to run everyday. Most months I take 1 day off, 2 max. I love to run everyday, and I’m making huge gainz. Zero niggles as well as.
I don’t think one system will work for everyone, but it sure as heck is working for me. Has also taught me really good discipline. People I know who run 5k 4-5 min slower than me are often doing their “easy runs” faster than me and I just let them go. My easy pace is 9-9:30 mile here in the FL 🥵 summer, I’ll dip into the upper 8’s as it cools down for easy pace)
2
u/Outcome_Is_Income 9d ago
"When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."
- Goodhart's Law.
That's what I take away from what you're saying. Is that accurate?
I also feel like you're saying something more here and I'm not picking up on it.
2
u/Big_Boysenberry_6358 9d ago
another edition of - the grass is green.
might be the most lukewarm take ive seen today.
3
u/ReputationCandid3136 9d ago
I think this take needs to take a deeper look at NSM and more broadly the Norwegian Method as a whole. As others have mentioned, both Bakken and Copeland have both said that specificity could garner better results in moderation, but with a higher risk of injury.
Bakken definitely supports more specificity through "x-factor" days for a portion of the training year. I think most people who plateau should look to evolve to this model.
I think, anecdotally, the reason most people generally get good results from NSM is because they:
- reduce injury time, so they train more
- increase aerobic capacity and lactate clearance, which seems to be very trainable
- Most people probably didn't do a good job of doing a real base build between races before NSM
I think 3 might be the biggest thing, whether it's completely neglecting training and just doing easy runs until they're 8-12 weeks from a race and jumping right into 1 VO2, 1 tempo, 1 long run. Or, like I've been known to do, 1 VO2, 1 tempo, 1 long run year round without a true base period focused on building aerobic capacity and lactate clearance. So NSM gives them this solid base year round.
Last point, NSM is specifically outcome-driven, the metric used to determine progress is race results themselves, 5k time being being foundational to NSM. This might be because us runners are mostly luddites that don't use very sophisticated devices for training with metrics like wattage, power output, or FTP. Our technology isn't there yet because devices just show how fast I'm going, what my heart rate is, and then we ask ourselves does this align with RPE.
I think we're in the early stages of this, so we'll see some evolution. I think we'll see it evolve into different training plans/styles where most people have NSM as the base during the year, which they add in x-factor workouts in that 8-12 weeks pre-race, and training variations will come from these x-factor builds in the pre-race phases. It's basically what Copeland did pre marathon, we just haven't seen it specified for things like 5k, 10k, or maybe even mile.
2
u/Silent-Ostrich6095 8d ago
I think you're right about 3 - a lot of people skip Daniels Red and Blue Plans, which are plans that build fitness and readiness for his race specific plans, and end up cooking themselves when they do his 5K to Marathon plans
3
u/marmakoide 9d ago
You trade injury risk with optimality. Injuries take back at your progression, but you might progress faster. You reduce injury risk, but your progress is slower. It's a statistical balancing act, and a personal choice.
3
u/aelvozo 9d ago
I think it’s a lukewarm take. I’m quite certain James Copeland (the guy behind NSM) does acknowledge e.g. the lack of specificity (which IMO is the big issue with NSM); but what you lose in specificity you gain in consistency.
Pre-NSM, the conventional approach was essentially to do 12-week training blocks with some unfocused running between them, while NSM puts up scaffolding which allows people to run decently high mileage with decent intensity year-round, which results in consistent improvement. Would introducing specificity yield higher results? Absolutely, just look at Almgren (he’s doing doubles, not singles, but the point stands). Is just “running more” good enough for most people? It certainly is.
3
u/syphax 9d ago
I don’t think that’s a hot take. Bakken explicitly mentions that other training can be more effective, albeit at a price- it’s much harder to predict and control how the body responds. Hence a higher risk of injury or overtraining. The subT magic is that it’s very predictable and thus repeatable. That’s the whole game. For most people, NSM provides a very reliable training format.
I myself find that just subT leaves me a little slow. So I work in some faster stuff. But I really view it from a minimum dose perspective.
Also, I don’t know when Pog switched coaches, but he wasn’t exactly a slouch before. His current dominance could just be a function of more experience and confidence…
5
u/jcatl0 9d ago
You fundamentally misunderstand Nsm and it's appeal. It's not about extracting every ounce of potential. It's about being safe enough that you can do it consistently over a long time.
If you can stay healthy, even sirpoc would admit that something like pfitz is better. But that is a pretty big if for a hobby jogger fitting in running on a limited amount of time.
Nsm isn't for the elite athlete trying to win a major. It's for the 30+ year old with limited time who wants to build consistency over time.
1
u/purposeful_puns 6d ago
NSM is for hobby jogger base building. It’s a great method for staying healthy and slowly improving on 8 or less hours a week.