Anybody else listening to the new Norwegian Method Podcast from SantaraTech?
At the start they explicitly say it’s intended to benefit age-group athletes. Wow, that’s sounds awesome, Coach Olav distilling it down for age groupers like me! 1.5 episodes in and it just seems like a lot of vague high-level mumbo-jumbo, occasionally peppered with tips that are definitely not relevant for a typical age grouper. For example:
Don’t over-focus on hemoglobin mass measurementsBe mindful that the coaching team isn’t too big, such that coaches are fighting for the athlete’s attention"So how would you structure a 20h/wk training plan for IMWC?"
David also speaks incredible fast, which is a little hard to follow.
Maybe it will get better? Maybe others are getting value from it? Curious if I’m the only one finding it surprisingly lacking of useful information?
Curious if I’m the only one finding it surprisingly lacking of useful information?
I haven’t listened to that one, but speaking of culty training podcasts, I found it a similar experience trying to listen to Peter Attia/Iñigo San Millán-type podcasts. Just hours and hours without much real content. There are some good things, like reinforcing that using HR or power to regulate effort levels is probably just fine - don’t need to do the cumbersome and expensive strip-testing thing. That’s not to say they’re “bad,” just that if all you want is the key information, you can get that just fine from reading a few compact articles.
I’m glad I’m not the only one thinking this. There is the occasional bit of interesting information, but even then it’s not truly useful for anyone training without lab support.
Very likely I missed that amongst the talk of haemoglobin mass and stroke volume etc.
It’s fascinating to see how the training processes they implement is as far removed from mine as their performances are, but not much I can draw from it.
I agreed with that assessment after episode 1. I found episode 2 to be much better with advice on critical power and velocity curves, but there’s nothing earth shattering there. No real direction for training other than test frequently.
I find Olav intends to keep things relatable but the other host goes down rabbit hole after rabbit hole that is just too complex for your typical age grouper. I could be wrong, but I don’t believe he even does triathlon which might explain why he’s a bit out of touch with the “reality†of most age groupers.
. No real direction for training other than test frequently
——
Being a coach for now over 15 years the biggest single thing I’ve learned. Every workout is a “test†if the program is written correctly so that you eventually don’t need to “test frequentlyâ€. IE- the weekly key quality sessions are weekly “tests†that you don’t need to apply more psyuedo pressure on some “test set†every month/block etc that supposedly is defining if the training has gone well.
Plus “test sets†tend to do something many times to athletes pysche….it’s like why is this test set any different than the similar type of set they did last week except it wasn’t designed or marked as a “test set� I’m of the mindset, the less “test sets†you can put in training (again coaches should be able to tell by daily workouts and weekly key sessions what the athlete is able to do) the better and the best tests in the business = races
ETA: Obviously if you are with elite athletes 24/7 and they are training in front of you, making them do “test sets” pretty much becomes the norm of the training. But if you are talking about general AG approach imo “test frequently” would imo not be the best path for fun and performance in said sport.
“my oppinion is the following: a lot of talking without saying very much. It is not interesting.”
I think that applies to the vast majority of podcasts.
There’s two real questions whenever peak level coaches are on podcasts:
What, if anything are they doing differently than their peers that is (presumably) the source of superiority?
If such a thing exists, why would they tell the world these methods on a free podcast?
I’m of the opinion that all of this stuff is chasing increasingly small marginal gains. Blu and Iden are still doing 90% the same stuff as every other pro triathlete. The testing isn’t making anybody faster, it’s just giving info about the current state. For 99% of triathletes the way to get faster is train more, sleep more, eat healthier, stop drinking. Not much podcast material in there.
Would it actually be helpful to know: “Given Blu’s lactate curve going into IMWC we needed to produce a bit more glycolytic power, so we focused on efforts in 5 minute range at 3.0mmol”. Without context of what he was doing before, what his lactate and power curve looked like, and what their expected power/lactate range for the race looked like there isn’t much useful info in there.
. No real direction for training other than test frequently
——
Being a coach for now over 15 years the biggest single thing I’ve learned. Every workout is a “test†if the program is written correctly so that you eventually don’t need to “test frequentlyâ€. IE- the weekly key quality sessions are weekly “tests†that you don’t need to apply more psyuedo pressure on some “test set†every month/block etc that supposedly is defining if the training has gone well.
Plus “test sets†tend to do something many times to athletes pysche….it’s like why is this test set any different than the similar type of set they did last week except it wasn’t designed or marked as a “test set� I’m of the mindset, the less “test sets†you can put in training (again coaches should be able to tell by daily workouts and weekly key sessions what the athlete is able to do) the better and the best tests in the business = races
ETA: Obviously if you are with elite athletes 24/7 and they are training in front of you, making them do “test sets” pretty much becomes the norm of the training. But if you are talking about general AG approach imo “test frequently” would imo not be the best path for fun and performance in said sport.
Maybe you were hoping for a specific piece of training advice that works for everyone and that people don’t already know about?
Ideally “it’s all about the calories, eat more doughnuts” or “train easier to go faster”?
I’m not sure how my post above merits what feels like a tongue in cheek comment?
The one host overcomplicates things and the podcast is called the “Norwegian Methodâ€, aimed at informing AGers with Kona ambitions on all things training and racing. Two episodes in, I’m not sure we’ve learned much about this “method†and how it is any different. Maybe I just had high hopes.
Maybe you were hoping for a specific piece of training advice that works for everyone and that people don’t already know about?
Ideally “it’s all about the calories, eat more doughnuts” or “train easier to go faster”?
I’m not sure how my post above merits what feels like a tongue in cheek comment?
The one host overcomplicates things and the podcast is called the “Norwegian Methodâ€, aimed at informing AGers with Kona ambitions on all things training and racing. Two episodes in, I’m not sure we’ve learned much about this “method†and how it is any different. Maybe I just had high hopes.
What is there about it that’s not already known (that they would be willing to say)?
Train a lot of intervals at or just below your MLSS, use a lactate meter to make sure you’re at that specific intensity. By doing this you can (theoretically) accumulate a greater training response to your already maxed out training stress. I’m not sure how applicable this is to AG’s who aren’t close to maxing out their weekly/monthly training stress, they may be better off just going harder and upping that stress from 80% of max to 90% of max.
It’s just this modern age group mindset - searching for training hacks that supposedly make olympians Kona-fit in the hopes of going sub 10. I just don’t understand what motivates an age grouper to race ironmans if they focus on other people’s tips to improve speed. The best you can hope for is to be a carbon copy of every average age grouper with a generic training plan, no fun and little ownership of your success. Potentially in poor health and with time and money down the drain, living someone else’s life.
Put another way: If a pro improves due to a coach’s advice, they get more prize money and sponsors while still keeping the satisfaction they’re training as hard as the best who are also given unlimited time and energy. Meanwhile, if an age grouper (competing against others with wildly varying levels of free time and income) improves by copying other people’s training, what do they get out of it?
At best, the new “method” or piece of kit just becomes another barrier to entry - if it’s even any good. At worst you end up doing training you dislike and is that is bad for you. Either way it’s not your own process. This way of going about your hobby just makes no sense to me.
