I have read James’ book and love the theory.

I’m a bit confused about his paces. Sub threshold is clearly slower than 10k and HM pace but page 134 he references his shorter reps being run at 95/96% of 10km race pace. I don’t understand how this is sub threshold?

I’m asking as with the tables etc he seems to suggest we should all be running slow Sub-TH based on 5km times but in practice he is actually exerting quite an effort running at very close to 10km race pace…..

Hi all,

I have always been a relatively low volume runner - 3 runs per week, around 30km baseline and then increasing to around 60-65km peaks for marathons, but over the last year I have added in two gym sessions (Hyrox, so a mix of strength and cardio included). I had stagnated for a while, although always felt I still had room to improve and that the problem was mostly overtraining. After my autumn 2025 marathon I received James's book as a Christmas present (after having heard bits and pieces) and switched fully to a sub-threshold approach.

I initially went to one fully easy day and two sub-threshold sessions (10 and 12km of quality in each), plus the two gym days and I ran new 10km (38:01) and marathon (3:01) PBs.

However, post-marathon I switched to three sub-threshold sessions a week (2x8km, 1x9km of quality) alongside the gym sessions, along with upping my baseline to 40km per week. It's hard to tell through the heat of summer (I live in Portugal), but I seem to be making progress after having lost some fitness in the marathon recovery.

I am wondering whether there are any other low volume runners out there that have made adjustments to the NSM that have thoughts about what works best and whether they are seeing good results?

Hi, I've been following the NSM for about a month now. I haven't seen much in the way of progress yet, but it's still early days.

I've read James' book cover to cover, but I still find it hard to know if I'm running at the correct intensity, especially during the easy/long runs.

I run 6-7 days/week, with about 90min sub-T and the rest easy (~75km/46mi total). My PBs are:

5km - 19:50

10km - 40:59

Max. HR I've recorded (using a chest strap) is 194 at the end of an all out 5km, resulting in a 136 limit for easy runs.

Garmin has consistently estimated my LTHR to be ~179, which I believe to be fairly accurate. Following the book's paces, my HR gets up to about 172-177 during sub-T runs, closer to the higher end on the 10x3min intervals. I'd rate these a 6-7/10 RPE.

On easy runs, I really feel like I'm plodding in order to keep my HR below 136. My average pace is 6:40-7:10/km (10:45-11:15/mi) depending on the temperature. RPE 2/10

Am I on the right track here, or should I be closer to or further from threshold? Are my easy runs really supposed to be that slow?

10x3min intervals.icu screenshot

https://bashify.io/i/jdGtcv

I have a bit of a query for my HR for my sub threshold reps. I have been doing this training for a year now and have had some good results - 17.06 5k and 35.51 10k but not sure if I have been going too hard in my workouts.

I had a lactate test done 11 years ago now so was just using those figures which stated my LT2 was 159 BPM so was sticking to under that for my reps. However in the last year my race HR have been average 151 and max 159 so never really getting out of threshold which does seem odd for me, this was calculated over 11 races in the last year.

For the last 3 months I have decided to not go over 154 HR in training as I don't feel I should be going up to 156-158 in training when I only hit that in races?! Not entirely sure what my maximum HR is (I would guess at 170) but I do my easy runs at around 110-113 HR.

I guess I will find out in future races but I got a calf niggle in May and also had low ferritin at the beginning of the year so wonder if I was just going too hard on everything.

For reference I was only doing 2 x sub threshold sessions a week. Now I am still doing 2 running sub thresholds a week but have added in a 3rd session on the elliptical (for the last 2 months) to see if I can make more gains that way.

Grateful for any advice. I know I could go and get another lactate test done but not sure how accurate they are in a lab when its different conditions to what I would then be doing my sessions in so feel like I'm guessing things at the moment. I also know its better to be undercooking things than overcooking things as well.

My session yesterday was 5 x 5 mins (60) at avg pace 6.10 per mile and avg HR 144, max HR 152 which is probably about right pace wise for where I am fitness wise - around a 17.20-30ish 5k currently.

Hey everyone,

I’m starting a 15-week build for my very first marathon on December 6th.

I’m aiming for a sub-3 hour finish. My current 5k and 10k PBs are 18:05 and 38:08 (set in May 2026), and also my last half (Dec 2025) was 1:27.

Right now, I’m averaging about 5 hours/week spread over 5 running days, plus 2 strength sessions. I want to transition to 6 running days per week starting this week.

Current Weekly Structure (5 Days):

• Mon: Easy run
• Tue: Sub-threshold intervals + Strength
• Wed: Rest
• Thu: Sub-threshold intervals
• Fri: Rest
• Sat: Easy run + Strength
• Sun: Easy Long Run (90')

Proposed Weekly Structure (6 Days):

My initial thought for adding a 6th day looks like this (with the special workouts set in sirpoc plan):

• Mon: Easy run
• Tue: Sub-threshold intervals
• Wed: Rest
• Thu: Sub-threshold intervals
• Fri: Easy run
• Sat: Sub-threshold intervals + Strength
• Sun: Easy Long Run

Questions & Advice Needed:

1. Sub-Threshold Volume: Would you recommend sticking to 2 sub-threshold sessions per week or bumping it up to 3 sessions as per the book and vanilla recommendation? If I stick to 2, where would you place the extra easy volume instead?
2. Long Run Progression: How would you evolve the Sunday long run over a 15-week block for someone coming off 5k/10k training? Should I start introducing Marathon Pace (MP) segments into the long run early on, or focus purely on easy distance first increasing 5 mins each week as per the book?
3. Weekly Volume Scaling: Moving from 5 hours/week to a proper marathon peak—what kind of weekly hour/mileage progression makes sense without blowing up my legs or adding injury risk?
4. General Advice: Any other tips from someone who has done it and had success with it?

Appreciate any insight, workout suggestions, or feedback on structuring this block!

For those who don’t run 7 days and say run 5/6 or are working on adding days - is there a favourable method here? Is it better to stack 6 consecutive days over running 3 days in a row then resting before continuing again. Does it make any difference?

Hi, im wanting to implement norwegian singles method after reading james copeland book last summer. One thing that stopped me is i start to break down when running over 45km a week. 45km is around 3hr 45 mins a week with one quicker run and the rest is easy + strides. My body is fine at this point now (started running 3 years ago, last year it 30km). But if I was to increase my load to 4 and half hours (going off the book this is the entry point) I’d be looking at about 52.5km a week. I can have a month of working up to 50/55km+ and then my body starts to breakdown with niggles.

So my question is how do I work up to 4 and half hours without getting injured so I can start Norwegian singles? Or can I do it at my current time load and slowly increase it over time? (I’m doing S&C to work on my niggles, 2 months into that)

Easy pace 5:10 km, HR normally around 130/140

10km: 38:50 HM: 1:27

Hey!

I usually bike to and from work which can add about 20-25 total load for the day according to intervals icu. This is not an insignificant number I think since my easy runs can be in that range.

This is something I recently realised when I started using my watch for the ride. Would you adjust your training according to this? Is so, how?

The term fatigue seams to be use as a double edge sword, that you need to know how to not over do it but do it enough to drive the adaptation. And that stimulus under depletion enhances the adaptation.

And that seams to be the case of Ingebritsen to be as fatigue as posible but not go over the edge and repeat for long periods of time (not tryieng to focus on the injuries), and has worken very well for him and brothers.

How does some one can distinguish the fatigue from the on that will get you stronger from the one that will get you in a hole.

The CTL is one metric many here will say but that in mi case havent relate at all from how i run or training is going and seams to just reward volume (in my case)

Hi everyone, I am looking for advice on choosing between two training methods for my sub-threshold sessions: (1) treadmill vs (2) outdoor.

My main concern is that I live somewhere that's typically around 30°C / 70% humidity year round, and I'm finding a pretty significant difference between treadmill and outdoor sessions.

For example, here is a comparison of 2 sub-T sessions that I did this week just 2 days apart:

Treadmill: Air-conditioned gym (~20°C, 0% incline):

• 12 min reps @ 4:15/km: HR roughly 165 → 175
• RPE feels comfortably sub-threshold
• I doubt the speed calibration is significantly different from what is shown as cadence and stride length feels just about right compared to outdoors. The main difference is the cardiac drift is SO much lower and stable
• However, it does not replicate the same stimulus as running outdoors esp when racing

Outdoor: ~30°C/70% humidity:

• 5×6 min @ 4:16/km: HR roughly 170 → 185
• Same pace feels significantly harder, not to mention the reps are shorter
• Even slowing down / using 1% treadmill incline adjustments, the outdoor equivalent tends to push HR into the high 170s/low 180s

For context, my LTHR is ~184, max HR 200.

My question is would you recommend doing the majority of my sub-T sessions on the treadmill under controlled conditions, or should I run outdoors and simply slow the pace down until HR/RPE is equivalent?

Thank you.

Hello!

I've been following NSM since New Year's and really like the structure and continuity it gives. I'm in need of some new shoes for my intervals, and I'm contemplating the EVO SL or Adios 9 to put into my rotation:

It would slot in with the following shoes:

Race: AP4

Long/easy: Vomero Plus (will switch to HB Edge when they are worn out)

Easy: Supernova Rise 3 (will likely remove this dedicated easy and alternate with the long run and interval shoe for easy sessions)

Intervals: Old AP4 + Insert new shoe

Current 5k shape: 17:27

Any thoughts on which to go for? I want to try the Adios 9, but not sure it will be good to do 3 sessions a week in them. Maybe I'll alternate the old AP4 + the long run shoe for some of the sessions. EVO SL is a safe bet, but I would like to have a shoe that forces me to train my lower legs and feet more.

Anyone who has experience with the Adios 9 and NSM style intervals?

My goal is to create a shoe rotation that gives me the relevant strength for my race-day shoes, so currently not interested in other brand shoes (even though there are many fun and interesting options out there)

I have this question myself, and I tried to find answers in the book/reddit threads but didn't find a definitive answer. I'm posting this in the form of an answer to summarize what I have found and show that I wasn't being lazy. BUT I am not an NSM expert and I will accept any corrections.

TLDR: If you are not running at least 4.5 hours a week, spread across 6 days of the week, you are not the kind of "beginner" that people in these spaces are talking about.

What is NSM?

Briefly, because the OPs of other threads asking this question dont even seem to know:

The Norwegian Singles Method is a training structure targeted at runners spending 6-8 hours per week on running. The canonical form also assumes you run everyday of the week.

The "selling point" of NSM is that it will allow you to make the most of this "limited" running time, while allowing you to repeat the same structure (with minor variations), week after week with no "boom and bust" cycles.

Is it for beginners?

Some people will say yes, but in running, "beginner" is a very broad term.

I suspect this has to do with the recent rise in the popularity of running. Some people think 15 miles a week is "solid", while experts in the field are making videos like "How to get good while running 40 miles a week" becuase 40 is considered low. But I digress

NSM is made to make the most out of a "limited" 6-8 hours per week. For perspective, a C25K finisher is running 1.5 hours per week, of all easy volume. NSM is targeted at people running 4x that volume and are physically capable of running more, but cannot due to logistics/desire rather than durability.

In the book (link removed because that seems to be a problem), there is no "are you ready for NSM?" checklist. There is a 4.5 hour / week schedule, that he describes as a "gateway" to canonical NSM. That routine has 3 speed sessions, and 3 easy runs, one of which is a long easy run.

Answer: NSM is not for "beginners" in the colloquial sense of the word "beginner". Its for serious novices

If you aren't running at least 4.5 hours per week, on 6 runs per week, you need to work up to that first to even begin incorporating the 2.5 speed sessions described in the "gateway" plan.

You need to be advanced enough to look at 4 consecutive days where you do a Speed^(tm) day, a long run day, an easy run day, and yet another speed day and consider that "easy" day the recovery period between your long run and the next speed day.

If you are a true beginner who fell into the NSM discussions, you should aim to get to 6 easy runs per week, including an easy long run. And then incorporate "half of a speed day" as described in the gateway plan of the book into one of the runs out of 6. And then turn 3 of the 6 days into those "half speed" days, and then begin turning those 3 days into the real sub threshold speed days.

A lot of the threads you see amongst novice/intermediate runners in spaces discussing NSM are amongst people who ran out of time in the week to do "standard" polarized training.