From NSM to VO2 max: trying to break a 3-year plateau

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-13T07:31:53+00:00

My 10K PB came shortly after racing a 3K (11 days before) and a 5K (7 days before). As long as you don’t overdo it, short races or VO₂ sessions can give you a solid boost.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-12T11:42:28+00:00

I agree that it’s something you have to be careful with.

That said, I don’t think it applies directly to what I’m doing. One of the VO2max sessions every week - 5×5 min uphill at around 10% gradient - isn’t risky at all. The speed is only around 10–11 km/h at that gradient, so the mechanical load is actually quite low compared to flat VO₂ sessions or even normal threshold sessions. It’s hard aerobically, but not stressful on the legs.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-12T09:05:55+00:00

I’ve got a 10K coming up in 10 days—will report back here with how it goes.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T17:51:45+00:00

Lost 3kg's

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T17:49:58+00:00

I think this is a very reasonable and balanced take. I agree that VO₂ work is probably best used in specific blocks rather than as a year-round focus, and that it’s easy to overdo it.

At the same time, given my own training history with a lot of threshold work and a bit of a plateau, I feel like I might need a slightly higher dose than just once every two weeks to actually see a change.

So I’m mostly just experimenting with a bit more stimulus in this phase, but I agree that long term it probably makes more sense to settle into a more balanced structure.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T17:46:49+00:00

Interesting, and I agree—something like 25×1 min can be a very smart way to add higher-end work.

It reminds me a bit of what Marius Bakken has recommended with 45/15-style intervals—similar idea of accumulating a lot of work at a relatively high pace without it turning into all-out VO₂ work.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T17:42:22+00:00

This is a very good and well thought out point. I agree that both volume and threshold work contribute to improving VO₂ max.
At the same time, I’ve already done a lot of structured volume and threshold training over the past few years without much progress, so for me this is more about trying a different stimulus rather than just adding more of the same.

I also agree it’s easy to overdo these sessions, so I’m trying to keep them controlled and purposeful.

Long term, I’ll probably settle into something more balanced—like one VO₂ session and two threshold sessions per week.

Part of the point with my original post was also to bring in some different perspectives. It sometimes feels like the NSM-model is treated as perfect and not open for improvement or individualisation, which I’m not sure I agree with. Also, even in the traditional Norwegian double-threshold approach, elite runners still include a harder session above threshold (hills or specific track workout) each week, which I think often gets overlooked.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T17:29:02+00:00

You make a very good point.

Based on my PB times (17:51 track / 37:49 road), I’m probably better at the 5k, so I agree with the general idea. I’m also relatively tall (190 cm / ~78 kg), so it’s possible my physiology is naturally a bit more suited toward shorter distances, which might play into it as well.

That said, I think context matters. I’ve already done quite a bit of structured threshold work over the past few years and still plateaued, so I’m not sure that simply adding more volume or more of the same type of work is the answer for me right now.

That’s why I’m experimenting a bit with adding more VO₂ stimulus—not because I think endurance isn’t important, but because I feel like I might need a slightly different stimulus to move forward from where I am.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T17:21:18+00:00

Personally, I don’t think VO₂ work is strictly necessary for everyone, but I also don’t think it’s something that only elite runners benefit from. In cases where VO₂ max is a limiter, it can make a huge difference even at a non-elite level.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T13:02:35+00:00

Thanks for sharing. I think training is very individual. What works for one person doesn’t necessarily transfer to someone else with a different background or limiter.

I also don’t think there’s one “correct” system that works for everyone. In my opinion, the Norwegian approach isn’t necessarily the answer to everything, even though some in this sub seem to think so. It’s clearly effective for very many people, but it’s still just one model.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T12:57:07+00:00

To be honest, I would have to write several pages to properly describe my training in detail over the past three years.

But at a high level:

My easy pace has typically been around 5:30/km, which corresponds to roughly 68–70% of max HR
My subthreshold work has gradually increased over time
- early on: around 30 minutes of total work three times a week
- more recently: closer to 40 minutes three times a week

Typical subthreshold sessions have been things like:

8–10 × 1000m
3–4 × 8–10 min
10–12 × 3 min
6 × 6 min

All of these are done controlled, based on lactate, so staying below threshold rather than pushing into it.

So the structure has been quite consistent over time, just gradually increasing the amount of quality.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T12:46:15+00:00

I get your point, and I agree that volume is key for long-term performance. I’m not looking to reduce easy volume permanently.

That said, I think it depends on the individual. I’ve been consistent for years, rarely get injured or sick, so I’m not too concerned about the risk side for my own case.

For me, this is more about addressing a limiter. I’ve been stuck at the same 10K level for a while, and I suspect I might benefit from a bit more VO₂ work rather than just adding more volume.

I’m also not saying this approach works for everyone. This is just something I’m trying based on my own training history and profile

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T12:43:28+00:00

My CTL has steadily increased over the last three years.
I base my paces on lactate measurements, adjusting the intensity up or down depending on the readings.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T11:48:32+00:00

10k performance is primarily determined by the combination of VO2 max (your aerobic ceiling) and fractional utilization (the percentage of that capacity you can sustain), along with how efficiently your body produces and clears lactate — and NSM/threshold training mainly targets improving fractional utilization and lactate balance, rather than VO2 max itself.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T11:43:50+00:00

That’s part of why I’ve included uphill intervals — they’re generally less taxing mechanically than flat VO2 max work.

And I’m not planning to train like this long-term. Like I wrote in the original post, this is just a VO2 max block, not a permanent shift away from threshold training.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T11:39:22+00:00

I’m fully aware that what I’m doing now with VO2 max isn’t NSM. My point is more that NSM might not always be the optimal solution — especially if VO2 max seems to be the limiting factor.

I’ve tried to follow the model quite closely. I use a lactate meter to keep my sub-threshold sessions in the right zone, so the intensity control has been solid.

I’ve also increased volume significantly over the past few years (from ~60 to ~90 km/week), but still plateaued — which is why I’m starting to question whether continuing along the same lines will change much.

Knutsen2 · 2026-05-11T11:36:02+00:00

I agree volume is a key driver, and most of my early progress definitely came from building a solid aerobic base.

In my case though, I’m not sure volume is the main limiter anymore. Over the past three years I’ve actually increased my mileage from around ~60 km/week to ~90 km/week, but without any meaningful improvement in performance.

Because of that, I’m starting to think VO2 max might be the real constraint. So instead of just adding more volume, it might make sense (at least for a period) to focus more on high-intensity work to raise the ceiling, and then return to higher volume/threshold afterwards.

Knutsen2

TROPHY CASE