The Norweigan Model of Lactate Threshold Training
The Norwegian model of lactate threshold training offers an intriguing approach for middle and long distance athletes. This model has been implemented successfully by some elite athletes, most notably in recent times Jackob Ingebrigtsen. The model emphasises moderating training intensity through lactate control and a unique method of blocking workouts.
Whereas traditional training in Track and Field often emphasises event-specific intensity or “race-pace” work, especially as the competitive season approaches, the Norwegian model argues that focusing on threshold work yields a more sustainable aerobic base without compromising speed adaptation.
🏃♀️ Athlete Example: While an 800m runner might typically alternate high-intensity, short-interval work with longer runs at a comfortable pace, the Norwegian model would advocate that this athlete should prioritise threshold intervals year-round, adding race-specific work only sparingly.
💡 Ask Yourself: Does the general fitness built through threshold training outweigh the specificity of race-pace work?
Key Components of the Norwegian Lactate Model
The essence of the Norwegian approach lies in carefully maintaining training at the athlete's lactate threshold, trying to achieve an optimal balance between high-intensity work and muscular recovery. The five elements below are defining features of the model.
📏 Lactate-Controlled Threshold Training
This model relies on regular lactate measurement to identify the training intensity “sweet spot”, where athletes can maximise their endurance while avoiding muscular fatigue. For most athletes, this occurs at a lactate level of 2-3 mmol/l.
⏰ Double Threshold Training
Usually twice weekly, athletes engage in two threshold sessions per day—morning and evening. This strategy aims to increase the overall threshold workload within a short timeframe without causing excessive muscular strain, thus permitting higher training volumes.
📆 Clustering Workouts
By structuring workouts within a condensed period, the model aims to help athletes capitalise on recovery windows and adapt to higher loads. For example, a coach might schedule a seven-day “block” of aerobic threshold work, followed by a rest phase.
🔁 Interval Variation
The Norwegian model uses intervals to optimise threshold work and allow mini-recoveries, often selecting longer intervals in the morning and shorter, high-intensity intervals in the evening. This structure can be adapted for different track events, with intervals more specific to the athlete’s target distance.
⛰️ Altitude Training
While this is certainly not exclusive to the Norweigan method, altitude training plays an important role in the model. Athletes use altitude training to boost lactate threshold and build endurance by managing the challenges of lower oxygen levels.
Implementing it in Your Training Environment
For Australian coaches, the Norwegian model offers both an opportunity and a challenge. This approach could significantly improve endurance and anaerobic efficiency, yet it also requires extensive monitoring and an athlete’s commitment to a disciplined threshold regime. If you think this might be a suitable approach for your squad, consider implementing some of the following coaching strategies.
Monitor Athlete’s Lactate Levels?
The goal of lactate monitoring is to help athletes find their 2-3 mmol/l. range, which is the desired threshold training intensity. Sadly, there are no mass-market continuous lactate monitoring tools at this time. A promising wearble tool by IDRO has been developed and is in use in research and clinical settings, but plans for a public release of the product have been repeatedly pushed back. Until this or a similar product is widely available, lactate monitoring is going to be very difficult for the average runner and coach to access.
Some High Performance environments use portable lactate test kits (such as the Lactate Plus), where athletes prick their finger or earlobe to take a blood sample and analyse it with a lactate strip and a portable lactate monitor. The drawback to these tools is that they are expensive, need to be used periodically throughout the training session, and require some skill and technical know-how to operate the equipment. Coaches should also be aware that the official manufacturer’s advice is that they should only be used in a clinical setting, meaning you are putting yourself at a legal risk should something go wrong and you are using the tool in a way that it is not intended.
So what can the average distance coach do?
Use RPE and the ‘Talk-Test’ to Estimate Lactate Levels
Obviously this is going to be far less reliable than the sensors described above, but some research suggests that an RPE between 6 and 7 corresponds most closely with a lactate threshold effort. Coaches should be able to observe their athletes being able to talk in full sentences - where athletes are limited to one or two word responses, they have likely moved into their anaerobic zone.
Experiment with Double Threshold Days
Start by experimenting with two daily sessions at or just below the lactate threshold, particularly in the base training phase. For instance, a middle-distance runner could do a 4 x 5-minute threshold interval session in the morning, followed by shorter intervals (e.g., 10 x 1 minute) in the evening.
Use Altitude Training When Appropriate
For athletes with access to altitude environments, introduce these phases strategically. For instance, a 10-day altitude block with double threshold days could be highly beneficial before key competitions.
Alternate Interval Lengths and Intensities
Structure training sessions with varied interval lengths to allow adaptation without over-stressing the muscles. For instance, after a week of longer, threshold-focused intervals, the next week could include shorter, higher-intensity intervals at or just above threshold.
Apply a ‘Green-Yellow-Red’ System for Recovery
Monitoring athletes’ readiness and adapting sessions is critical to avoid burnout. The “traffic light” system—green for high readiness, yellow for moderate caution, and red for stopping early—can guide training loads based on factors like heart rate, lactate, and subjective fatigue.
Example Training Weeks
The following example weekly plans show how an advanced senior distance athlete may incorporate this model of training in their weekly plan.
What About Developing Young Athletes?
For a developing athlete who trains only a few times per week, the Norwegian model can be adapted to focus on building foundational endurance, aerobic capacity, and gradual threshold improvement without the high intensity or frequency used by elite athletes.
Ask Yourself...
Now that you’ve read a little about the Norwegian training model, reflect on how these concepts might apply to your own coaching and training sessions.
💭 What advantages and potential gains do you see in implementing this model with your athletes?
💭 What possible risks or challenges could arise with this approach in your specific training environment?
💭 How would you adapt this model to suit the needs, goals, and abilities of each of your athletes?
Take a moment to think through these questions and consider how the Norwegian training model might align with your coaching philosophy and approach. Every training model has unique strengths and challenges—it's up to you to decide how it can best serve your athletes!
It really works...
Athletes like Jakob Ingebrigtsen and his brothers, who specialise in distances from 1500m to 5000m, have achieved remarkable success using the Norwegian model of lactate threshold training. This method has contributed to Jakob’s Olympic gold and world-class performances, with a core focus on double threshold sessions, carefully monitored lactate levels, and periodised altitude training.
Additionally, the Norwegian triathletes Kristian Blummenfelt and Gustav Iden have dominated international events, showcasing the model’s effectiveness beyond running. Their results underline the model’s potential to elevate performance in endurance events by pushing the anaerobic threshold without overtaxing the body.
...Sometimes
However, not all athletes respond well to this approach. For example, consider the case of an Australian 800m runner with a naturally high proportion of fast-twitch muscle fibres and a strong preference for high-intensity, race-pace intervals. After success as a junior, they transitioned for several months to the Norwegian model. This athlete felt constantly fatigued and lacked the sharpness they typically gained from speed-focused sessions.
Their performance in key races dropped, and they experienced nagging muscle soreness, likely due to the cumulative strain of double threshold days without enough neuromuscular recovery. In this case, the model’s heavy threshold emphasis may have undermined the athlete’s explosive qualities, which was the basis of their success as a junior. This example illustrates that while the Norwegian model is highly effective for some, others may require a more speed-oriented approach to reach their full potential.
Commonly Cited Strengths of the Model
Adaptation without Exhaustion: By splitting sessions into shorter intervals or double sessions, you can achieve cumulative threshold work without prolonged strain. Middle-distance athletes benefit by retaining their speed base, and long-distance athletes build sustained endurance, both with controlled fatigue.
High Volume, Low Wear and Tear: Because these workouts are close to but not over the threshold, the body isn’t as taxed as it would be with constant high-intensity work. This approach allows for high mileage without breaking down the muscles, which is ideal for athletes who need to maintain endurance over long races.
Adaptability to Race Needs: Threshold work in this model allows athletes to reach near-peak aerobic capacity, giving them more buffer against fatigue during races. Double threshold days give middle-distance athletes an endurance boost without sacrificing too much speed.
Commonly Cited Limitations of the Model
Resource-Intensive: Lactate measurement isn’t easily available enough for every coach or athlete, and this model is very reliant on accurate lactate readings. If lactate testing equipment isn’t available, it becomes difficult to monitor and adjust training precisely. Getting athletes to train in the desired zone through subjective tests like RPE and the talk-test alone are unlikely to be reliable, and the risk of not training in the desired intensity zone and over-training become a threat.
Limited Event-Specific Speed Work: For athletes in the 800m–1500m range, this model might be too endurance-focused, potentially limiting the benefits of true speed workouts that are essential for race performance in shorter middle distances.
Risk of Monotony: Threshold training can get repetitive, especially when workouts stay within a narrow range. Athletes used to more varied paces might find this approach lacks the mental stimulation or physical variety they’re accustomed to, which could impact motivation.
Recovery Demands: Double threshold days require athletes to recover quickly between sessions. For athletes who are prone to overuse injuries or have limited recovery capacity, this could be a risk factor, so they’ll need close monitoring.
Ultimately, adopting the Norwegian lactate model should not mean discarding traditional methods entirely but integrating a structured, data-informed approach to threshold training. For Australian coaches, blending this model with your existing practices could foster a new generation of track and field athletes who are not only fast but also resilient and adaptable.
💡 Ask Yourself: What do you need to know more about to consider adopting this approach?
Let us know in the comments below and we’ll explore further in subsequent articles/