Your link is taking me to a different article.

This is the link.

Capitalizing on the hype, good for them.

thank you. i made the edit.

There's still time to sign up, get your Super Sapiens Blood Glucose Monitor, and Lactate Threshold Meter. Aren't all your average age groupers doing these things?

Honestly, there's probably some good data to back up their methods, but there is so much low hanging fruit for Age Groupers. First sleep (recovery), second nutrition (optimizing body composition) third time management (managing time and balancing stress or cortisol), and finally continued training improvements (doing the work).

I have to believe very few age groupers have every area at optimal levels. Throwing in glucose and lactate monitoring seems over the top for most of us.

Could not have said it better myself. I'm glad they're getting paid for what they created, but my god, if you've actually optimized to this extent then an actual in-person coach should be the next logical step.

Despite my personal reliance on data, I do feel pretty strongly that training data needs to be viewed in context. If I have a threshold session with out of range blood lactate v. power numbers, the first questions are about hydration, previous meal timing and fatigue. I don't see any way an app can capture hydration and meal timing status without being overly intrusive or cumbersome.

Agreed, @mathematics. I've written an app in this space (the nutrition side only) and it's going to have to be an insanely good design to not be another mess of over-tracking, poor analysis, and misapplication of what's truly important. Good on them for innovating though.

Disclosures: Over-tracking is one of my personal pet peeves. I wrote an app that does very little "monitoring and tracking" and instead just learns about the user the way that a coach would, with a good up front conversation, then makes recommendations, and will eventually allow "light" tracking and iteration based on those data.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

Age group athletes don't need more apps or devices or hardware. They need to work to develop their sense of what the brain and body are communicating. It's as simple as being present and engaged with less "middle men" in between the brain and body.

Tim

---

http://www.magnoliamasters.com
http://www.snappingtortuga.com
http://www.swimeasyspeed.com

Agree 100%. One of the middle men that severely interferes in that brain-body dialogue are music/earphones. Not to mention the interference with cadence.

I am biased since I am connected to the Entalpi team, but triathletes are already collecting loads of data with their sensors. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to use these data to improve your training even more? The Norwegian method is not only about collecting data, but a big part of it is about using the data you have in an optimal way to improve your training (and race times).

I think most triathletes would benefit more from getting rid of most of the data collected and being more in touch with RPE than they would from this

Does this app measure your glucose and lactate levels in your sweat via the finger print sensor on your phone?

Blummenfeldt said on triathlon mockery that each lactate strip is 4 dollars (or a cake)

By the way, specifically how does the quote relate to the app?

The concept will work as long as you have a stop watch for swimming, gps watch for running and a power meter for cycling. More data (sensors) will improve the outputs, but is not mandatory to get started.

Big question for me, is why would I choose this algorithm-based plan over, say, trainerroad?

Trainerroad has an incredible dataset (~200,000 users) of specific training interventions over a long period of time with a repeated testing protocol against just about any cohort imaginable. TR used their treasure trove of training data to develop and train their algorithm.

This seems to be trading on the success on a small number of elite norwegian athletes. Why trust this vs trainnerroad?

Not myself advocating the method, but the Norwegians do have several activate world champions and LS in triathlon utilizing their training system.

Trainerroad has zero, last I counted. And prior to the AI-coaching of TR (I haven't used the AI so I can't comment on it, but I used the prior version a lot), their plans broke a lot of motivated athletes through burnout and overtraining with all those nutz intervals.

But isn't the "Norwegian" method based a ton on lactate blood testing. The other poster mentioned not needing lactate stuff to get started. Which at that point, how viable of a "norwegian" system is it for an AG athlete at that point?

Not knocking the system, I think he's questioning the viability of applying of the "details" to then applying it to AG athletes.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Yes, but that could just be marketing BS. Just because somebody endorses something for money does not mean it's good. The app will have to prove itself.

One of the tenets of the Norwegian system is controlled intensity via lactate testing. That is what allows the incredibly high volume of intensity. A lot of athletes could improve by doing more LT2/tempo volume, but a lot of athletes (especially those doing tempo too hard) will burn themselves out. Stimulate, don't annihilate.

its about 2 dollars a strip.

Yes, but other poster posted this:

The concept will work as long as you have a stop watch for swimming, gps watch for running and a power meter for cycling. More data (sensors) will improve the outputs, but is not mandatory to get started.



I get it, they don't want to "force" you to do blood testing, and it would be "cool' to be doing the Norwegian method with much less invasiveness, but at that point, with non lactating testing are you going to get the "norwegian" experience?

ETA: If your "method" is based on lactate testing so that it allows you to perform better, I would thus think lactate testing would be *mandatory*....anything less would be a likely inaccurate substitute. I feel like this method has a much more "buy in" from the athlete, and doing it any other way, is that even the "norwegian" way at that point?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

late to this discussion (thanks international travel) yet I think TR probably has a bias in the way the overall system is built. It's a lot of short testing then short(er) intervals usually at above threshold/CP/MLSS

The short testing is biased towards overpredicting MLSS/CP/threshold* and the short intervals are often above that point yet not hard enough to elicit central changes nor are they sustainable to provide growth for an entire season. Maybe that's the difference?


*however you want to define the point, (FTP/CP/MLSS/threshold), at which over it your capacity to do work for long periods of time is severely diminished, while under that point you can do significant amounts of work

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Again, I'm not advocating it. I have no plans on lactate testing, ever. And just from my superficial observations via youtube videos, it does seem to be pretty important for the method.

But I'll give credit where credit is due - the Norwegians have figured something out at the top ranks that have them getting world-beating results in the past 2 years, against legit competition, so you can't just discount them.

Whether the app fully captures and reflects that is somethign else, but I'd hope they wouldn't sully the halo of their excellent results with a poor coaching app/system.

I'd at least say their pedigree is a lot higher than Trainerroads even at this early point. Are any pro triathletes using TR?

But I'll give credit where credit is due - the Norwegians have figured something out at the top ranks that have them getting world-beating results in the past 2 years, against legit competition, so you can't just discount them.

--------

If you read what I've said, I'm not discounting the "norwegian" method. I'm asking are you getting the "norwegian method" when lactate testing is then not part of your training?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Isn't this just coaching? using the data to make informed choices to better your training and racing? The average AG athlete isn't optimizing life around training even if live revolves somewhat to mostly around training. IDK if an app can proactively work that in but instead reacts to that. i also don't see the average athlete using lactate in training especially since values can change day to day . I think they do have a system in place for their elites that are producing great results against the rest of the world. more skeptical it transfers to AG athletes.





I think these 2 hit the nail on the head.

If you look at triathlon, specifically 70.3 and IM yet even going down to sprint and oly races, I'd be willing to bet at least 30% of the field beats themselves with pacing mistakes, at least, and probably closer to 50%. Until athletes learn X is what i can sustain for 30 min,1h, 2h, 3h both in training and in a race where they are X far into the race, no app will help them race well, consistently.

probably more prevalent today, although tech is more reliable than 10-15 years ago, is the athlete who blows up with their garmin flies off their bike or their PM dies mid race. I still see race reports littered with "well I guess I went to hard too early" or "I fell off the pace late in the race and dropped down to X"

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

I'm afraid this will fall into the common 'Norwegian training=double threshold'.