{"id":762,"date":"2026-05-07T20:40:37","date_gmt":"2026-05-07T17:40:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/?p=762"},"modified":"2026-05-07T21:38:49","modified_gmt":"2026-05-07T18:38:49","slug":"norwegian-method-myth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/norwegian-method-myth\/","title":{"rendered":"The Norwegian training method is a brand, not biology"},"content":{"rendered":"

In October 2025, Siren Amelia Seiler-Viken \u2013 daughter of the same Steven Seiler who laid the foundations of polarised training \u2013 published the results of an international survey. It posed an uncomfortable question: does the \u201cNorwegian method\u201d as a universal scale even exist, or is it simply a regional habit that the world perceives as standard?.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is the \u201cNorwegian method\u201d and why is everyone quoting it<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

If you listen to podcasts about endurance and longevity \u2014 Peter Attia, Andrew Huberman, Rich Roll, I\u00f1igo San Mill\u00e1n \u2014 sooner or later you'll hear the phrase \u201cNorwegian method\u201d. This refers to a five-zone intensity scale tied to percentage of maximum heart rate:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Zone 1: 60\u201372% of HRmax \u2014 Zone 2: 72\u201382% of HRmax \u2014 Zone 3: 82\u201387% of HRmax \u2014 Zone 4: 88\u201392% of HRmax \u2014 Zone 5: 93\u2013100% of HRmax<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was documented and popularised by Steven Seiler in 2010, based on the practices of Olympiatoppen, the Norwegian Olympic Training Centre. It was in his work that the concept of polarised training emerged: 80% of training volume below LT1, 20% above LT2, with a minimum in the \u201cmiddle\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It genuinely worked for the Norwegians. Jakob Ingebrigtsen, a whole host of skiers and biathletes, and record-breaking results at world championships grew up on this system. Therefore, when the Western longevity discourse in the late 2010s was looking for a \u201cscientific standard\u201d for intensity zones \u2013 the Norwegian scale seemed like the ideal candidate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since then, it's been passed from one person to another like the Mendeleev table.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What did Seiler's daughter's study show?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Siren Amelia Seiler-Viken is a runner and a master\u2019s student at the Norwegian School of Sport Sciences. Together with her colleagues, she conducted an international survey of 778 endurance sports practitioners: coaches, athletes and sports scientists from Norway, other European countries and North America. 298 of them answered questions regarding specific lower limits of %HRmax for each of the five zones.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Result:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 47% generally uses a five-zone scale.<\/strong> The rest trains according to three-zone, seven-zone, or other systems. In total, the authors identified over 40 different zonal systems in literature and practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Norwegians are 2.7 times more likely than everyone else<\/strong> are specifically using five-zone. That is, it is not a \u201cglobal standard\u201d - it is a regional prevalence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Norwegian respondents report the highest average lower bounds for Zone 2 and Zone 3.<\/strong> So, the \u201cNorwegian Zone 2\u201d in terms of heart rate actually corresponds to what in other regions is considered the upper part of Zone 2 or even Zone 3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No differences were found between coaches, athletes, and scientists. Nor were any differences found between elite and amateur levels. The confusion is not concentrated \u201camong amateurs\u201d. It is global.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cycling and running are different zones for the same heart rate<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The same study revealed another interesting finding. Cyclists have the lowest average %HRmax thresholds for Zones 1, 2 and 3 across all disciplines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The reason is simple and physiological. Cycling is a low-impact sport, allowing you to maintain a low heart rate for long periods. In real races, a cyclist spends 15\u201330% of the time riding at a power output of less than 25 watts\u2014drafting, descending, coasting. Running is a weight-bearing activity, with eccentric work at every step; it is impossible to \u201crest passively\u201d. This naturally raises the heart rate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The conclusion is unknown to those who train only on one watch: when running and cycling Garmins count \u201cZone 2\u201d at the same percentage of HRmax, they show different physiological states. Running Zone 2 by heart rate often corresponds to cycling Zone 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What does this mean in practice<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

If I've been hearing about the Norwegian method as a law of physics, then 2025 gives sufficient reason to reconsider.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is not a law. It is a regional tradition that is effective in the Norwegian training system and is not necessarily transferable to an American amateur, a Ukrainian amateur, or a 50-year-old office worker. Its specific HRmax percentages are not physiological constants, but a compromise between prescription convenience and average thresholds in the Norwegian cohort.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This doesn't mean the scale is bad. It means that Norwegian figures are a starting point, not the final answer<\/strong>. If my heart rate during a \u201clight aerobic\u201d session is above 75% HRmax, this isn\u2019t necessarily an error \u2014 I might have a high resting heart rate or be running into a headwind. If it\u2019s below 70%, that doesn\u2019t necessarily mean I\u2019m \u201cunderworking\u201d either \u2014 I might have a low maximum heart rate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is truly constant is physiological thresholds<\/strong>, LT1 and LT2. They can be measured in a test, but even they can be assessed without a laboratory \u2013 the talk test, the feeling of effort, and the pace that can be maintained for 60\u201390 minutes without a breakdown in condition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Which of these is useful?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Norwegian method is an engineering abstraction over the behaviour of real athletes. The daughter of the abstraction's author showed that the abstraction doesn't work the same for everyone. This doesn't devalue the idea of polarised training itself; it remains strong. It devalues the temptation to copy specific percentages of HRmax as a universal template.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More about the zones themselves - how to distinguish them, what the position of 14 IJSPP 2025 experts showed, how to adjust intensity without a laboratory - in A complete guide to Zone 2<\/a>. This post is about one crack in the popular perception. The guide is about the whole map.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sources<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Seiler-Viken S.A., Mentzoni F., Seiler S., Skarli S., Losnegard T. Contextualising the Norwegian Standardised Intensity Zone Framework in an International Sample of Endurance Practitioners.<\/em> Scientific Reports. 2025;15:34367. DOI: 10.1038\/s41598-025-17023-z<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Seiler S. What is the best practice for determining the intensity and duration of training sessions for endurance athletes?<\/em> IJSPP. 2010;5(3):276-291.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Vitaliy \/ Founder of life:)on<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In October 2025, Siren Amelia Seiler-Viken \u2013 daughter of the very Steven Seiler who laid the foundations for polarised training \u2013 published the results of an international survey. It posed an awkward question: is there really such a thing as the \u201cNorwegian method\u201d as a universal scale, or is it merely a regional habit that the world perceives as standard? What is the \u201cNorwegian method\u201d and why does everyone cite it\u2026<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":763,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kadence_starter_templates_imported_post":false,"_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[38,36,12,37,13],"class_list":["post-762","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-blog","tag-polarised-training","tag-zone-2","tag-12","tag-37","tag-13"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/762","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=762"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/762\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":764,"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/762\/revisions\/764"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/763"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=762"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=762"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.life-on.com.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=762"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}