The Athlete's Compass

The Athlete’s Compass Podcast is your compass for navigating endurance training and health. In this show, we explore the cardinal directions of training, nutrition, recovery, and mindset, delving into the dynamic relationship that drives athletic success. Athletes are more than numbers; they're individuals with unique lifestyles and mindset challenges. Coaches who understand these personal nuances play a vital role in their athletes' journey. While training details and data are important, tools like Athletica provide a solution to streamline the technicalities, allowing coaches to focus on the human connection which makes the human coaches the best they can be. Each week, renowned sports scientist and researcher Paul Laursen will be our teacher and guide as we break down training principles so you can understand how best to train for your sport! We take a no-bullshit and practical approach to support age-groupers, masters, and everyday cyclists, runners, and triathletes like you as you find your direction as an athlete. The hosts are Paul Laursen, sports scientist and founder of the Athletica.ai training platform, Marjana Rakai, coach, sports scientist, and triathlete, and Paul Warloski, coach and cyclist.

The Athlete's Compass is a health podcast hosted by Unknown Host, with 147 episodes on record and a Required Pod Score of 80.

Unknown Host hosts The Athlete's Compass, a health show with 147 episodes published.

Our AI reads these to draft pitches. Use them as grounding for a pitch that cites a real guest and a specific topic.

• 

  Episode #147

  Run Faster Without Running More

  Sep 24, 202626 min

  Episode Summary Want to run faster but don’t have time—or the recovery capacity—to add more mileage? Paul Warloski and Dr. Paul Laursen explain how runners can improve performance by getting more from the training they already do. They discuss auditing training intensity, polarized training, high-intensity intervals, strides, hills, cycling, heat training, strength and plyometric work, running economy, recovery, and fueling. They also explain why one quality session per week may be enough to produce meaningful improvements and offer a simple four-day training framework for time-crunched runners. Key Takeaways More mileage isn’t the only path to faster running. Training quality, intensity, strength, running economy, and recovery can all improve performance. Start by auditing your intensity distribution . Too many runners spend excessive time in the moderate “gray zone.” For someone running four or five times per week, a useful framework is roughly three to four easy sessions and one to two quality sessions . One high-intensity session per week can be enough for recreational runners to improve. Runners new to speed work should begin with strides , then progressively introduce sessions such as 30/30 intervals, tempo work, and longer VO₂-max-style intervals. Progressive overload matters. Don’t jump straight into demanding track workouts. Hill running can simultaneously challenge the muscular and cardiovascular systems while encouraging an effective drive phase in the running stride. Heavy strength training —including squats, lunges, and deadlifts—can improve running economy. Plyometric work can improve neuromuscular efficiency and potentially transfer to better running performance. Cross-training such as cycling can add cardiovascular stimulus without the same neuromuscular load as additional running. Heat or sauna exposure is discussed as another potential way to stimulate cardiovascular adaptations. Recovery is part of training. Making easy days genuinely easy can improve your ability to absorb harder sessions. For masters athletes, maintaining strength, intensity and adequate recovery becomes especially important. One of the episode’s simplest principles: “The most important session is the next session.” Try Athletica | Adaptive Endurance Training Plans Powered by Sports Science Dr. Paul Laursen Paul Warloski - Simple Endurance Coaching

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #146

  How to Improve Your Running Economy

  Sep 17, 202636 min

  Two runners can have similar fitness and VO₂ max numbers yet perform very differently. One reason is running economy—the metabolic cost of maintaining a given running speed . Paul Warloski and Dr. Paul Laursen explain why economy is different from mechanical efficiency, how it can be assessed in the lab and through everyday training data, and why it improves through consistent running, high-intensity work, heavy strength training and plyometrics. They also examine running form, vertical oscillation, stride length, fatigue, aging, carbon-plated shoes and metrics such as efficiency factor and aerobic decoupling. The practical message is simple: a bigger aerobic engine helps, but learning to use that engine economically can translate into better performance. Key takeaways Running economy is essentially your running “fuel economy.” It describes how much oxygen and metabolic energy you need to maintain a particular speed. VO₂ max and running economy are different. A runner can possess a very large aerobic engine without converting that capacity into equally fast performances. Simply training consistently can improve economy. Both higher-volume aerobic work and high-intensity training contribute to physiological and neuromuscular adaptations. Strength training matters. Heavy squats, deadlifts and lunges are discussed as ways to improve neuromuscular recruitment and ultimately running economy. Plyometrics can help too. Jumps, step-downs and other explosive exercises train the stretch-shortening cycle and elastic recoil. Strides, hills and intervals provide running-specific neuromuscular training. Short, fast efforts help recruit larger motor units and train force production. Running form is partly an outcome of training. Lower vertical oscillation, shorter ground-contact time and effective forward movement are associated with better economy, while deliberately changing form can initially make running less economical. Fatigue reduces economy. Maintaining movement quality late in long runs and races is part of what is described as durability—or, alternatively, resistance to fatigability. Strength becomes particularly important with age. Continuing to recruit larger motor units may help masters athletes counter some age-related changes. Carbon-plated shoes can improve economy, but the response is individual. The episode emphasizes training quality before footwear technology. Efficiency factor and aerobic decoupling offer useful field indicators. Trends over time are more meaningful than judging economy from one isolated workout. Try Athletica | Adaptive Endurance Training Plans Powered by Sports Science Dr. Paul Laursen Paul Warloski - Simple Endurance Coaching

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #145

  Why Your VO₂ Max Isn’t Rising

  Sep 10, 202632 min

  VO₂ max is one of endurance sport’s most closely watched metrics, but what does it mean when the number refuses to rise? Paul Warloski and Dr. Paul Laursen explain why a plateau—particularly for experienced and older athletes—can actually indicate successful training. They explore the roles of aging, genetics, aerobic volume, Zone 1 and Zone 2 work, high-intensity intervals, fat oxidation, recovery, nutrition, and life stress. The central message is that VO₂ max development isn’t about finding a shortcut or completing ever-harder workouts. A strong aerobic foundation, carefully controlled intensity, consistency, and sufficient recovery matter more—and improvements in fitness and performance can occur even when the VO₂ max number itself barely changes. Key Episode Takeaways Maintaining VO₂ max can be a win. Because VO₂ max tends to decline with age, an older athlete who keeps the same number may actually be outperforming the expected age-related trajectory. Your training history matters. Someone relatively new to endurance training may have considerable room to improve VO₂ max, while a lifelong, highly trained athlete is likely much closer to their ceiling. Aerobic volume comes first. Laursen describes consistent low-intensity training as the foundation, with HIIT being more like the “icing on the cake.” Zone 1 and Zone 2 help prepare you to absorb hard training. Greater aerobic development supports recovery and may make subsequent high-intensity work more productive. Both long and short intervals can work. Examples include 2–5 minute VO₂ max intervals, 1 km running repeats, 4 x 4-minute sessions, and 30/30 intervals. Five-minute power or pace can be a useful external marker. Laursen describes maximal sustainable output around five minutes as closely associated with VO₂ max. Don’t chase heart rate during short VO₂ max intervals. Because heart rate responds with a lag, pace or power is a more useful variable for controlling the session. Going harder isn’t automatically better. Starting too aggressively can reduce the total quality work you accumulate. The aim is controlled time above threshold rather than a “hero workout.” Fat oxidation may matter even at high intensity. A study discussed in the episode found fat oxidation distinguished elite orienteers from recreational athletes despite other measures being similar. Older athletes may need more recovery. One or perhaps two hard sessions per week may be more appropriate than the three an athlete could tolerate when younger, depending on individual recovery. Be skeptical of dramatic VO₂ max “hacks.” The episode argues that consistent progressive training, aerobic volume, HIIT, nutrition, and recovery remain the major levers. Life stress counts as training stress. Poor recovery and elevated overall stress may interfere with adaptations, making sleep, relaxation, and workload management part of the performance equation. Try Athletica | Adaptive Endurance Training Plans Powered by Sports Science Dr. Paul Laursen Paul Warloski - Simple Endurance Coaching

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #144

  Why Stopping Was My Best Decision: 1,000km Across France with Jens Wachter

  Sep 3, 202634 min

  Endurance athlete and Athletica user Jens joins Paul Warloski and Dr. Paul Laursen to share the story behind Project Trans France , his ambitious attempt to run roughly 1,000 kilometers across France in just 17 days while pulling a self-supported trailer. Jens explains how years of ultrarunning and orienteering shaped his approach, how he incorporated high-volume training into an ordinary workweek, and how Athletica helped him adapt his workload based on heart rate, HRV, sleep, and recovery. Once the project began, an intense European heat wave and a worsening groin injury forced constant adjustments. Ultimately, Jens made the difficult decision to stop—not because his motivation disappeared, but because his body was sending unmistakable warning signs. The conversation is a powerful reminder that successful endurance training is as much about adaptability, self-awareness, and decision-making as it is about fitness. Key Episode Takeaways Huge goals become manageable when broken into smaller units. Jens turned 1,000 kilometers over 17 days into a target of roughly 60 km per day, then split each day into two 30 km sessions. Training has to fit real life. Rather than building his life entirely around training, Jens used his commute to incorporate running, cycling, elevation, and back-to-back sessions. Progress eventually becomes durability. For an ultra-endurance challenge, simply getting faster wasn't the objective; Jens needed to develop the ability to repeat a sustainable workload day after day. Adaptability matters more than rigid adherence. Illness, injury, work commitments, and changing conditions required continual modification of the plan. Recovery data can provide useful context. Jens used heart rate, HRV, sleep, training load, and Athletica's coaching feedback to help identify when to push and when to back off. Don't try new gear immediately before a major event. Jens believes using fresh, insufficiently tested equipment during a long training run contributed to his groin issue—a classic reminder of the "nothing new on race day" rule. Environmental conditions can completely change the challenge. The heat wave in France elevated Jens' heart rate and dramatically reduced the pace and volume he could safely sustain. Know your personal warning signs. Jens recognized agitation, excessive heart rate, exhaustion, swelling, and increasing pain as indicators that something was wrong. Stopping can be an endurance skill. After consulting medical support and reassessing his injury, Jens chose not to continue simply for the sake of completing the challenge. Remember why you started. His closing advice is simple: "Be kind to yourself and keep it simple." When things become difficult, reconnecting with the reason behind the goal can help guide the next decision. Try Athletica | Adaptive Endurance Training Plans Powered by Sports Science Dr. Paul Laursen Paul Warloski - Simple Endurance Coaching

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #143

  Norwegian Method vs Polarized: What’s Better?

  Aug 27, 202635 min

  The Norwegian method has become one of endurance sport’s hottest training topics, thanks largely to elite performances, double-threshold sessions, and lactate-guided intensity control. But is it really an alternative to traditional 80/20 training? Paul Warloski and Dr. Paul Laursen unpack what the so-called Norwegian method actually involves and explain why it may have far more in common with polarized training than athletes realize. The conversation explores lactate testing, sub-threshold training, double-threshold days, recovery, race specificity, training for masters athletes, and why everyday runners, cyclists, and triathletes probably shouldn’t throw out their current training plans in pursuit of the latest trend. Key takeaways The Norwegian method isn’t necessarily one single training system . Dr. Marius Bakken’s approach is one particular version built around intensity control, lactate monitoring, muscle status, and repeatable training. 80/20 and Norwegian-style training overlap significantly. The majority of training remains low-intensity aerobic work. The most important lesson may not be “do more threshold” , but rather “control your threshold work better.” Bakken’s approach generally keeps sub-threshold work controlled enough that the athlete can accumulate substantial quality without creating excessive fatigue. Lactate is used as a marker of physiological stress , helping athletes avoid pushing sessions beyond the intended intensity. Double-threshold days allow highly trained athletes to concentrate demanding work on hard days , followed by genuinely easy recovery days. A typical structure discussed in the episode could feature three higher-stress days during the week, separated by low-intensity recovery days. The Norwegian approach can sometimes look more pyramidal than strictly polarized , with additional work in the moderate/sub-threshold range. Specificity still matters. An 800m runner, marathoner, criterium cyclist, gravel racer, and triathlete should not perform identical intensity sessions. For athletes training roughly 6–10 hours per week , copying elite double-threshold programs literally is usually unnecessary. Triathletes could potentially apply the principle by putting a harder bike and harder run on the same day , rather than performing two run threshold sessions. Athletes do not necessarily need a lactate meter . Training just under critical pace, critical power, FTP, or a similar second-threshold marker can approximate the same principle. Masters athletes can use the same concepts, but recovery capacity becomes increasingly important with age . Subjective signals—including muscle stiffness, fatigue, mental freshness, and the feeling of having “pop”—can help determine readiness. The ultimate recommendation: don’t overhaul your training simply because the Norwegian method is fashionable. Keep the aerobic foundation and borrow the principles that make sense for your training history, event, and recovery capacity. Try Athletica | Adaptive Endurance Training Plans Powered by Sports Science Dr. Paul Laursen Paul Warloski - Simple Endurance Coaching

  ListenShow Notes

Recent guests on The Athlete's Compass. Study who booked and why before you pitch.

Based on semantic analysis of episode topics and host coverage, this show is a strong guest fit for executives in:

Industry fit is computed by PitchCentric using vector embeddings of the show's episode catalog.