Running training for 10/11 year olds

so how much would many of the africans be running per week if they hadn't ran before "high school" age?.......thats a pretty dumb comment earl

Earl wrote:

Every mile you run before high school is one less mile you will want to run after high school.

I think there ought to be a way to work putting marbles into jars into this discussion.

This discussion had some potential a ways back but it's degenerated into typical letsrun back biting and nonsense. Tell me guys, are you this dumb in real life?

otter wrote:

I didn't say base work, I said anaerobic based work. Tarnslation: anaeobic type work. I know it's difficult to understand.

I'll take Lydiard's view over yours considering he developed his views after sixty years of research. You say you know more than he ever did, so you're on your own.

My fault... didn't catch the -ed at the end of base. Sorry about that.

Otter regarding your ignorance with Lydiard's human physiology background… Wow, good luck with that. Feel free to site Lydiard's 60 years of published scientific research while you’re at it. Especially the part about the relationship with structured intervals and an inability of the middle school kids to adapt neurologically. Here's an idea, email five or ten university professors known for conducting any research that would support your (note, I'm not saying it's Lydiard's - because you're wrong about what you think he’s saying) ridiculous contention that structured interval training for middle school age children is bad for them. Back your statements up with facts instead of puking fodder over message boards that have zero truth to them!

TO AK:

Thanks for posting the article... you're right it is interesting. I assume you were kidding on the intervals comment, but seriously I don't think anyone (I could be wrong) has posted that kids should be doing 16x400 or 20x200 or whatever. Anyway, there's nothing wrong with something like a structured 4 x [4 x 50 on 50 off] w/ a full 60s between each lap type of session with book end warm-up/cool-down. Another point is there seems to be this assumption out there that intervals are all-out or nothing at all. If you did do 16 x 400, who's to say that has to be at 90%+ maximum and not a controlled effort throughout with full recovery between efforts? Structured intervals serve a much broader application beyond simple anaerobic development.

On swimming: Yes they do spend hours (two a days in many clubs) doing short/med/long efforts at a very high percentage of their maximum heart rates.

On soccer: Go to a local middle school game, strap the kid with a heart monitor with recovery data potential, and see for yourself just how many high intensity bursts and jogging/rest intervals they do during the game. You’re underestimating the intensity of youth soccer I’m afraid.

That said, don't take my word for it (obviously you’re not doing that), and I suggest you keep digging, but eventually you'll find that the inability of children to tolerate hard bouts of exercise and or adapt to the intense mode of exercise stress neurologically is nothing more than a myth.

...cite (sorry for the spelling)

You may disagree with what Lydiard says but it looks like I have to prove that I'm not interpreting it wrong:

"Anaerobic training is what destroys young runners. I've had people complain to me that kids shouldn't do all the running I prescribe; but what I have them doing is all aerobic and that's good for them. I do not use anaerobic training."

"We know that young people, before they reach the age of puberty and go through that fast growth rate, have the ability to use oxygen more efficiently for their body weight than adults. They also have highly sensitive nervous systems so they are protected by nature to be able to continue activity for a long time at the aerobic level. But they cannot stand heavy doses of anaerobic training and pressure from coaching regimes to race a lot. This occurs in many affluent countries, usually because sporting success is as good for an educational institute as academic success and success means better funding. These youngsters, therefore, don't develop their aerobic capacity sufficiently so when as adults - if they're still interested in running - they come up against the Africans, their relatively low oxygen uptake level is no match for their opponents' high level. When the pressure goes on in a race, they lose knee lift, they experience neuromuscular breakdown, they can't sprint at the end - and the Africans can."

It goes on and on. Each one of his books addresses this issue.

If you feel that you know everything about the subject how come you have not taken the time to read Lydiard's books before dismissing them as "puking fodder."

IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL TO USE CHILDREN AS GUINEA PIGS IN AN IN DEPTH MEDICAL STUDY. That's why there is no solid research either way on this topic. So you want me to consult some egghead from somewhere and ask him these questions. The answer I will get will come from some huge ego even larger than yours and will have no basis of proof to it. Anything beyond a sixty or seventy meter stride is unwise for a child.

If you think interval sessions are an important part of a childs development to reach their full potential as runners I would have to say your just another one of those eggheads who really doesn't have any idea what they are talking about.

You said you know more than Lydiard ever knew but you have never read a word he wrote. What does that say about you?

Another quote from Lydiard:

"Where the problem occurs is when parents start to push them to run faster. They have a highly sensitive nervous system and they can't handle too much anaerobic running because it pulls their blood PH level too low and that affects their nervous system."

Yeah, I'm another dick head citing an un scientific study of the Garritson family (among others) who were all setting age group records before high school and then never did a thing after. Real training should start the summer before 9th grade. The problem we have now is that kids don't play outside enough now days and thus do not "naturally" develop their muscular and aerobic systems. The guys who say play soccer and ultimate frisbee are on the right track.

Thanks for your wonderful insight into running and training for 10/11 year olds. I am so impressed with all the facts and knowledge you brought to this thread. I hope to use all your scientific data in my thesis. Sorry I called you a dick head.

Earl wrote:

Yeah, I'm another dick head citing an un scientific study of the Garritson family (among others) who were all setting age group records before high school and then never did a thing after. Real training should start the summer before 9th grade. The problem we have now is that kids don't play outside enough now days and thus do not "naturally" develop their muscular and aerobic systems. The guys who say play soccer and ultimate frisbee are on the right track.

So tell me… how’s that curb-running process working out for you these days? It was printed in jogger-world, so it must be fact right?

Otter, you are in fact incorrectly interpreting Lydiard’s point regarding middle school aged run training.

I never said Lydiard’s books (publicly presented) information was fodder, I said your information IS fodder… there’s a difference, and you’re obviously taking what Lydiard is advocating and trying to make it fit into your ignorant POV on the subject. I have read all of Lydiard’s material (obviously you haven’t), and I’m asking you to cite your references (including scientific), not because I didn’t read the material, but because I had hoped that you would be intelligent enough to realize after doing so that you are very much mistaken on this particular subject.

It’s right in front of you apparently, but you refuse to see the information for what it is… I guess that’s why Lydiard was so reluctant to publish his books in the first place. He was very concerned that the general public (that’s obviously you) would misunderstand his materials and read into it incorrectly. Lydiard’s works are very complex… way more complex then simple LSD and avoidance of what you are generalizing (incorrectly I might add) as all-out interval sessions. You are the perfect example of why coaches (especially developmental coaches) should be required to have at least some form of balanced understanding with developmental physiology, psychology, and practical experience in a multi-tier training environment.

Thanks for the quotes (not Lydiard’s, but yours)…its good evidence of your ignorance. Furthermore, I must add that when someone (that’s you in this case) assumes that by asking for scientific reference to support a claim that that individual is an egg-headed scientist who spends more time in the lab than actually experiencing the practical application and observational reference of the particular point of interest is in no realistic way qualified to make such contentious claims. I’m a lifetime endurance athlete first, egg-headed scientist second. I learn from the field then back it up with science. It takes reading, asking questions from those who are referenced, then reading some more. Sorry you’re at issue with that process, but as long as you continue to plaster public message boards with completely incorrect information, you’ll likely (hopefully) be challenged by those who have taken the time to learn both the history and current understanding of the topic in question.

Thanks for the quotes (not Lydiard’s, but yours)…its good evidence of your ignorance.

The first two quotes are from Running to the top by Arthur Lydiard not me. The first quote from page 23 the second from pages 19 and 20.

The last quote is from an interview with Arthur Lydiard in 2003 a year before he passed away.

So then what is your interpretation of what he said. Remember they are not my quotes they are Lydiard's.

"Anaerobic training is what destroys young runners." How complex of a statement is that. Address the issue instead of attacking me. I've not heard any proof from you. The only thing I have heard is you standing up on your soapbox saying that you know a lot more than me (and Lydiard-yes you said that) but have not said why. You said I interpreted Lydiard wrong, and then you said I fabricated the quotes I posted.

IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL TO USE CHILDREN AS GUINEA PIGS IN AN IN DEPTH MEDICAL STUDY.

Anything beyond a sixty or seventy meter stride is unwise for a child.

...as I said, not Lydiard's, but your's.

Maybe because you're one of those insanely ignorant soccer moms who spend 50% of your time passing out hand-sanitizing gels to every kid on the team and 50% of your time co-playing or play-by-play-micro-coaching the all-rubber-cushioned playground! Individuals like you are going to ludicrous lengths to take the challenges out of life for children. This type of parental hyper-concern has the net effect of making kids more fragile; which is likely why they’re breaking down in record numbers. A nation of underdeveloped sissies!

I'm not sure why you keep implying that I'm not agreeing with Lydiard's general concepts. I respect and agree with Lydiard on many levels. He did very well with the tools he had at the time and has done wonders for the advancements of endurance sports. It’s the failure of those with a highly visible public medium, and lack of scientific insight (e.g. Runners World) that have bastardized the basic principles employed by Lydiard. Therefore, it's you I'm calling out as an ignorant fool with respect to this particular subject (not Lydiard) and the fact that you're misreading what Lydiard is saying, then using that as your ONLY defense is quite annoying if not borderline negligent if in fact you actually have any sort of supervisory capacity over developmental athletics.

You still avoid addressing his statement. Again, explain how I am misreading it. If you are as smart as you claim you are, let's debate the issue instead of my background vs. yours.

And yes I am using Lydiard as my only defense. So far you have nothing other than shots in the dark about me.

I don't want to wade thru all the responses here because I think I can guess what direction the general drift will take so will offer one observation & one query:

Observation: for the most part, running is generally NOT fun for kids under 13, particularly longer distance (over 5 sustained minutes).

Query: what age did you, the Letsrun audience, start in w/organized running. I started at 14.

...again, you ARE the issue, not Lydiard hence the reason we’re discussing you.

You're the one taking a statement(s) out of context and generalizing it to the extreme. Lydiard would bitch slap you if he could read how you're bastardizing his concepts. I know what Lydiard meant by that statement(s) because I asked him in person and gave him the time he needed to clarify without simply taking a sentence from a very complex theory and plastering it over public message boards as if it was the word of GOD. Obviously I can't help you if you're unwilling to do the work. It would prove useless for me to interpret Lydiard's work for you because you’ve already shown to be an immature moron and wouldn’t here a word I said. I told you to seek additional resources of information (pro/con) and you refused, claiming they'd all support my point(s). Uh…yeah, that IS the point you dipshit!

In the end, I have no desire to educate the likes of you, just save others from blindly following your ridiculous, unsubstantiated claims that structured anaerobic exercise stress is bad for children and should be avoided until mid-late high school. How do I know this you ask…I have two eyes, a brain capable of complex thought, and finally the ability to reason from patient observation. That alone, as I said already, was not enough to satisfy me so I decided to take the time to back up my observation with science by reading and studying everything I could find (for more than 20 years in fact). That evidence says you’re wrong, and Lydiard is right on many levels… good luck with that apparent conundrum.

We’re done here.

...hear (sorry for the spelling)

Once again you have neither said or explained anything. I'm done here as well.

huh?, those quotes by Lydiard posted by Otter appear crystal clear to me. However, if, as you say, Lydiard actually means the exact opposite of what he is saying, and everyone is interpreting them wrongly, then please enlighten us, especially those of us who know nothing about this topic. Its in your interest to put out correct information if your such an expert in this area. But you keep refusing to do this, instead having a go at otter; this suggests that you don't actually have anything and he has proved you wrong. Then you announce your leaving the discussion... what does that say? In effect, your saying, ''I've got evidence, but I can't tell you what it is'!

huh?

I'll second "what?". Can you elaborate the little secret Arthur whispered to you that none of us knows about? If you don't want to disclose in public for whatever the reason, you can send me an e-mail personally. We would like to know if there's anything we don't know about as we move forward with Lydiard Foundation and with its Kids Running Program. We are not saying EVERYTHING he has ever said is true and correct; he has exaggerated things and, worse yet, incorrect with some of the detailed topics. If he's wrong about something, we would like to know. If he had something nobody knew about, we would also like to know as well.

I did that interview with Arthur that came out in 2004 in "Marathon & Beyond". I worked very closely with him for that interview. Kids training is a very sensitive issue and very important issue. If some grown-ups want to go out and kill themselves on hes/her own will, there's nothing we can do about. But if the coach has a wrong idea, then it's the kids who would suffer without them knowing. Nothing pleased Arthur than watching young kids participating in running and having fun...and continue to exell. We would appreciate it very much if you could share your knowledge on kids training that you heard from Arthur, which, I'd have to admit unless I read it wrongly, you have not shared with us yet. Thanks!