Running training for 10/11 year olds

Nobby - glad you turned up...

I'd be interested if you'd take the time here to briefly summarise what Lydiard DID say regarding young (pre-pubescent) kids and running.

And perhaps any finer points where you (or Snell) disagree with him.

Many thanks in advance.

Scothh - I disagree with you statement re. kids under 13 not enjoying running more than 5min. I have 5 kids - the three under 13 will all normally choose to run well over 5min if asked - my 9yr old fanatically so - he just loves running! My one who is older than 13 is less keen.

I think most kids don't like doing anything that is hard work if you let them be lazy - in any area of life. When a kid is fit and healthy (as all should be, relatively speaking), then a 5min run is no big deal and so can easily be enjoyable.

Pantman:

What I know about things Arthur would have said about kids running would be: whatever they feel happy about, let them do it. And don't EVER force them to do anything they don't feel comfortable doing. He believed young kids can run a lot as long as the effort is comfortable to them. I believe he had quite a few young kids running famous Waitakere 22-mile course (if I remember it correctly, as young as 12 years old) at their will comfortably. I think there's a picture of his son, Gary, running Waitak in a pouring rain at the age of 15 or 16. He had coached a handful of young girls (15, 16 and 17) running 90 minutes to 2-hour regularly. I have several people, Gary included, whom I intend to talk to in depth how Arthur went about helping out young kids with their running. Heather Charmichael is a beautiful dark-haired lady (now) who, at the age of 18, Arthur brought to Peachtree road race. She beat, among others, Patti Catalano and Mary Shea and set the course record and nobody knew where the hell she came from. Heather was one of the girls Arthur coached as a high school runner (I know it's a few years older from the original topic). Another one of the group was Christy McMiken who represented NZ in 10000m at Seoul Olympics (missed the final by a few steps). Another one is Glynis Quick who battled with Nanae Sasaki (coached by the late Kiyoshi Nakamura) at Nagoya marathon in the early 80s. Interestingly, she's married to Robert Vaughan who coached Francie Larrue Smith.

In Arthur's opinion, going for an aerobic running at comfortable effort, up to 2-hours or even longer, for young kids as young as 12 or so, is no problem. He would most probably, with great caution, say even as eary as 10. I say "with caution" because, with a sensitive issue like this, he would not simply guess. Just as he was cautious about jogging group, though he was confident it would work, he was just as cautious about coaching those young ladies. Of course, after a few trials, his confidence took over.

He, on the other hand, had a huge problem with ANAEROBIC training with youngsters--here I'd say almost as old as 17 or 18. I capitalized ANAEROBIC because there's huge difference between simply running fast and taking a break, in other words, "interval" training and anaerobic training. I remember people looked puzzled when Bill Bowerman said that simple interval concept works well with older people. What he meant was jogging betwen telephone poles and taking a walk break between the next poles--that's interval training. But that's NOTHING like anaerobic training. In Arthur's eyes, anaerobic training means creating buffer against oxygen debt, in other words, resistance against lowering of pH level in the body. You can sprint and take a break and sprint and take a break and never creat too much lactic acid to affect your central nervous system because the burst of sprint is so short that it won't create lactic acid, in today's fancy words, it's alactate. On the other side of the coin, you can have a kid run 500m all out ONCE and his/her system will be full of lactic acid. It's not interval form at all but could be very dangerous for youngsters. This is why Arthur didn't like to see track events shorter than 800m being the main event for young kids--someone who's not fast for a sprinter and more of an endurance type, yet, the longest event is 400m so consequently they'd be forced to run 400m. Coming off the final turn, their parents yelling at them while their legs are full of lactic acid, they would push even more because of that added psychological pressure. On the other hand, he said, distances beyond 800m, kids will pace themselves and, in a way, "cheat" to run slower at some parts because they know they can't run the entire distance full-out; therefore, not as dangerous. Cross country, he would say, would be even better because parents and coaches are out of sight!

I personally feel clacifying soccer, even basketball which I think is more quick turn around event, as "interval training" and, if Arthur said soccer is good for young kids and, therefore, Arthur would encourage young kids to do interval training is a wrong interpretation. Yes, kids love soccer and basketball and they play hard. They consist of hard quick bursts followed by recoveries; but the nature of "exercise" is completely different from structured "interval training". Arthur would have NEVER approved of giving structured interval training to young kids of 10, 11 or 12 years old. Yes, we see kids running around HARD all over the place in a game of soccer or basketball. But they know when they are pushing too much; when things get tough, they'll slow down or walk. It is more of a fartlek workout; in which you could listen to your own reaction and determine the effort accordingly. Whereas, at least my understanding of intervals, particularly structured interval training, it would most likely a form of something like 8X200m. Kids migh run the first 200m and, after 120m, they are done, but it's just getting into the final straight where their coach might be staring at them with a stopwatch in hand... What would they do? They would keep pushing to the finish line and, more often than not, they would jog quickly, not thinking too much about "recovery" to the start of the next one. They would most likely be cooked after the first 3 but because it's written 8X, they would push to comply. Arthur absolutely "hated" a program like that.

His approach to kids running would be summed up with this one line: "Let them play at and with athletics." Anything less than "fun" and "play" for kids running, that's not good enough.

Okay, sorry, folks; I'm writing a book here. About the argument with Dr. Snell, Arthur said that kids' VO2Max relative to their body weight is higher than that of adults. What he meant is that, with a very simple terms (by using completely bogus numbers), if you weigh 160lbs with 6 liters; this kid may weigh, say, 80lbs with VO2Max of 4 liters. The kids weight may be a half of that of adult, VO2Max might be a bit higher than a half (of that of adult); therefore, when you devide that by weight, oxygen comsumption per kilogram of body weight is higher for the kid. You see some little kid actually running really really really well and sometimes would PO you by passing you (!). It happens a lot with young girls; but as they go through a growth spurt and gain weight overnight, they lose that ability completely. It is because the ratio of oxygen comsumption PER KILOGRAM OF BODY WEIGHT decreases dramatically overnight. Now Peter claims that if the kids' VO2Max is higher than that of adult, it would have to be reflected in the actual performances, in other words, they would have to be able to run the mile as fast as adults. of course, that is a bit of an exggerated exapmle because, as we know, it involves more than just oxygen consumpton--muscle strenghs, sense of pacing, tactics and all. Peter knows that because he's done VO2Max on himself at various age and found out that his VO2Max didn't really decrease that much when he was high twenties, 30-year-old and beyond but, he said, his mile times at those points were NOWHERE near what he ran at his prime. But basically it shoud reflect in the actual performances. Naturally, we would like to use this line in the Arthur Lydiard Training Video Series but we need to be clear of the "correct" statement. We don't want to put an incorrect statement "just because he said so."

Okay, enough of that. I'm going back to watching "That 70s Show"!

That reminds me of a lovely "running program" my PE class had to do when I was about 10 or 11. They made us run laps around a gym continuously for ten minutes (at the time it was excruciating (sp?) for me as I was the furthest thing from athletic in any way. If you had to stop, you were banished to the center of the court and just sit there for the other kids to ridicule you. I made sure never to stop and be a "fat loser" who had to sit in the middle. Maybe a little harsh, but I'm a distance runner now, aren't I?

PS: Of course, this is completely the opinon of Arthur Lydiard on kids running. Nobody cares about what the pre-historic coach would have to say, right? Most people argue about his idea of long continuous running for middle distance runners. So feel free to take it or leave it. I, of course, absolutely strongly believe the Lydiardism is the right way to go about; so this is it for me. I feel he's right simply because his words sounds logical to me; it makes sense to me. Sometimes when I read someone's comments or articles and they don't sound logical at all. What are they thinking...?

txRUNNERgirl:

That reminded me...and this has nothing to do with Lydiard; running should NEVER be a punishment in PE class or other activities. The coach of my daughter's basketball team once had the girls on the losing team to runa few laps. I told the coach (with a smile but not jokingly and explained why) NEVER to use running as a punishment. I would not go as far to say, realistically, use it as a reward; but NEVER EVER as a punishment.

Those of you who cares about running, and hopeully since this is a running message board, most of you do; if you see any PE teachers or any coach doing that, tell them not to. At a very young age in this country, kids view running as a negative thing and it shoud NOT and must NOT.

I completely agree. It wasn't necessarily as punishment, but it was the forcefulness that made it not fun. I mean, running laps around a basketball court is still not my idea of a good time. It is good for kids to exercise, but how about having recess or playing games instead? People wonder why there are not that many good American distance runners. Well, we have grown up with a negative view of running.

Amen to that; and thanks for bringing it up. We seem to have been too busy talking about physiology this and trainng that; but it really is a very fundamental issue that needed to be addressed, isn't it?

I was coaching a bunch of runners at a track one day, and a hockey group came down to the track for some drills. The hockey coach yelled at them to pay attention or they'd be running laps. I then shouted at my group: "Pay attention or you'll be lacing up your skates and hitting the rink".

Someone asked when we started organized training. For me it was also 14. My best times were done at 28-34. I'm ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that my generally aerobic running throughout most of my teens has kept me eternally enthusiastic about running throughout all of the later, harder training stages.

I see destruction of young runners every year. It pains me. The signs are always there - overeager parents and coaches, kids being very lethargic and bored....

Print this thread. Give it to aspiring coaches.

Just for the record because I don't think it has been mentioned, Kastor (nee Drossin) was an age group xc champion at 11 or 12.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

People wonder why there are not that many good American distance runners. Well, we have grown up with a negative view of running.

I won't deny that running is still (unbelievably) used as punishment in some circles but I maintain the reason kids don't run more than they do is because 'just running' isn't fun. If it were fun, why don't we see any kids running thru the neighborhood for exercise? It ain't fun and/or not very many adults (who too often place adult expectations on developmental activities for kids) who make running fun by incorporating it into games.

There will always be exceptions, kids that started racing when they were 10, 11 & 12 and continue into adulthood. Many, many more sustain an interest if they begin organized running if they start later. For every success story that started young, there are 10 times more that walk the halls of schools that never take up running at all. Too many fear failure.

scotth wrote:

I won't deny that running is still (unbelievably) used as punishment in some circles but I maintain the reason kids don't run more than they do is because 'just running' isn't fun. If it were fun, why don't we see any kids running thru the neighborhood for exercise? It ain't fun and/or not very many adults (who too often place adult expectations on developmental activities for kids) who make running fun by incorporating it into games.

There will always be exceptions, kids that started racing when they were 10, 11 & 12 and continue into adulthood. Many, many more sustain an interest if they begin organized running if they start later. For every success story that started young, there are 10 times more that walk the halls of schools that never take up running at all. Too many fear failure.

Similarly,

I would say that for every kid who wanted to be an astronaut at a young age there 10 times more astronauts that didn't realize that dream until later in life. Does this mean we should discourage kids from wanting to be astronauts. The argument is silly. Statistically speaking, kids change as their minds as they get older. There is no evidence - factual or circumstantial - to suggest that any runner who burned out would have stayed with running if they had started later. Just like every great clarinet prodigy who threw the damn thing out as soon as they were able probably wouldn't have fallen in love with it for life if only they had started as adults.

scotth:

I beg to differ. That's still a stereo-typical view. I helped some kids running at elementary level before and, yes, I did think running "alone" wouldn't be fun for kids so I mixed it all up with other activities and, in a way, limited the running part. It turned out quite a few kids came to me afterwards and asked if they could "run some more". It's not that they were particularly "fast" either. They just wanted to run more.

Granted, they were probably 1/10 or less but, I'd have to admit, I was surprised to see so many kids actually just wanted to run for the sake of running.

When it comes down to it, it's responsibility of coaches/teachers to make it fun for kids. I used to toss a golfball while runnning (it bounces better); Arthur used to tell jokes (okay, with adults); isn't it why they sing songs at millitary? (okay, adults again, but we get the idea)

Nobby, thanks for highlighting the difference between team sport practises like that and structured running training for kids. I think one of the big issues is also psychological too. In a soccer game they will run for the ball when fatigued but it's still part of the game. If you have kids doing 8 x 300 by the time they get half way through it really will NOT be a game/fun for them if they're exhausted. It just doesn't work the same way, it becomes torture. And that will put them off.

In answer to scott, I started organised running training when I was 16.

I do wonder though, with all the theory on this that has come up in the thread, what would be recommended for 11 to 15 year olds who aren't distance runners: pure sprinters (60-200) and longer sprinters (300-400). What training is OK? I for sure did a lot of interval training when I was 16, but I was 16, not younger, and I loved the training.

Thank Nobby for the great info on kids running. My kids aren't of age yet (8 and 5) but reading this stuff is great. My kids love to run. Nothing structured but they like to do kids races and run in Soccer and Basketball. It's funny when I take my 8 year old daughter to a kids race and she is disappointed that the race is ONLY a half mile for her. I coach soccer, basketball, and T-ball for kids right now and I am still amazed at the amount of coaches that want to use running as punishment. I am spreading the word but not trying to be annoying about it at the same time. Some coaches just don't know what else to do when the kids are acting up for them. Personally I sit kids out when they are misbehaving, that's my alternative. Not with their parents but on the side of the field/court. It doesn't happen much (maybe once for one kid per season) because once they do that they seem to pay better attention the rest of the year. Just my two cents.

I figured that I could rejoin the conversation now because it is not hostile in here anymore.

We have a kids track meet in our town that is very non-competitive. Kids who don't partcipate in anything else love our meets because we don't put an emphasis on winning. We want kids to know that running is for them no matter what their ability level may be.

I once had a well known track coach who runs a youth track program near us contact me about coming to our meets. I knew ahead of time what his program was like. It was based on intense training of young children to produce champions later.

His message he sent said he had strong runners and some weak runners and he would like to come to our meets to compete. Imagine someone telling a 7 year old they are a weak runner! I sent a message back to him that said our meets are non-competitive and based on fun and good sportsmanship. His response was, "that will not work for us."

I'm not going to say the Hershey meets don't have their place too, but only a dozen kids showed up for those meets in our town despite all of the advertising. We average 250 kids per night during the summer. If you come in last in one of our heats you get a ribbon, a T-shirt, you get cheered in, and you get your name in the paper for grandma to hang up on the fridge. And best of all you are not eliminated. You get to come back next week and run again.

If you make it fun, it will be more popular then you can imagine.

A 15-year-old boy knocked Arthur's door one day and asked him if he could train him. Arthur said he was the slowest runner he'd ever coached. He never won any race (locally) but he loved to run. He kept on running and ended up winning the NZ national marathon title, I believe, when he was 38 in around 2:20, went on and represented NZ for 1974 Commonwealth Games in the marathon (where Ian Thompson won in 2:09 with Jack Foster running 2:11 as a 41-year-old); and won the master's world championships marathon in Germany a couple of years later.

How can anybody determine if a 7-year-old is a good runner or not? Those coaches are the ones who would go on destroying potential--potential of the young hearts.

Thanks for the replies, Nobby.

My (just) 10yr old loves running. But he loves racing more.

He started running with my wife when he was 6. She was starting too and so they (and my elder daughter who was 10) did 1 min walk / 1 min run reps. When she ran for 10min they did too. When she got up to 5 miles, we made them stop after the first half. But soon they did more. They have run most days for the last 3.5 yrs, mostly very, very easy.

This has mainly been for company, health and fun, but now he has discovered racing. His fitness ensures he does well and it really is a case of having to hold him back now.

I am convinced of a Lydiard type approach and he has done a few longer runs on occasion and is exceptionally fit. But I am still unsure of what (if any) faster work he could/should do.

He wants to do well NOW - I am far more concerned about holding him back so he can do well when he is older. But I'd like him to experience the whole base, peak, race approach to learn, if that does not harm him.

I am happy for him to keep doing easy miles (aerobic base will do no harm) and jump into the odd 5k or XC race. I just want him to keep enjoying himself and keep fit for the long term. But he loves nothing more than racing and doing well. So to what degree should we allow to train to be competitive without harming him? What faster training (if any) would you have him do?

Of course my schoolchildren and club kids love to run (after-school club). I take my schoolchildren on a trail every Friday morning and it's the highlight of their week. The trail looks different every time. Last week 6 white-tailed deer crossed out path about 100 yards in front of us. It was breathtaking.

Today they had to walk across a plank/bridge because it was too icy to go across the rocks. And when we go back to the classroom my kids write about their running. They are reluctant writers (usually). They all have IEPs, but after running their writing flows. If I were to take Friday running away from them they would be heartbroken. Some of the children who start out with me come back years later and tell me about being on the XC or track team and others just tell me about how they still love to run.

Best thing- start them young and make it fun. Encourage them all. If you love running you will want to encourage the slowest, the most awkward, the average guy/gal, and the very gifted athletically inclined and you'll find a way to make them find a good place for running in their lives.

Carol

kidsrunning.com

Pantman:

I think as long as the kid is comfortable and loves to "compete", then there's no reason to deny it. However, as you have pointed out, it would be beneficial to restrict some of the races, particularly depending on the nature of the race. Naturally, if the kid does well in the race, he/she would have more fun. The challenge is when he/she gets into a stress situation from too much training, too much racing, or balaning homework and social life and running. Natural reaction of the kid to that is to train harder; which is, at the moment, probably the opposite of what should be done. It would be very difficult for a young kid of 10- or 11- or 12-of-age to understand and freely accept "losing". Particularly when he goes through puberty, even more so with girls, as his body shoots up a couple of inches in a short time, he would more likely to lose coordination and muscle strength, therefore, more likely NOT to perform as well as he had been. Psycologically it would be very difficult and physically with added stress and added "enthusiasm" to train even harder would put him in a very vulnerable to various growing injuries. I think it's this mental part of it that you, as a parent or coach, would have to be VERY careful about.

As far as training is concerned, I think racing itself would be the best "speed" training for kids (I'm talkin about track races like 800m or 1500m), if you want to call it that way. I would still limit it to, at most, once a month or once every other week only for a part of the season (in other words, not year arund). Longer races like 5-miles or 10km would probably be better (still definitely not every week though) because they would just slow down and coast. If you are thinking about races like 800m or 1500m, be more cautious about it because of the speed that involves. All in all, I would still limit somewhere around, and I'm not trying to generalize here, 5~10 races a year.

Idealy, I would have kids to long easy jog as often as possible; with one long jog on weekend (realistically, it would be a couple of times still...). Once or week or so, have then "have fun" on open field and do some exercises or drills if you want your kids to excel eventually, it's importtant to keep them agile and supple. Have them do some easy hill sprining, short sprints of, say, 20 to 30m (that's plenty long enough for a 10-year-old), skipping, bounding, some basketball or soccer drills using cones and such. One of the national sprinting coaches in Japan uses basketball exercises because many of the elements in basketball helps to make you "run faster". Things like dash to the cone (10m away) and go around and dash back backwards; do some side steps; etc. I can still send you some visuals (moving one) later if you want.

I personally don't like to make anybody younger than 17 a "runner" or a "jumper" or a "basketball player" or anything; in other words, specialize in one event or category of events. Make them do as many different activities as possible; develop their overall body's abilities.

Again, let kids play at and with athletics. I wouldn't necessarily limit "participating" races because it could very well be a lot of run. But definitely limit "competitive" atomosphere. Growing up is enough pressure. They don't need any added pressure in their lives.