Lacing the "Lydiard Way"

check out the lydiard foundation website, there's a step-by-step guide on how to do it

To whom is your reply directed? It doesn't seem to belong in this thread - at least as an intelligent direct response to anything said before. Why accuse "wondering", of propogating the Lydiard cult, after he says "I'm sticking with the original method."?You are acting like Pavlov's dog, conditioned to slobber "cult" everytime someone rings "Lydiard" -- quite ironic behavior for someone who claims he's campaigning for independent thinking.If you try to read "wondering"'s post for comprehension applying the higher order parts of the brain, you would understand "wondering" asking: "I don't get this Lydiard lacing -- what do others see in it?".This is a request for information, presumably to help form his (or her) independent thinking, where the proper reply would be personal testimonials. This request, and the subsequent replies, is hardly evidence of the existence of a cult. Your response just doesn't seem to fit coherently in a civilized discussion between higher order mammals capable of independent thought.I only hope that too many people won't be brain-washed into believing a Lydiard cult exists.Regards,

lQ100 wrote:

The cult of Lydiard is now to the shoes too. This is micomanagement and can result in compulsive behaviours of those involved. Do you want to tie your shoe like this? Okay for you but not to promote that behaviour onto everyone. This is not good Kool Aid for everyone so don't do the drink. The Lydiard cult is more like the minimalists. Do it my way or go to the highway. We are all different. There is not one method for each.

"Ian's Shoelace Site" is an amazing collection of information regarding a subject I haven't given much thought since I was 5 years old.Regarding "Straight (Bar) Lacing", also called "Fashion Lacing" and, dare I say it, "Lydiard Lacing", one drawback is that it works best for an even number of eyelets.The site gives a number of "odd" work-arounds, but it seems that a good "odd" workaround for runners would be to combine "Straight Lacing" with "Lock Lacing", which helps prevent heel slipping. I did try this and the biggest disadvantage for me so far, is that it takes me longer to tie and untie my shoes.Regards,

wondering... wrote:

http://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/straightbarlacing.htm

or

http://www.fitnesssports.com/lyd_clinic_guide/Arthur%20Lydiard.pdf

Page 26

The connection of Lydiard and shoe ties was made, to which I responded. In a public forum all are welcome to offer insight. Your disagreement is noted but that does not mean I cannot respond too. Are you not the slobbering dog for your knee-jerk responses to anything I post. Can you not just disagree without condescentions? Who is the cultist now? You help to make my point in that you are conditioned to respond to me. I am Pavlov here. The true irony is in your responses. Can you not see this? If not, is this not another sign of the cult. I would say yes.

I'm all for everyone's freedom of speech and attempt to offer insight. But for whatever reason, you have joined a discussion (again) with a completely off-topic reaction. This discussion forum is organized by threads, and your response just seems out of place in this thread. This thread was a fair and harmless question and answer session about the benefits of lacing your shoes a certain way that Lydiard recommended, and you seem to want to turn it into an argument about cults.I'm not just giving a knee-jerk response. I'm trying to read your alleged insight with comprehension, and I just can't make the link between anything you say, and what was said before in this thread, except for one keyword, Lydiard.For example, when you said "okay for you but not to promote that behaviour onto everyone" -- I read everything else, and believe I understood it, and I just can't see what you are reacting against. I don't see anyone promoting that behavior onto everyone. Your reactions just lack the pre-requisite action. The link between Lydiard and lacing was made, but the link between Lydiard and cult was not.I interpret "Lydiard" as an adjective to describe a specific method of lacing he recommended. We use adjectives to be more precise, and avoid ambiguity. You are probably repulsed that Lydiard is again taking credit for discovering a method for tying shoes, and will no doubt remind us that Lydiard did not invent shoes, nor laces.It's not just that I'm simply expressing disagreement because I possess a dissenting opinion. I can do that without condescending. I'm saying your post is so poor, it is just completely disconnected with the rest of the thread. You seem to want to argue, just for the sake of arguing. You seem to want to censor, or taint, every discussion about Lydiard, and are particularly sensitive to Lydiard lacing.Searching for practical reasons and benefits, and offering practical reasons and benefits, of why Lydiard recommended a certain way of lacing, is a demonstration that a cult doesn't exist. It's an example of an attempt at independent thinking, rather than blindly following the leader. If someone had said "I lace my shoes the Lydiard way because he had so much success in the 1960's Olympics, so he must know what he's talking about.", or simply "How dare you question Lydiard?" that might be construed as evidence of a cult. But the reality is that that didn't happen.Where you see a cult, I see exactly the opposite.Perhaps if I spent more time, I could be less condescending. It's just that your posts demonstrate such a high degree of mis-comprehension of what is actually written, I don't know how to express that observation in a diplomatic way.Regards,

lQ100 wrote:

The connection of Lydiard and shoe ties was made, to which I responded. In a public forum all are welcome to offer insight. Your disagreement is noted but that does not mean I cannot respond too. Are you not the slobbering dog for your knee-jerk responses to anything I post. Can you not just disagree without condescentions? Who is the cultist now? You help to make my point in that you are conditioned to respond to me. I am Pavlov here. The true irony is in your responses. Can you not see this? If not, is this not another sign of the cult. I would say yes.

I started this thread, and I say The Light wins, IQ100 should figure out something better to do with his time than argue about a Lydiard cult. Oh no...I said his name! Does that mean that I, too, have now become part of this cult? Get a job IQ. Nice writing Light. Continue..

Are you not sightful enough to see the quotated and capitalized words "Lydiard Way" in the thread title? Just because the reference is to lacing means not a disjunction with the cult. Perhaps it could have been racing, or eating, or studying the "Lydiard Way." It does not matter. These are all aspects of an overall program of dominance and suppression. How can you not see this? You see the trees, but not the forest that is Lydiardism. This is because you have been brainwashed and are of the cult. You cannot be objective about this before an intervention. It may be too late for you, but I want to warn others so that they do not become the slobbering dogs to Lydiard's Pavlov. Did not Jim Jones offer positive outcomes to his followers. Yes, but they still drank the Kool Aid. Does not Lydiarism offer much the same? Yes!

Mr. wondering....You are of the cult and therefore incapable of making an objective decision of this topic. Yes you started the thread and thereby opened it up to responses. You may not agree with them, but you must accept them. I urge you and others to think carefully about all of this before committing yourself to the "Lydiard Way." It is a dark and dangerous path that you may end up choosing. I will remain here to help anyone get through this fog that is Lydiard cult life. You can choose another way.

wondering... wrote:

I started this thread, and I say The Light wins, IQ100 should figure out something better to do with his time than argue about a Lydiard cult. Oh no...I said his name! Does that mean that I, too, have now become part of this cult? Get a job IQ. Nice writing Light. Continue..

Next....the Lydiard Way to lace the tie !

Skuj, give it a break. It's not funny anymore.

lQ100 wrote:

Mr. wondering....

You are of the cult and therefore incapable of making an objective decision of this topic. Yes you started the thread and thereby opened it up to responses. You may not agree with them, but you must accept them. I urge you and others to think carefully about all of this before committing yourself to the "Lydiard Way." It is a dark and dangerous path that you may end up choosing. I will remain here to help anyone get through this fog that is Lydiard cult life. You can choose another way.

In fairness to 100IQ, in addition to thinking about a Lydiard cult he must have found an English language course somewhere in Italy that he's spending time at. His English is WAY better than it was when I last checked the Lydiard-Daniels thread.

HRE, that's because IQ100 is really Skuj. He writes English pretty well....at least as well as you can expect given his limitations.

wondering... wrote:

I started this thread, and I say The Light wins, IQ100 should figure out something better to do with his time than argue about a Lydiard cult. Oh no...I said his name! Does that mean that I, too, have now become part of this cult? Get a job IQ. Nice writing Light. Continue..

I did not write that.

Indeed I see the quotes, but interpreted them as a specific, but non-standard, reference to a particular method of lacing. This is your strong evidence of a cult? "wondering" also put "normal" in quotes -- is there a cult which worships lacing shoes in the "traditional "normal" fashion"?To summarize the start of this thread, "wondering" was saying he didn't "get" Lydiard lacing, and asked others why they did it - cause he was going back to the "normal" way. Putting the "Lydiard Way" in quotes, is a useful way for him to briefly describe exactly what he means, as well as attracting the attention of the right group of persons to answer. A few people responded with practical pragmatic reasons, like "less pressure can prevent foot pain". No one came forward with a cultist reply: "Join us!" This is "exactly" the kind of rational discourse that must take place, so that non-lemmings can independently decide for themselves what they think is right. Can't you see that? I would think you should be in favor of that, as it discourages cultism.I may or may not be objective, but I hope my arguments are, and that most people could tell the difference if they weren't. My knowledge of Lydiard is quite recent, and not that practical. I have 3 pairs of running shoes, and only one is laced with "straight" lacing. There may still be hope for me yet. I find it highly unlikely that I am already brain-washed, although if I were, I wouldn't know it, would I.When I do stumble across new knowledge, I seek out, in a very non-cultist fashion, just what critics say about this new knowledge, and assess the applicability and validity of the criticism, before I commit to it. I find it telling that none of Lydiard's critics ever say his system or ideas don't work, or don't achieve the stated goals of reaching your potential, and peaking at the right times. Most of the vocal debate is about the range and boundaries of Lydiard's influence, or the unusual degree of enthusiasm by his followers, or that other non-Lydiard systems work better. Some other minor debate is about the terminology he used to describe the science. I assume that if the critics could discredit the system, they would. If they can't, then they must turn to something else, like discrediting his followers as lemmings, or attacking non-central details like lacing your shoes, or if the system can be rightfully called "perfect". The lack of substance in critiques of Lydiard gives me more faith in the Lydiard system than reading "Run to the Top".Regards,

IQ100 and or Skuj or both, in case we are mistaken that you are not Skuj. But until proven otherwise, I assume that IQ100 is Skuj.

Prove other wise:

Christopherkelsall@gmail.com

Anyway, Skuj just got his fellow club mates pissed at him.

At least well trained dogs don't shit in their own kennel...but I guess Skuj can't even do that right.

GO AWAY SKUJ, YOU ARE AN INTERNATIONAL INCIDENT!

Well I tried it on a 6 mile run and liked it. I'm going to do a 9 mile today and if it goes well I'll convert all of my shoes over...

You don't really know for sure, and you trash Skuj publicly (while singlehandidly turning his forum into letsrun), because you may or may not be right. In your world, it is up to someone to email you to prove to you that you are wrong, while in the meantime, you can go on trashing. Did I miss anything?

Wetcoast wrote:

IQ100 and or Skuj or both, in case we are mistaken that you are not Skuj. But until proven otherwise, I assume that IQ100 is Skuj.

Prove other wise:

Christopherkelsall@gmail.com

Anyway, Skuj just got his fellow club mates pissed at him.

At least well trained dogs don't shit in their own kennel...but I guess Skuj can't even do that right.

GO AWAY SKUJ, YOU ARE AN INTERNATIONAL INCIDENT!

So let me get this straight: wrote:

Did I miss anything?

You apparently missed the fact that Skuj is a well-known troll who likes to tout himself alongside some of the more intelligent and well-established coaching authorities who post here. He coaches penguins, which is not a bad thing but clearly he is in a different coaching class than some of these other folks. He has had some good moments, but his bad ones have clearly overshadowed those. It has been well established that Skuj trolls under many different handles, often on the same thread. So believing that he is trolling as IQ100 may not be such a stretch.

bump to try this