Lydiard Aerobic Phase

Heh, I may as well go all the way, so that I can join naf in hell. HRE is convinced that I was IQ100 anyway.

HRE, how does most of what you wrote ("you don't need to spend much time or effort on anaerobic work" "you can race yourself fit without doing any anaerobic work" "Mills won gold because he didn't do intervals") relate to the REALITY of then, and today? Do those statements absolutely reflect / apply to most of the Gold medallists and WR holders of the 60s and the 00s and everything else inbetween?

I submit "no". And I challenge you not to merely be a troll. But to ask why so many Lydiard Myths and Statements are applied in broad strokes to ALL ATHLETICS by his most ardent followers.

You will think I'm merely trying to be mean. I'm not!

Ralph Doubell was coached by Franz Stampfl who was around at the same time as Lydiard and Cerutty. Two of them lived in the saem city and the other a 4 hour flight away. Strange huh.

Anyway Doubell won the 1968 800m Olympic title. He injured his achilled a few weeks out and coudn't train. He freshened up and boom. Stampfl himself said it was lucky he got injured.

So was Stampfl a legend coach or lucky?

it answers plenty HRE but opens up another question :)

Problem between Snell and Lydiard? ey?

ps i saw Trevor Vincent recently and will again recently. What was his connection to Lydiard? Coach-athlete?

cheers for the new name as well

Sim

Doubell's 1968 time is STILL the Aussie Record???!!!

Skuj wrote:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/sportsf/stories/s226388.htm

Doubell's 1968 time is STILL the Aussie Record???!!!

Damn straight man, how crazy is that!

At the op of the Aussie all-time list it goes Doubell first at 144.40 and Peter Bourke (also coached by Stampfl in the mid 80s) at 144.78.

Cook and Vincent turn up in many of Arthur's books and talks. In 1961 they were part of a team that went to NZ for a series of cross country races against Lydiard's runners. Yhey pretty much got their behinds kicked and eventually asked Lydiard why his guys were so much better. Arthur proceeded to tell them about his method and its emphasis on base building. Evidently 7:00 pace was mentioned somewhere along the line.

Cook and Vincent went back to Oz and started doing a lot of distance work at a 7:00 pace. Eventually Ron Clarke, who'd given up the sport to start a career and family and because he didn't like doing all the interval work he'd done under Stampfl, started running with them as he found their way of training pleasant and wanted to get fit enough to run in club races.

From there, as Arthur tells it, Clarke started running faster as he got fitter while Cook and Vincent kept to the 7:00 pace and "went nowhere."

I think Arthur's story falls apart at that point. Cook was 8th at Tokyo in the 10,000, Vincent as I'm sure you know, won the steeple at the 1962 Commonwealth Games, so that's a pretty respectable "nowhere." On top of that, in everything I've read by and about Clarke after his retirement he mentions Cook and Vincent as lifelong training partners which would have been fairly difficult if he was running 5:00s all the time and they were stuck at 7:00.

I actually tracked Trevor's e-mail address down and asked him about that story. He said that he certainly remembered things much differently than Arthur told it and would send more information later. He never did and I don't want to nag him. But what seems to have happened, I got this from a guy called Keith Livingstone who knows all three, is that they'd start out tigether and usually pick up the pace in the later stages of the run, so maybe Clarke was on his own for the last two-three miles or so. If you bump into Trevor again it would be worth asking and passing along the response.

sim wrote:

I give up on you. You are not interested in learning you are only interested in hearing yourself speak. Shutup please.

To live life as the expert sceptic is truly a lonely existence. You in fact are the fanatic and i now agree with Nobby in that you are an idiot. Go toss yourself somewhere else!

guys i am interested in why Lydiard chose this lacing form over all others. The cross over form does apply more pressure even if laced carefully. But who really cares? Lets talk more about the lydiard aerobic phase. How long is the longest anyone has done it for?

sim

Sim

Did you follow Nobby invite and did you join to the Lydiard Foundation ? If you don´t yet please to it as soon as possible. You and "Caroline No" you shall join to the Lydiard foundation as merit members. With your advise to go out and disappear from this site you are a typical Lydiard member. No doubt about it. Join the Lydiard Foundation quickly. They will be proud of you both.

Caroline no

The same advise for you.

Did you join to the Lydiard Foundation ? If you don´t yet please to it as soon as possible. You and "Sim" you shall join to the Lydiard foundation as merit members. With your advise to go out and disappear from this site you are a typical Lydiard member. No doubt about it. Join the Lydiard Foundation quickly. They will be proud of you both.

I will definitely do that. Might take a few weeks though, our circles only really cross at XC meets at the moment.

not a fanatic wrote:

Caroline no

The same advise for you.

Did you join to the Lydiard Foundation ? If you don´t yet please to it as soon as possible. You and "Sim" you shall join to the Lydiard foundation as merit members. With your advise to go out and disappear from this site you are a typical Lydiard member. No doubt about it. Join the Lydiard Foundation quickly. They will be proud of you both.

Well we have taken part of the discussion over to the Lydiard website so we can discuss things in peace!!!!! Peace from what? Well from you actually.

Still it was worth trying to work with you to see what your angle was. It's not worth trying anymore because the angle involves an artificial agenda*. In this sense you are not real. Not real in words or thoughts and haha definitely not physically real in cyberworld. Maybe you will just vanish eventually down the rabbit hole of your own unreality. :) ps there are drugs that you can take for a happier outlook on life you know.

*ie - there is no substance to your argument and when asked for some substance you say you are deliberately not giving any. Not giving any or not having any?

Mr. Ray wrote:

"not a fanatic",

In your opinion, what are the main flaws in the imperfect Lydiard approach to training?

The main flaw of Lydiard training is the lack of perspective. Here you have a first example of what is wrong in the Lydard appreciation. Latter i will continue to comment more about the deeper aspects of Lydiard training that i think that are wrong. I will answer to your questions. When i will do it I hope that it will satisfy those who consider that i just pratt on people and i dont discuss or comment the Lydiard training. But now i want to comment this lack of perspective.

The fact is this one. The jogging for wealth purpose reasons and general wealth condition is done advised since the early 20s of the last century – after the 1st World War - and that practice is consolidate during the next decades until the start of the 2nd world war and did continue on that European Nordic countries after the 2nd World War is over Several sport disciplines used the aerobic runs all as a regular practice. In Europe the Nordic-Swede gymnastics had many training programmes to get people of all ages and different fitness conditions to steady run and walk outdoor in pleasant environment as a complement of what is considered integral exercise. Soon after the 2nd world war many countries have a state programme of fitness that includes physical activity very similar to the actual jogging.

Some other states did lead that jogging movement as a state affair. Among that states are the past USSR and past East Germany as well as several past socialist states. I could go deep in history but it doesn’t matter. The historic references that I did that’s enough to understand that only a sport historician ignorant may consider that Lydiard starts or leads or was the first one to systematise such activity to be considered the “Father of Jogging”. Not the “father” or the “mother”, neither the “son”. May be that’s more accurate to call him an illegitimate son of jogging. To self proclaim Lydiard “the Father of Jogging” that is run sport history ignorance and abusive authorship to relieve and exaggerate another run aspect in the attempt to gain some world notoriety in what relates such issue.

“sim” said about Bruce Lee that he considered the aerobics condition the base of a good shape condition and that he used to run some miles. Did he run that runs

by the Lydiard connection ? If he doesn´t why to name Lydiard relate to that issue ? Because Lydiard did stress the interest of the aerobic condition to enhance the middle and long distance event performance ? That’s not enough.

The practice of what is considered the jogging done as a current and regular exercise from all ages and for wealth fit condition reason is done all over the world since long ago and long before the Lydiard recomendation.. As usual the Lydiard adept - willing to show that Lydiard is the best in several run issues they did consider him the “Father of Jogging”.

That’s an absurd and have no evidence. This my consideration about Lydiard “the father of jogging” takes for granted that I consider Lydiard in a world scale influence. If I consider the Lydiard jog run influence in a “little village” scale that are the “friends and fans” and members of the Lydiard Foundation or the Lydiard NZ population and some more USA or Japan whatever other country in what can be considered a local scale of interfeerence I may admit that at that small “world village” scale Lydiard may be considered “The father of Jogging”. But in a world scale he doesn´t. That’s something like we live today in world isolation and absence of information and that we think the humans didn’t get on the moon in 69. Some Lydiard fans they lived in the confined world of the triangle that’s: Lydiard Foundation – NZ - USA running scene and little more. Like a trinity of knowledge and nothing happens out of that trinity.

As some they said often on this site the expand of Lydiard teaching is done more at the coast of the English language and the books he wrote in the english language and in the american run scene than the legitimate authorship of the his teach. This is precisely the case of the practice of the easy aerobic run known as jogging.

If you want to read one serious study about the jogging phenomenon – read the book, C. Les enfants d'Achille et de Nike: une ethnologie de la course à pied ordinaire. By Martine Segalen and MIchelat Frére. Paris: Ed. Métailié, 1994.ISBN-10: 2864241811 ISBN-13: 978-2864241812

This book is from a Ph. French anthropologist and sociologist master Martine Segalen. She refers to the use of the jogging as a social behaviour and that’s considered daily ritual of socialisation as well as a aerobic wealth run exercise. On that book she document the root and world origin of that jogging movement and the source from what the numerous French runners do it since the late 60s. If you go or cross both Paris parks – Park of Princes and Park of Vincennes at the evening – you will see what is the jogging activity Martine Segalen talks about.

The more if by the way you go to Brazil and walk on Rio de Janeiro “Calçadão” and you see thousand of runner joggers doing daily jogging there and you may research what´s the source of that jogging boom since the mid 60s.

No one knows Lydiard or the Lydiard connection with th activity they are doing. A deep reasearch and you will see that that daily activity it was born on the lesson of the studies of Kenneth Cooper the one of the famous Cooper Test from 68. First it was adjust to be done by an unfit population and soon it was done as jogging to promote the aerobic condition and fitness. No connection with Lydiard teachings about that practice.

Finnaly if you go to USA, The LSD mouvement that had his boom after Frank Shorter marathon win had their root out of the lydaird teach mainly.

Facts are facts. Ther´s no way you can change the sport history and in this case the history of the jogging. No way that Lydiard is considered the “Father of Jogging” by put some people doing jogging by his jogging advise and that they do regular aerobic runs. Once for all it would be more honest and rigorous to appreciate Lydiard for what Lydiard did and what were their achievements and not for what he didn’t. Ok. Lydiard put some people in the popular jogging activity. But that means he is the “Father of jogging” ? No he doesn´t.

Lydiard coached directly some world top class runners and that runners did olympic wins and world records. For some period that runners can be considered the best of the world. No one can deny it. The fact that Lydiard did what he did it doesn’t mean that Lydiard is immaculate to discussor to comments or eventually we may disagree with Lydiar training. Everyone is free discuss the why and how he did it as everyone may comment and discuss every other Lydiard training issue. The wrong premise that because he did what he did we may take part of a consensus or unanimity of agreement that he have the authorship or the best advise for every training situation that’s something I don’t accept. That’s not because those who agree with Lydiard training are numerous than those that don’t that Lydiard training is good or bad. That’s not because those that post pro Lydiard on this board are numerous than those who dislike the Lydiard training or that don’t agree with some Lydiard training aspects that Lydiard is the best or that the arguments pro Lydiard are correct. The fact that Lydiard did what he did doesn’t allow that large number of adepts - the Lydiard adepts - that they are right and the minority is wrong. I remember that the judge of Lydiard training isn’t a case of number of adepts or judge in the style of democracy by the vote or number of opinion makers. May be those who consider Lydiard training quite good or perfect aren’t satisfy with some critics against the method. For me nothing can be accepted blindly neither imposed.

I also don’t accept arguments like the one that’s simply to argue that Lydiard is the best because he and his training system did an huge success on the top run level. This is a very naive argument. In fact a quite complete analyse of a coach needs more expertise and complex analysis tan simply the compilation of the perfromances. I refuse the primary emotional and imprudence of consideration. When we will understand that the appreciation of a coach or his training it needs to be done by a deeper analysis than simply their results or their runners competitive achievements ? When we do from that moment on we will refuse that naïve winner argument and success arguments or the ajectivation “the best” “the maker of champons” “the maker of winners” and that all sentences as enough to judge the training method.

When something is so wrong as to consider Lydiard the “Father of Jogging” and as long as the opponent or the moderator will permit me I will never stop to say that in a world context and about the jogging the supposed Lydiard jogging authorship or the use of jogging use it is not true. I will say that “the king is nude”.

Skuj I ask you to do the same other wise you are nothing more than a member of the Anti - lydiard cult alc. You clowns throw out all these challenges, make up a ridiculous test then refuse to participate but instead sit back and take pot shots, while some so called lydiardites in what I used to think was naiveness would attempt to no avail some meaning dialogue in an attempt to understand your "position".

Take that and discuss up yer ... mate.

CraigMac4h wrote:

"If it happens I do 100miles a week or whatever others Lydiard training principles this doesn't mean necessary that I train by The Lydiard way."

That's where I disagree. That's like saying "just because I run intervals until my pulse is 180 beats per minute, then rest until it drops to 120 bpm, and go again, doesn't mean I follow Gerchler's guidelines."

Or, for that matter, saying "Just because take some cookie dough, and add chocolate chips, and cook it in an oven, doesn't mean I've made chocolate chip cookies."

Yeah. . if you train according to Lydiard principles, then it's fair for someone to go "Oh, you train kind of like how Lydiard recommends." What's the big deal there?

True, dat. Philosophies and methodologies tend to trickle down. Whether you're adopting a methodology from 'the' source or it's fifteenth cousin, it's still the same methodology.

HRE wrote:

Eventually Ron Clarke, who'd given up the sport to start a career and family and because he didn't like doing all the interval work he'd done under Stampfl, started running with them.....

Very interesting. I'd like to explore this more (ie Clarke disliking the work under Stampfl). Where can I read about this? Thanks.

Too rambling. Too hard to understand. Doesn't appear,from what's understandable, to be anything other than the usual "Lydiard gets too much credit from his cult" stuff.

Nothing new or worth answering that I can see. Maybe you should have another go.

If you can find either "The Unforgiving Minute" or his more recent autobiography, "The Meaning of Success" there are comments about working with Stampfl. It's also mentioned in "Ron Clarke Talks Track" and he mentions Stampfl in the interview Brian Lenton did with him in "Interviews." But you aren't going to find any schedules or anything.

Most of the experts on this board they consider training as an art. For them the coach is the artist that deals with te training elements mileage, intensity, frequencylike the painter deals with the shapes and colours – Now, try to paint the famous Giaconda (Mona Lisa) by Leonardo da Vinci. Even a good reproduction is the Leonardo paint ? No it doesn’t. Coaching is a matter of authorship. The style influence or the in the art as well as in other form or creative process or reproduction or in the coaching influeneced by a training method it doesn´t mean that the final result is similar to the original. That´s why in the first instance no one can train as Lydiard did himself but just by Lydiard influence in the Lydiard method.

Do you love music ? Many musicians they claim to be influenced by other musicians and when you hear that artist to play his own music that music results different than the original. Your made chocolate chip cookies example when you made your own chocolate chip cookies that´s CraigMac4h chocolate chip cookies. You weren’t the only one to make the chip chocolate cookies. We both do our chocolate chip cookies. Many people does it. By your influence when I try myself make the same “CraigMac4h” cookies with the same ingredients that you did and try to follow all your instructions but that´s still my own “no fanatic” chocolate not yours. Or don´t you agree ? Despite that I try imitate your own cookies that´s not my own cook considered ? So what prevails that the individual that does it not the one we copy or we are influenced. If despite that I cook it myself but in your own way that´s your chocolate cook chips then for the same logic of consideration that´s not your chocolate chip cookies what you did but from the one that did teach you to do that cookies. This is the same about the training. Coach Haikkola may followed a strait Lydiard training instructions but when he coaches Lasse Viren that´s Haikkola training not Lydiard training. This is one among other reasons that´s wrong to consider that Lydiard is the maker Finish champions and that medals except in the single case of Pekka Vasala- Effetively Vasala after the 72 1500m olimpic gold medal he goes to NZ and trained directly by Lydiard but what he could get it was a 6th place in the european champion. Here you have the best that Lydiard could do to the Finish runners despite some of the Finish coaches have in their methods the Lydiard influence - not them all as Lydiard fans they say. If you follow this your line of consideration that the one who does something that´s not the authour but the one who teach him to do so you need to get back and back to know who is the first person that did invent that chocolate chip cookie meal and he is the authour notjust of my and your cookies but all chocolate chip cokies that everyone did until yet. If you insist in that your wrong way to think - as many Lydiard fans they do - then I shall say that Lydiard didn´t knew to write - does he learn from himself or someone teach him ? If you insist to follow your wrong authorship interpretation about the training the human being that did create the training as te way to enhance the performance is the universal training authour of every training method. While so we have no Cerruty training Igloi training Lydiard training whatever. If the man that does 100miles follows necessary the Lydiard training, then from who Lydiard did learn to do the single mileage run training? Egg; Lydiard did confess that he followed the east german in what concerns the periodisation, the anaerobic block extend and the peak or competitive block period of duration. Then in your wrong conclusion Lydiard training is not Lydiard training but east german training or watever. With such your wrong conclusion ther´s no Lydiard training. We would need to go back and back and discovered who was the first one to do 100miles and the first one to do the hill training whatever. I know that are extremist examples but that´s the way i can make you know such basic issue you seems not understand.

But let´s continue with the same basic example of the chocoloate cookies. Despite that I may do the chocolate chip cookies if I had not the intention to copy that from you or be influenced from you or when I do it from another one else advise rather than my cookies it can´t have your name or your influence relate the authorsip. That´s the same with the training. When someone does 100miles may be that´s Lydiard training or that is not. May be that´s Lydiard training influenced, but may be it doesn´t. If that´s done by another source of advise that´s not Lydiard training either despite that´s similar or equal to that Lydiard training elelment. If i do the 100miles by my own consideration and you relate the result with other than the source of influence what you do that´s wrong authorship and identity and a question of abusive identification. If i do 100miles by other source than the Lydiard one despite that the 100miles thats´a Lydiard principle that´s abusve to consider Lydiard 100miles training.

Now relate that with what is the Lydiard training in every aspect or every training element. I do 100miles but I miss the hills, but instead of the hills I do your “run intervals until my pulse is 180 beats per minute, then rest until it drops to 120 bpm, and go again. For you does it means I follow Gerchler's guidelines or the Lydiard guidelines ? So how to consider that training ? 50% from Lydiard and 50% from Gesheler ?

I could go on and on but it doesn´t matter. What i did that´s enough that every human being with mainstream comprehension that Lydiard didn´t made 17 olympic medals.

"not a fanatic",

With respect to lacing, I guess I take a pragmatic view. I know that some people have odd shaped feet, and may find it difficult to get shoes to fit well. I know there are different lacing techniques to help the shoes fit better and reduce foot problems. If different lacing could help prevent blisters, black toe-nails, heel-slipping, carpal tunnel syndrome, then why not?

I don't know what all the top athletes do, or for that matter if they win Gold Medals with sore feet. They all have shoe contracts -- maybe that includes custom fitted shoes. I'm more concerned with preventing black toenails than mimicking top-athletes shoelaces. I don't have their feet, or any special access to shoe manufacturers.

I didn't see you list any criteria (except advising to do a hard lace) for evaluating, accepting, or rejecting, a shoelace technique. You said you wouldn't say why you prefer criss-cross and triathlon lacing, as that would deviate from the discussion, but in fact, that would have provided a direct answer to one of my questions -- which lacing is superior, and why?

I guess my main criteria is comfort, and injury/soreness reduction. As the saying goes, "if the shoe fits..." Another one might be, that the laces don't come undone. I don't do triathlons, but could imagine for tri-athletes, time to lace the shoes could be another important criteria.

It's interesting your perception that, in the Lydiard dogma, "straight lacing" is on equal footing with "100 miles a week", or the "hill-phase", when it comes to applying the Lydiard way. I didn't put lacing in the same perspective, and it's the first time I've ever heard anyone interpret lacing like that and offer that viewpoint. I see it the way you said you would accept it, "seen as recommendation or a kind of curiosity or a personal Lydiard little advise". I gather most people, if not everyone, see it like that, and would not be swayed by a few fanatics.

One once was stated the definition of insanity is repeating the same thing and expecting a diffrent result. One must consider the Lydiardites as they appear to be called insane to be trying to attempt a dialogue with the anti lydiard cultists (alc) such as naf and skuj ( though techanically he hasn't been at letsrun for six months heh. heh, heh.. Oh I forgot some one oh no here we go again somebody is a gemini