Coe did a base of steady running - at good aerobic pace
after a while introduced more hill work
then did bulk interval work
then moved to fast rep work (longer recovery) and speed endurance sessions
this is what lydiard did
extras were the weight training and circuit work
the multi pace didn't start until after a base was completed, and was most evident during the pre comp and comp phase
Is every success due to Lydiard? Did Lydiard ever have any failures? We dont hear much about those.
I am sure there were some failures, but coe's training followed the same pattern
0/10
fvck McMillan wrote:
0/10
which part is incorrect?
So Coe did what most top runners have been doing for 50 years or so, for the most part. What does Lydiard have to do with it?
Same az it ever wuz wrote:
So Coe did what most top runners have been doing for 50 years or so, for the most part. What does Lydiard have to do with it?
Forget Lydiard then. Coe and Snell did very similar training.
Has no one read Coe's book? Does anybody actually do any research into the subject or go to the British miler’s club web site which is full of information and studies in athletics. No. Very few seem to do so. So no one knows that the majority of Coe’s mileage in his base phase was what peter Coe referred to as lactate venticiallary threshold training. Coe described this as 5 to 10 mile runs at 5 min per mile, often with surges mixed in. You would also know that hill training was part of his base, not something added on later. Also, weight and circuit training where not simply added on, but where a huge part of his training, something that Lydiard was against. Virtually every training ideal of modern runners has a base and to have one does not mean everyone trained followed Lydiard. Peter Coe was adamantly against easy mileage, and has sited in several articles that his son ran recoveries at no less than 5:40 a mile. Lydiard didn’t invent Periodization, and he implemented it very differently than the Coes did, and was all for asininely easy miles composing the majority of peoples year round mileage.
Templar,My statements come straight from a Peter Coe Book.
Templar21 wrote:
Has no one read Coe's book? Does anybody actually do any research into the subject or go to the British miler’s club web site which is full of information and studies in athletics. No. Very few seem to do so. So no one knows that the majority of Coe’s mileage in his base phase was what peter Coe referred to as lactate venticiallary threshold training. Coe described this as 5 to 10 mile runs at 5 min per mile, often with surges mixed in. You would also know that hill training was part of his base, not something added on later. Also, weight and circuit training where not simply added on, but where a huge part of his training, something that Lydiard was against. Virtually every training ideal of modern runners has a base and to have one does not mean everyone trained followed Lydiard. Peter Coe was adamantly against easy mileage, and has sited in several articles that his son ran recoveries at no less than 5:40 a mile. Lydiard didn’t invent Periodization, and he implemented it very differently than the Coes did, and was all for asininely easy miles composing the majority of peoples year round mileage.
If you read Peter Coe's book the "base phase" is 8 weeks of 40 miles/week steady running. Whereas Lydiard's marathon training went "as long as possible" with a goal of 100 mile/week. Also Coe considers 12 miles as the "long run" during his base phase.
Coe introduces speedwork in the next phase which is at a higher volume (70 mpw). And his highest volume weeks included interval and speed work. "The name of the game is speed"--Peter Coe, and that's where the bulk of the training volume was focused on.
Lydiard's "hill phases" and "interval phases" ideally just lasted for 4 weeks each followed by a "sharpening phase".
Pretty much ALL types of training incorporates an initial high volume/conditioning phase, followed by sports specific training, followed by a taper. For example for football you have spring practice and conditioning (steady state), grueling summer training camp (high volume), scrimmages and preseason games (sport specific), real games (and lower volume practices), and then tapering for the playoffs. So is NFL football/college football "Lydiard trained"? So were Bear Bryant, Paul Brown and Vince Lombardi Lydiard disciples? Give me a freakin break!
Preconditioning followed by high volume, high intensity work followed by a taper has been around before Lydiard (see Franz Stampfl's book). The revolutionary thing Lydiard did was have 800/1500 runners run 20 milers, prolonging the preconditioning/base phase, and reducing the anaerobic (interval) phase of training to about 2 months.
Bottom line, read the books instead making up your own revisionist history.
Templar21 wrote:
Lydiard . . . was all for asininely easy miles composing the majority of peoples year round mileage.
It doesn't sound as though you're very familiar with Lydiard's training methods for competitive runners. Lydiard advocated 100 mpw of pretty darn hard running, along with whatever supplemental easy running could be tolerated. If you look at the training of John Walker, who was not coached by Lydiard but trained along Lydiard lines, you will see a lot of long runs at speeds near five minutes per mile during the base-building phase.
Still second best in history for 800 meters
Still second best in history for 1000 meters
all this since 28 YEARS AGO.
end of thread.
Most if the best middle and long distance runners in the world do something similar to Lydiard, either through inspiration or independent invention.
Coe had a fair amount of moderate/relaxed running but since it wasn't "training specifc" it wasn't recorded.
Rubbish
His name was Lydiard, not lydirad.
Anyways, Coe was basically Coe trained. He did speed endurance in winter.
wellnow wrote:
His name was Lydiard, not lydirad.
Anyways, Coe was basically Coe trained. He did speed endurance in winter.
Lydiard - ok - a typo.
Coe may have done rep work in winter - but it was not deeply anaerobic and certainly not speed endurance.
Coe did speed endurance in May onwards - not in Winter, and this was after a period of interval sessions like 20-40 x 200.
The multi pace stuff started in Feb, but Seb got right into it in March.
What do you think he was doing before Feb?
He got into hill work more seriously around March too.
It is sounding very similar to what Snell did.
Remember Snell didn't often get to 100 miles per week.
UkAthleticscoach - tell me where you disagree.
Templar,Coe's Book? Don't you mean books!!Hills were part of his base but emphasised more at a certain time of the year. Snell ran at best aerobic pace too - except before Tokyo when he did a little anaerobic work throughout the base period.
Templar21 wrote:
Has no one read Coe's book? Does anybody actually do any research into the subject or go to the British miler’s club web site which is full of information and studies in athletics. No. Very few seem to do so. So no one knows that the majority of Coe’s mileage in his base phase was what peter Coe referred to as lactate venticiallary threshold training. Coe described this as 5 to 10 mile runs at 5 min per mile, often with surges mixed in. You would also know that hill training was part of his base, not something added on later. Also, weight and circuit training where not simply added on, but where a huge part of his training, something that Lydiard was against. Virtually every training ideal of modern runners has a base and to have one does not mean everyone trained followed Lydiard. Peter Coe was adamantly against easy mileage, and has sited in several articles that his son ran recoveries at no less than 5:40 a mile. Lydiard didn’t invent Periodization, and he implemented it very differently than the Coes did, and was all for asininely easy miles composing the majority of peoples year round mileage.
He did a few 14 mile runs too.My book says 80 miles not 70. I think you may have the same one."as long as possible" but usually around 10-12 weeks.Yes, I agree, Snell ran big mileage during interval and speed work too.Lydiard hill phase - 6 weeks in Run to the Top - written when Snell was runningLydiard interval phase - 6 weeks in Run to the Top - written when Snell was runningLydiard speed endurance sharpening phase - 6 weeks in Run to the Top - written when Snell was runningnot 4If the name of the game is speed, Bolt would be winning the mile was well.Forget my opening - this isn't for or against Lydiard, or making claims for Lydiard. Simply stating that I believe Coe and Snell did very similar training.
Read the books wrote:
If you read Peter Coe's book the "base phase" is 8 weeks of 40 miles/week steady running. Whereas Lydiard's marathon training went "as long as possible" with a goal of 100 mile/week. Also Coe considers 12 miles as the "long run" during his base phase.
Coe introduces speedwork in the next phase which is at a higher volume (70 mpw). And his highest volume weeks included interval and speed work. "The name of the game is speed"--Peter Coe, and that's where the bulk of the training volume was focused on.
Lydiard's "hill phases" and "interval phases" ideally just lasted for 4 weeks each followed by a "sharpening phase".
Pretty much ALL types of training incorporates an initial high volume/conditioning phase, followed by sports specific training, followed by a taper. For example for football you have spring practice and conditioning (steady state), grueling summer training camp (high volume), scrimmages and preseason games (sport specific), real games (and lower volume practices), and then tapering for the playoffs. So is NFL football/college football "Lydiard trained"? So were Bear Bryant, Paul Brown and Vince Lombardi Lydiard disciples? Give me a freakin break!
Preconditioning followed by high volume, high intensity work followed by a taper has been around before Lydiard (see Franz Stampfl's book). The revolutionary thing Lydiard did was have 800/1500 runners run 20 milers, prolonging the preconditioning/base phase, and reducing the anaerobic (interval) phase of training to about 2 months.
Bottom line, read the books instead making up your own revisionist history.
'tell me where you disagree.'
Volume
All training systems have similarities, especially in the base phase, but Coe v Lydiard are at opposite ends; even if both systems were over & under exaggerated. Ovett's was closer to what you are looking for
so what do u think coe's and snell's volumes were