Tired of hearing people badmouth Lydiard when they don't really understand his Training

thank you for sharing

Because most people only catch soundbites:

http://www.fitnesssports.com/lyd_clinic_guide/lydpg2.html

Doesn't sound like jogging to me:

Monday 10 miles (15km) at 1/2 effort over undulating course

Tuesday 15 miles (25km) at 1/4 effort over reasonably flat

Wednesday 12 miles (20km) at 1/2 effort over hilly course

Thursday 18 miles (30km) at 1/4 effort over reasonably flat

Friday 10 miles (15km) at 3/4 effort over flat course

Saturday 22 miles (35km) at 1/4 effort over reasonably flat

Sunday 15 miles (25km) at 1/4 effort over any type terrain

Look another "conditioning" program by Lydiards:

1. Conditioning (As long as possible) 2 week cycles.

Monday: Aerobic running 3/4 to 1 hour.

Tuesday: Aerobic running 1 to 1.5 hours.

Wednesday: Run hilly course 1/2 to 1 hour.

Thursday: Aerobic running 1 to 1.5 hours.

Friday: Jog 1/2 to 1 hour.

Saturday: Run hilly course 1/2 to 1 hour.

Sunday: Aerobic running 1.5 to 2 hours.

Monday: Run hilly course 1/2 to 1 hour.

Tuesday: Aerobic running 1 to 1.5 hours.

Wednesday: Time trial 3000 or 5000 meters.

Thursday: Aerobic running 1 to 1.5 hours.

Friday: Jog 1/2 to 1 hour.

Saturday: Relaxed striding of 4 to 8 times 200 meters.

Sunday: Aerobic running 2 hours or more.

People don't realize that Lydiard often contridicted himself from one moment to the next, or better put: he tweaked his program from day to day to deal with individual runners.

Alan

So you're telling me that everyone can't follow the same damn plan? I'm pretty sure I could jump onto Ryan Hall's training plan any day.

The ridiculous thing is that questioning if the Lydiard system works is like questioning if the forward pass in American football works.

Its just a long proven conceptual framework for training. No more, no less. Lydiard's genius was also in being well attuned to the runners he coached and recognizing that they are all different and require unique training and the right amount of rest at the right time. It goes way beyond just running a bunch of miles.

Ryan Foreman wrote:

The ridiculous thing is that questioning if the Lydiard system works is like questioning if the forward pass in American football works.

Its just a long proven conceptual framework for training. No more, no less. Lydiard's genius was also in being well attuned to the runners he coached and recognizing that they are all different and require unique training and the right amount of rest at the right time. It goes way beyond just running a bunch of miles.

Lydiard only had success with a limited number of runners in the 1960s. He kept coaching for decades after that but didn´t produce any more world class runners (yes I know he influenced the Finns). Lydiard was a great coach but he was no more of a magician than anybody else.

It never ceases to amaze me how anonymous posters with smug screen names like "well." come on here and instantly demonstrate their total ignorance on a topic. Do a little research before nonchalantly dismissing one of the greatest coaches of all time.

Lydiard had great success throughout his long coaching career. Keep in mind that after his initial gold medal success with a bunch of young Auckland guys, he realized that his greatest contribution would be made by coaching coaches. "well." casually mentions Lydiard's stint in Finland. He doesn't mention that the next several years saw the Finns go from nowhere to one of the great distance running powers of the world during the 1970s. When you trace the Lydiard influence as it has been passed down through scores of coaches - John Davies, Dick Quax, Bill Bowerman, John McDonald and Mark Wetmore to name just a few - you realize what a debt we owe that great innovator and teacher.

Mark Coughlin

I know it's blasphamy but I read Kenny Moore's book and few others and I had to wonder.

Were Lydiard and Bowerman great great coaches, or were they just doing something that others weren't?

Both guys are famous for taking guys from just around the area and going to the Olympics with them, winning National titles. Perhaps the field just wasn't very deep?

"Were Lydiard and Bowerman great great coaches, or were they just doing something that others weren't?"

You can define great however you wish, but what they did took a lot of courage going against conventional wisdom of the time. Their methods were very effective and laid down the foundation for what every distance runner does today.

It seems so simple looking back knowing what we know now, but it wasn't quite so simple then. Run slower to race faster? That was herecy at the time.

The guys that ran for Lydiard all seem to have a high opinion of him. Barry Magee has stated that he is sure we wouldn't have won and olympic bronze medal without Arthur's coaching.

I don't know that Peter Snell ever made a similar statememnt about his three olympic golds, but he did state that he maximized his 1500/mile potential. Or at least that was the inference in John Walker's book.

3 of the most sure-fire troll topics here: triathletes, ultrarunners, and Lydiard.

Who is this John McDonald you speak of??

He was in and out of coaching from about 1965 on. He went to Mexico and left pretty soon because he just didn't like the situation. Then he went to Finland where he got them on the path that lead to their resurgence in the early to mid 70s. Then he went home and got Richard Tayler to the gold in the 1974 Commonwealth Games 10,000. That's quite a lot of success.

By the late 70s he decided that he didn't want to coach anymore but soon after that his wife got him to coach the girls who ran at the school where she taught. That was very successful. I'll get some of the names wrong and miss others but Anne Hannum, Heather Matthews, Heather Carmichael, Christine McMeiken and one or two more names I'm forgetting came out of that period.

Then his wife died, it hit him very hard, and he really did quit coaching. So he was successful long after he was done working with the original group.

Agreed. Lydiard has to be seen in context. In the 50s, intervals were hot and steady state was not. Lydiard shifted the balance.

well. wrote:

Ryan Foreman wrote:

The ridiculous thing is that questioning if the Lydiard system works is like questioning if the forward pass in American football works.

Its just a long proven conceptual framework for training. No more, no less. Lydiard's genius was also in being well attuned to the runners he coached and recognizing that they are all different and require unique training and the right amount of rest at the right time. It goes way beyond just running a bunch of miles.

Lydiard only had success with a limited number of runners in the 1960s. He kept coaching for decades after that but didn´t produce any more world class runners (yes I know he influenced the Finns). Lydiard was a great coach but he was no more of a magician than anybody else.

Yeah. Because coaches started using his training techniques. Then soon after, the East Africans emerged whose very way of life was effectively Lydiard training whether they knew it or not.