| Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| guinea pigs |
| ||
|
Many of you are familiar with John Molvar's Lydiard interpretation in which he claims that a non-runner can go from 0 to 100MPW in 10 weeks by following his schedule. For those of you who don't know about it yet, see: http://www.bunnhill.com/BobHodge/Special/LydiardInterpreted.htm Here are two of his key comments: "Lydiard says you can and should take a sedentary office worker who has never done anything physical his whole life and get him up to 100 miles per week in 9 weeks" "Lydiard does caution that when you ascend rapidly that the tendons around the knees and in the front shins can get sore ... but there is no need to stop running. Lydiard says to also expect muscle soreness but don't take days off" Well guess what - several of my former teammates got together and tried this after a year off from running. None of them had run 100MPW before, and they didn't put on much weight since their last competitive race. All runs were done on easy, flat surfaces, and here were the results: - Two of them got Achilles Tendonitis after the end of week 5's long run (11 mile long run, 45 miles that week). One made it to the end of week 6, while the other quit immediately. Neither of them were overpronators or had Achilles problems before. - One person stopped after getting a stress fracture after week 7 (66 miles that week) - One of them complained of excessive fatigue throughout the day from week 4 onwards. He then slowed his pace to 8:30/mile and fell sick the day after week 8's medium-long run (15 miles). No, it wasn't the swine flu, but it was pretty bad; he skipped work for a week. - Another guy became really irritable toward the end of week 7. He somehow made it to the end of week 10 without getting injured or sick, but he stopped immediately after that and told us he would never try it again. - Our final runner got ITBS pretty early on at the end of week 3 (22 MPW). It went away after using the foam roller, but he stopped after it came back with a vengeance at the beginning of week 9 (90MPW). Oh, and one more thing to add. These weren't slow guys by any stretch of the imagination. Three of them ran a sub 4 1500, and the slowest one had a 5K PR of 16:18. None of them had more than one injury during their four years of college running. |
| guinea pigs |
| ||
|
To make things clearer, I'd like to say that I only mentioned the big injuries that caused them to stop the program. Smaller injuries and illnesses that were run through and overcome (blisters, toenails falling off, runny nose, etc) were not included. |
| kapal |
| ||
|
The 10 weeks to 100 miles never seemed realistic. In fact, I think if you take 10 good runners who are currently running 70 mile weeks and they all try to bump their mileage up to 100 miles in 10 weeks (30 mile increase), then at least a few of them would get injured or sick and a couple of the runners who make it to 100 mile weeks would be irritable and have their running performance slip. |
| newname |
| ||
|
That is nuts. Maybe an athletic, very thin guy in the 60's could do that, but I doubt it. In 2009 you are going to be hard-pressed to find people that could actually run 100mpw avg at even 7:30-pace and hold it for very many weeks. Anyone who is "sedentary" is going to struggle tremendously. Getting someone who has no running background up to 100mpw is probably harder than ramping up a consistent 100mpw guy to 200mpw. How many women run 100mpw consistently? Top college girls are INFINITELY better conditioned than a sedentary male and most cannot do it for very long. |
| Picture me trollin |
| ||
|
Lydiard is right, in some cases you COULD do it. Pace must be incredibly relaxed on soft surfaces. Not sure it's the smartest move tho Also, can we get the heights and weights of the participants in your self-designed study???? |
| Not An Expert |
| ||
What would a person being from the '60s have to do with his ability to do this? |
| Remembering the 60s |
| ||
What would a person being from the '60s have to do with his ability to do this?[/quote] People on average had a lot better general physique in the 60s. |
| quser |
| ||
|
That's funny. I was thinking about this the other day. Although you can say you "proved" it, he would likely still come back and say it's still possible. And, sure, it is, by someone like Abdi, with perfect form, no extra weight and no biomechanical issues. I don't think anyone, excluding John, really believed it was doable. I just wonder why some folks with have way decent abilities would waste their time trying to come up with evidence. |
| i know |
| ||
|
Your experiment is flawed in that you used experienced runners. Try it again with sedentary office workers.
|
| thinker |
| ||
] That could be very true, especially for previously fast runners. They had preconceived notions about how fast they should be training and possibly didn't listen to their bodies as well as an inexperienced person would. If they overdid things early on they could be fighting these injuries the whole way through. |
| track chick |
| ||
|
I think there's no question it CAN be done, but it's not the wisest method. |
| Wendell Gee |
| ||
|
Why does John Molvar repeatedly come up on this board as an "expert" of any sort? Who has he coached? When did his training theories get validated at any level? I ask these questions every time and nobody has an answer. He just takes Lydiard, twists it and throws it out again. 100 miles. 10 weeks. They are arbitrary numbers. Anybody who think training should be based on arbitrary, fit everyone on the same scale, numbers is fooling themselves. |
| 26mi235 |
| ||
|
I am sort of an example of someone who did exactly this. The 'sort of' has to do with the fact that I was a mediocre XC runner in HS (5-7th on the JV team my senior year, ran all four years). Also, I ran sporadically, and rode a bike for some of my transportation. I started running regularly at the beginning of August. I targeted a late-October marathon and was up to 100mpw by the beginning of October or late September. However, I got shin splints and had to back off a bit so I switched dates and ran Culver City on 1 December. My highest mileage 'month' (31 days) was 495 or so and I had between 5 to 7 weeks over 100 miles. I ran 2:52, although I ran way too slow from mile 5 through 16 (7:10 pace) and probably could have gone under 2:50, although it made the last 10k easy - I ran sub-39 from 20mi to the end. |
| 26mi235 |
| ||
|
Addendum: Essentially that sub-39 last 6mi 385 yards was my 'PR' for 10K, as this was my first road race. In HS my XC PR was 10:37 on a fast and slightly short 2-mile course. The biggest problem that could have been helped was that the shoes at the time were very mediocre. With modern shoes, I think that I would have had an easier time and would have probably been 2-3 minutes faster in the race. |
| The Rocket. |
| ||
|
I think there are two very major factors which may have lead to this epic failure. 1. Shoes. In Lydiard's day the shoes required the runners to use their natural shock absorption systems and not rely on artificial cushioning and stability. Once you start to do high mileage (especially if you build it up really fast) the artificial cushioning and support tricks the body into thinking it actually has support, but gradually tears away at the body. - Read 'Born to Run' 2. Pace. In Molvar's "Lydiard Interpreted", Molvar stresses that the pace be relaxed. When you run with this many guys who have all run in the past the tendency will be to go back to the pace that you had become accustomed to. However, in order to increase miles rapidly you need to run much slower (but maintain a quick turnover). |
| Cpt Ahab |
| ||
|
pre and the obession with the 100mpw are two of the most consistantly fetishized subjects on LR. amazing. |
| la la land |
| ||
|
I will nominate you and your band of guinea pigs for a Nobel prize. You may go to your grave content in the knowledge that you have advanced training theory by your noble experiement. I salute you, ruin-your-friends'-bodies-to-make-a-point guy. |
| former |
| ||
|
john molvar has not legitimacy in these sorts of conversations, posts, blogs, etc. Excuse me, john molvar has not legitimacy in the world of track and field. He moved from assistant coaching a small, insignificant high school team that no one has or will ever hear of, to running the xc and track programs at a tiny Christian college with a horrible athletic program. Being a former sprinter under this man, I realized soon into my junior year that he was trying to turn the whole running program into a year-long xc team, and a bad one at that. He runs the team into the ground and gives them no time to recover in between workouts. Honestly, does it sound like a good idea to run sprint workouts Monday-Thursday? I didn't think so. If anyone ever gets stuck in a conversation with him, and he begins to talk about the so-called "school records" his runners have set, please fake a phone call or just run away. These school records began being recorded when I began my college career there...in 2006-07. There have been countless injuries on that team, including myself. It took me far too long to realize that I shouldn't run for molvar. This man should not be regarded as a coach, and especially as an expert of anything related to track or fitness. I apologize for being off-topic, but it needs to be said in case anyone is thinking about taking this man seriously. |
| canuckster |
| ||
People on average had a lot better general physique in the 60s.[/quote] Since you are clearly caught up in Mad Men nostalgia, I ask, what about all the smoking, drinking, red meat and fatty foods? People on average may have weighed less, but a 60s man beside a man of the same build today would not have an advantage. |
| Wendell Gee |
| ||
|
I've seen his nonsense since the mid-'90's when he posted to the old t-and-f darkwing server at UOregon. He projects a certain arrogance about the topic with no discernible results to back it up. He did make some good all-time lists at one point. Or am I confusing him with Pat Hoffman? |
| Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
LetsRun.com Get an Extra 20% off on Spikes/Flats from the leader in track and field/racing shoes Eastbay.com. You'll automatically see the discount at checkout. Email us at letsrun@letsrun.com if you have questions.
Nike Pegasus 20% off. Special LetsRun.com savings on the Nike Air Pegasus.
Nike Mayfly Extra 20% Off.
20% off the adidas AdiZero at Eastbay.com. LetsRun.com visitors get 20% off
