Early on i post what on the Lydiard Foundation site it´s Lydiard training. Training blocks, aerobics, 100miles, hill the Lydiard way, the anaerobic block, AND among all that Lydiard stuff, it´s the Lydiard way to lace the shoe.
At that occasion, i wrote it´s an absurd to consider the Lydiard way to lace the shoe at the same level of interest than all other Lydiard training main aspects. I call it ridiculous and build in the Lydiard cult.
Someone said i was wrong, because the lace shoe contributes decisively for the performance enhance. I took some examples of the beloved Lydiard runners, Lasse Viren, that didn´t lace the Lydiard way. I said that most of the olympic champions, world recordists, they did what they did without the Lydiard lace.
At some moment of that discuss HRE gets into the debate to defend the Lydaird way to lace the shoe. He said that the way to lace the shoe it was advised by Lydiard himself on the occasion he meet Lydiard.
So what ? The same old stuff. You tend personalize everything. To contest Lasse Viren you use your own example ! Don´t you understand it´s inadequate !
In one of the last posts someone tries to argue with me with Nobby lace use supposedly without follow that lace kind. But what is Nobby as a runner, what are Nobby best performances ? Nobby is one fat runner of jogging, and is one runner with no evident performance that i might take in consideration for the pros or cons of Lydaird training or the pros and cons of lace the shoe. The way Nobby laces the shoe it´s irrelevant as argument. Someone isn´t one coach with credentials simply because he gets close from another good coach - Lydiard. Nobby isn´t one good coach because he studies Lydiard, or did private conversations with Lydiard, or lived with Lydiard, or Lydiard did him a representative attorney. Coach knowledge doesn´t happens by osmosis. Osmosis is only one chemical property, not one human property, or that Lydiard, by some kind of magic introduces on Nobby or soemone else his training knowledge.
Therefore the individual examples of that kind of persons means nothing to the discuss. Or they know what they talk about by the use of coach science or they don´t.
Therefore, your tendency to use yourself as living example is inadequate for the appreciation.
If the Lydiardiste thinks that Lydiard should change his opinion about altitude training, it´s one step to progress, but not that Lydaird training is indate yet. Lydiard training, be done in altitude, be done at sea level, or be done into the water, or in subsoil, be done with what kind of lace the shoe, it´s the same outdate Lydiard training. What should be done was to update the training methodology.
Some they say that my long posts are only conversation, theory. I might agree, but do they think that when they post, are they do training ?