Is Peter Coe's book as bad?

Who?

Hard to believe that a real coach is this much out of touch/out of date. The original "Training Distance Runners" was published 21 years ago. The updated second edition is called "Better Training for Distance Runners" and is perhaps the best training book out there for coaches and serious competitive runners (and that is the intended audience).

This book is not for everyone--it is NOT "how to run your best 5K without working for it". Some coaches seem not capable of understanding the physiology sections in the first 3-4 chapters, and it wouldn't surprise me if 75% of the people who post on this site cannot understand those chapters. But there is a great deal of information in this book for people who actually understand what they're doing.

For people wishing to train for just middle distance (800/1500), Peter Coe's "Winning Running" is perhaps a better book.

any books you'd back for decathlon training/drills, coach d?

coach d wrote:

Hard to believe that a real coach is this much out of touch/out of date. The original "Training Distance Runners" was published 21 years ago. The updated second edition is called "Better Training for Distance Runners" and is perhaps the best training book out there for coaches and serious competitive runners (and that is the intended audience).

This book is not for everyone--it is NOT "how to run your best 5K without working for it". Some coaches seem not capable of understanding the physiology sections in the first 3-4 chapters, and it wouldn't surprise me if 75% of the people who post on this site cannot understand those chapters. But there is a great deal of information in this book for people who actually understand what they're doing.

For people wishing to train for just middle distance (800/1500), Peter Coe's "Winning Running" is perhaps a better book.

I have both editions. Of course, respectable coaches can differ in their approaches, but for any coach who is trying to educate himself about training distance runners, the book is definitely worth reading and re-reading; it's one of the classics, like Lydiard's writings in earlier times. Don't expect "cook book" training programs telling you how many miles and what workouts to run each day in order to achieve a particular time over a particular distance. It's focused much more on overall concepts of physiology, training, and conditioning.

Thanks, even though you were a d1ck with you initial remark. Reading and studying is how I am trying to become a "real" coach, coach d.

the d in coach d is for dickhead, correct?

Becoming a better coach wrote:

So Seb's book is boring... has anyone read Peter Coe's and David Martin's book "Training Distance Runners" Is it worth the time? I coach HS CC and T&F and am always looking for ways to improve. Thanks.

Seb has many books - his first 3 written with david miller, are all spectacular. I'd get his new book and read it before you write if off as boring. That piece in the Guardian is incredibly critical and out of touch.

To answer your question: no. Peter Coe's Book Better Training For Distance Runners is the definitive book on distance training, along with his Winning Running which has a more middle distance focus.

Like coach d said, it is very technical at times and is not the hobby jogger get fit quick program that you'd find in Runner's World. It doesn't tell you "do this". It gives a set of principles and the reasoning behind them. This gives you the tools necessary to create you own program, provided that you have a proper understanding of what he is saying

coach d wrote:

Hard to believe that a real coach is this much out of touch/out of date. The original "Training Distance Runners" was published 21 years ago. The updated second edition is called "Better Training for Distance Runners" and is perhaps the best training book out there for coaches and serious competitive runners (and that is the intended audience).

This book is not for everyone--it is NOT "how to run your best 5K without working for it". Some coaches seem not capable of understanding the physiology sections in the first 3-4 chapters, and it wouldn't surprise me if 75% of the people who post on this site cannot understand those chapters. But there is a great deal of information in this book for people who actually understand what they're doing.

For people wishing to train for just middle distance (800/1500), Peter Coe's "Winning Running" is perhaps a better book.

I like you more and more, coach d. My thoughts exactly. I've found a great deal of coaches cannot even understand Daniels. No doubt BTFDR would be a waste on them. Great info for anyone who can pay attention though.

attack of the zombie fetuses wrote:

the d in coach d is for (self-important) dickhead, correct?

fixed, and you are correct sir.

Since I am a big time D1 coach with insider information, I can get away with it.

Becoming a better coach wrote:

Thanks, even though you were a d1ck with you initial remark. Reading and studying is how I am trying to become a "real" coach, coach d.

I am in no means a running pro or coach with a wealth of knowledge on this subject I run on a club team in college and would consider myself about equivalent in time and fitness to a top high-school athlete. I do however have some advice for XC from the perspective of someone who ran decently and without major injury in high school, has some knowledge of running theory and has a lot of friends that are very good runners. If you are trying to improve your team and be a better coach be wary of the lure of achieving short-term gains by upping milage. Running too much milage when the body is not fully developed and the runner does not have the years of training under their belt to adequately cope with that milage can lead the runner to burnout in high-school or be prone to injury in college (something I unfortunately see often).

You should train your athletes based on a progression pattern factoring in years or seasons spent running, how fast they are, and their pubescent development. In my opinion very few runners in high school should run more than 60-mile weeks. Only one in a thousand runners should be advised to run 65, and less than one in a thousand, those who are immensely talented, physically matured, have many years of running under their belt and are out to break state-records, should consider running more than that, and I might still advise against it. No runner in high-school should run more than 75-mile weeks in my opinion. For talented runners High school should not be the peak of their running career but should set them up for a healthy productive college career. When upping milage, consider decreasing the quality of miles run temporarily.

My thinking is that High quality workouts should be 1-3 times a week, less in the weeks before races and more earlier in the season (eg. 1-2 at Aerobic Threshold or VO2 max and one Medium Steady-State). For cross country I would advise a max of one VO2 workout every week and a half. Do race specific workouts later in the season. As distance runners progress from Freshman year you should focus on developing Aerobic Base first and foremost by assigning quality easy runs, The second most important development would be increasing the Aerobic Threshold. Encourage your runners to hit even splits in interval training instead of going faster for the first or last couple in order to spend the maximum time in targeted training zones. Building a milage base at almost any pace is king for inexperienced runners but for better runners LSD is overrated and easy days should be faster but not too fast. For a long distance runner who runs a 4:40 mile this would mean something like 6:40-7:15 (conversational) pace depending on how they feel that day.

Lateral conditioning and strengthening is an important tool in your arsenal: focus on isometric and full range of motion body weight exercises for distance runners targeting abdominals, adducters, abducters, quads, hamstrings, calfs, and lower back as well as the upper body. Plank, Squats, and pushups are standard workouts that can be done every day. Only more experienced runners should be introduced to the weight room during season. For high-schoolers i advise light plyometric stretching every day before running. 50-100m Strides after easy days, short Hill repeats and form drills (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhzzpZVMtl4) can be used on easy days to improve running economy and top end speed. I also like plyos to prevent shin splints although they are not very effective they do help. Toes and heels pointed in and out and and in-foot/out-foot walking. Dedicated runners should be advised to do static after running.

Heres a sample schedule for an experienced distance runner who runs a 4:30 mile. Mon- Easy 8mi Tues- 5x1000 meters w/2min rest Wed- Med-Steady 6 mi Thur- Easy 7mi Fri- 20min Aerobic Threshold Sat- Easy 5 mi Sunday-Long run 10 mi. Long runs should be typically capped at 12 miles for the very good runners you are likely to encounter. Consistency is the most important factor in developing a distance runner, make sure your runners know this and do not run too fast on easy days. For XC runners give them a schedule of easy runs that build a milage base during summer and encourage them to run together. I would focus a lot on proper running form as the best way to prevent injury. Cross torsional movement, heel striking and overpronation are some of the most common mistakes to lookout for in high-schoolers.

All of these recommendations are basic but can be immensely useful if you follow them. This is a goddam long post I hope there was something helpful in there for you.

Great book. Highly recommend it.

"becoming a better coach" sounds like a complete and smug tool.

Peter Coe is a hack who coached one genetically supreme champion. He knew nothing of any value.

Nope 2 wrote:

Peter Coe is a hack who coached one genetically supreme champion. He knew nothing of any value.

So you didn't like his book?

attack of the zombie fetuses wrote:

the d in coach d is for dickhead, correct?

No

Coach D.. ouchebag

Nope 2 wrote:

Peter Coe is a hack who coached one genetically supreme champion. He knew nothing of any value.

He also coached Wendy Sly, if I am not mistaken.

OP, props for always trying to improve, for your athletes and for yourself.

Nope 2 wrote:

Peter Coe is a hack who coached one genetically supreme champion. He knew nothing of any value.

I must beg to differ on two points.

On your second sentence, he brought management, organisation and clear thinking to coaching when most of the other "great coaches" in the UK were dealing with 50+ people per week and pulling sessions out of the air. He worked out what they needed to learn, sought out the best experts he could find, learned and monitored and adjusted.

On the first point, he coached a handful later on and I know they were very happy with his input. In Seb's later years he had a small group including Wendy Sly and Helen Thorpe, one of our better 800 runners. They came down to join in with John Hovell's group on Sunday mornings, which was Seb's regular weekend session in from 1984 onwards. It was great to see how Peter and John Hovell, an old-fashioned fire-and-brimstone-non-scientific type out of the club system, actually agreeing on pretty much everything but from different standpoints.

He gets a bad rep for not being in the club system and not coaching hundreds of kids, but bear in mind that he only got involved in the sport when it was clear his son had talent. In a later era with the funding that's around now, he might have ended up doing what Dave Brailsford did for cycling.