Physiology questions about Lydiard training.

António Cabral wrote:

Now about Tim Noakes. I repeat once again. It´s not the question that i donº´t understand Noakes Central Governor. i undertand his theory quite well. Here the issues are 2.

One is that Noakes theory is nothing but just a theory without scientific proof from psychology, neurology, or one branch of science prove that supports Noakes theory. In that context we may refer Noakes Central Governor as imagination and SPECULATION, because git no practical effect, no evident prove.

Second. Consequently Noakes theory got not application to the training methodology. what is the runner or coach or the training method that did benefit from Noakes Central Governor theory, that did enhance his performance from the application of that theory ? No one.

Mr. Cabral. I am out of my depth when compared to your vast wealth of experience and knowledge, but I believe you are mistaken to some degree. I once heard an interview with Noakes where he described some of the scientific support for his theory. I remember that there was one test in particular, where he prescribed ritalin to a test group. The result was a dramatic increase in, if I remember correctly, aerobic performance.

I am no biochemist, but I believe that the idea was that, for some reason, amphetamines trick the "central governor." Of course, the practical application here might be scant, as I believe taking any drugs of these kind would constitute PED usage.

I am sticking my neck out here, probably to be chopped off, but that's my two cents, for what it's worth.

Shipsy,

After nearly two decades of coaching children I'm sure your ratio of aerobics first is much greater than 99 out of 100.

The problem is you wrote all that to support the aerobic side but never gave any examples of the central governor holding anyone back so how do you know it exists?

Seems to me that anything that can develop longer than you can keep training is not limited by the supporting systems but by the rate it can develop and if the methods employed cause forced breaks in development.

To put it simply, Central governor = nervous system. You can't do anything without involving the nervous system. Antonio has no idea what he is talking about as usual.

Shipsy,

Do you agree that the central governor is the nervous system?

If it is the nervous system then it would seem that we are all born with the ability to breath but not the ability to walk or run. Further the ideas of processing more oxygen vs becoming more efficient seem to be intricately tied together than the aerobic vs anaerobic mechanisms.

Please be aware that I'm simplifying things down to stupid level (Antonio level) when I say that central governor = nervous system.

Already we are in trouble. You think holism is a fantasy and i think it is the only concrete reality we have. How do we progress from here? We obviously have very different understandings of this.

Perhaps understanding the fact that the Central Governor is something which regulates our homeostasis. I think that alone explains a lot about the CG.

Systems would be the systems that interact with one another. For example the breathing system, the blood carrying system, the chemical system and the mechanical system. All four of these interact all of the time.

Qualities - you could talk about a whole system here but it is more focused on speed, strength, power, endurance, mobility and the factors that make up these qualities.

Balance - homeostasis is a form of balance. Our body is kept in homeostasis unless we push ourselves to a point that takes us outside it. There are a lot of feedback mechanisms to bring us back into homeostasis. The central governor is the idea that some part of us is taking care of the whole, which if you really think about it, is common sense.

As the poster Anonymous Coward said but i just found this which could be an interesting if long read.

I didn't ask and i don't care because i can see where you are at by how you express yourself. Clearly you have developed knowledge in our sport and as i said before, in similar words, you have a clear understanding of the mid-level concepts. Which is a step above most. But from this position of a level 2 coach with expressed proof of mid-level concepts, where do you get the gall to criticise such people as you do. And when asked to back up your criticism you avoid the question like it's the plague. I have no doubt you have done your level 2 practical and theoretical exams and passed them. But this is not the issue at all.

Seriously it is my considered opinion that Lydiard and Cerutty and Noakes all know that the body is a singular whole unit and it operates as such. You can debate this all you want but i could draw masses of support from other spheres of knowledge around the world and throughout human history. Martial Arts is grounded in the idea of holism. Meditation and the spiritual paths are founded in the idea of holism. Tradition Chinese Medicine and Ayurvedic Medicine are as well, and that covers about 50% of the human race - India, China and surrounding smaller countries. Pilates is founded in this idea as are many other holistic healing modalities. When Yuri Sedykh stopped lifting wieghts and following a pre-planned routine, he mainly just threw hammers in the ring, for hours and hours. He had discovered this idea and was pursuing it wholeheartedly. He just threw hammers. You could say it is very specific training. Yes but it is very specific to holistic as well.

If i was to call you Antonio the Portuguese citizen i would not be referring to you holistically. If i called you Antonio the athletics coach the same problem is still there. If i called you Antonio the human being then we are getting closer to the holistic Antonio.

UIN)&%^$#* wrote:

Shipsy,

After nearly two decades of coaching children I'm sure your ratio of aerobics first is much greater than 99 out of 100.

The problem is you wrote all that to support the aerobic side but never gave any examples of the central governor holding anyone back so how do you know it exists?

Seems to me that anything that can develop longer than you can keep training is not limited by the supporting systems but by the rate it can develop and if the methods employed cause forced breaks in development.

Seriously its not even 99 its 100. I cannot come close to remembering anyone that didn't start with aerobic first. You have to enhance the system which protects you from the ravages of the anaerobic system, or you get ravaged :)

I know something exists which shuts me down when i am over training. I may have only overtrained in one area like strength or speed, but i cant then go out and do a developmental session in the aerobic, power or technical areas. Only one system is seriously overused yet the entire meta-system needs resting.

And your third paragraph. You have a good brain. So you are imagining a quite inefficient and potentially interrupted training path. I don't see it like that. With correct attention to balancing the program and having a progressive path of development not a lot should go wrong. Furthermore if something is going wrong then the early warning signs are there to be noticed. Also it is better to lose a session than a week. Patience is something that comes with experience, the school of hard knocks so to speak. Imagine the path of improvement can become exponential, if all the elements are tuned into a fine balance. It could be true. I say it is worth finding out.

And i agree with fizzy - the two terms (CG and Nervous system) are not synonymous but they are related. The nervous system is like the surface expression of the CG. It carries out the commands.

I'd just like to say something about human potential. The only considered opinion someone can have on the issue is 'i don't know'. It is always being predicted but it just keeps heading outwards, in every endeavour. Why? I think simply because the effects of our environment are much stronger than most believe. And that if you create an environment in your life that is continuously developmental then you can travel very far from where you began. If this attitude persists through to your grandchildren and on to their grandchildren, well i guess you get something like the Kenyan makeup or the Tamahumaran one, which appears to be consciously developed, a step ahead of the Kenyans in this regard.

Conscious development is what we can do as reflective human beings and we have the capacity to use this choice in any way we can imagine. We can get a 9-5, hit the pub 6 nights a week and end up on the couch watching infomercials before crashing, or we can develop a simple routine of physical and mental health, Waking up to a stretch whilst listening to relaxing music before heading out on an easy run to return to a healthy breakfast ... and so the day begins. Our choice determines which and only our choice.

One way can take us to the depths of human incapacity and the other to the heights of seemingly superhuman capacity or at least a more superhuman version of you.

Shipsy,

OK, I think I understand your idea of the balance now, it makes sense. Unfortunately, not everyone knows they are getting ravaged let alone which part of their training is causing the problem.

"The nervous system is like the surface expression of the CG. It carries out the commands."

I like this explaination, it fits with what I remember from reading about CG years ago.

Possibly you read something here, it is a few years old now

lots of good stuff near the end, perhaps this link is a good page to start on if you haven't been through it before. Noakes himself is talking and Steve Macgregor is knowledgeable. I was sim in that thread and had some interaction with those two.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2412208&page=49

Antonio,I'm curious about this. Which book did you read? What exactly did Noakes say about Lopes' training? Do you have a direct quote?The Noakes' book I read (with nearly 1000 pages) has about 3 sentences on Lopes' training, the first of which says that the details are "scanty". The other two are consistent with how you've described Lopes' training. What is the big lie?BTW, Noakes' ideas about Lopes' training has nothing to do with the formation or foundation of Central Governor theory.

António Cabral wrote:

...

Besides i read the book and what he says about Carlos Lopes training is simply a lie. That´s the problem of search investigation with know and without see it, but just from read and quote from wrong sources. I followed Carlos lopes entire career nd daily training, i know his all time coach, i know Lopes well, i´m still friend of Lopes, i know enough from Lopes to know that what Noakes says about Lopes training is just bulls**t. What to think bout someone that builds a theory with wrong data/information suport ? Got no credit.

Antonio,

For someone who didn't want to debate the Central Governor Theory, you sure put out a lot of words against it. I don't want to debate it either, and I'm not sure how "holistic" it is, or if it can be expressed simply as the "central nervous system".

But I think a lot of people look at the Central Governor Theory the wrong way, not to mention theories in general. Theories aren't there to be proven. On the contrary, they are more useful when disproven. No one has yet disproven the existence of the "Central Governor" -- something that should be much easier than proving it, if it doesn't exist. The purpose of theories and models is for scientists to design new experiments that might further knowledge.

The Central Governor Theory says that fatigue, a reduction in performance, is initiated centrally (in the brain), based on some higher level aggregation of many peripheral inputs, resulting in a reduction of effort. Maybe the best way to think about it is to think of the alternative, when there is no central governor. Here, the "peripheral theory" is that fatigue initiates due to some catastrophic conditions in the periphery. You might call this a "Peripheral Governors model". No one has yet proven this "Peripheral Governors" model is exhaustive, but Noakes is trying to disprove it.

A "peripheral" model says that we slow down due to some local or physical imbalance that physically prevents us from continuing at the same intensity: e.g. we run out of carbs; our muscles get hot; our body gets dehydrated; the muscles accumulate to much lactate (or H+); our muscles lack oxygen; the air lacks oxygen; etc.

The "central" model doesn't contradict the "peripheral" model. It adds another layer. The "peripheral" stuff is still all there. The "central" model says that your body learns from past experience, and will prevent you from pushing yourself to the point where you can cause a "peripheral" catastrophe. One example supporting this concept is during a hot Chicago marathon, where the predicted best time is around 2:11, the elite runners immediately start at 2:11 pace from the first kilometer, way before body temperature rises significantly enough to cause the muscles to slow down. What, in a "peripheral" model causes these runners to optimally slow down in the first few kms? (I won't debate this example. It's just an example to illustrate what kinds of things they are looking at and why.)

The "central governor" can be seen as an extra self-defense mechanism, that prevents physical catastrophes before they happen.

I'm not arguing for or against the "central governor", just clarifying what you argue for (an equally unproven "peripheral only" model) when you argue against it.

You also dismiss it as not being practical for training. While I understand this pragmatism, I think it's premature, and also misunderstanding the role of science. Science doesn't exist only to support training. The "central governor" might lead us to better training. Or it might simply bring us a better understanding of why the current training is best. Or it might be refined as something in between the two models (a "representative democracy model"). Or eventually disproven and discarded.

Rekrunner

Don´t miss my out of interest about the Central Governor with my interest in coach and training information.

One thing is my position as coach about the Central Govern theory. It´s one subject that no one did prove he existence, it´s just academic speculation and the usual astralized individuals be the rocket physiology new theories did agree emotional more than rational. if i did write about the 2 fiber types issue it´s not because i and Hadd we did discover something, new or old. It´s mainly because in my opinion that my theory of different training need from different fiber type and the need of training individualisation is a issue that gor some application in te concrete training by the coach lead. Or everything i did read what is the CG,the existance, it´s just an hypothesis and got no way to have a concrete training or science or biology or physiology or phychology or "nervous system" apllication to quote the other Detector idiot.

Because got no prove and no positive effect, the training context doesn´t really matters me for that reason. Got no consequence to the training methodology. As a coach and in the training context one subject it matters me just if got some a practical application try to learn.I know that the man got the moon in 1969 but what´s the link tot he training methodology ' I don´t know no one. That doesn´t mean that i don´t like to know what i can about the conquer of the moon.

Similar thing to the CG. The fact that i think he CG is one irrelevant subject to the distance training methodology doesn´t imply that i don´t understand what is or that i don´t got my information and my opinion about the subject.

I don´t got here where i did read what Noakes said about Lopes. But i remember what he says. He says that Lopes training was basically intervals and daily easy runs, and that kind of training to him is the prove that LT doesn´t work, due to Lopes run success without LT runs on his training schedule. Or it´s just not true,

because Carlos Lopes did the daily continuous runs very faster. he question this. How can someone built a theory with wrong facts, wrong information, wrong training. He quotes where he took Lopes training, and the source was a published book, but in fact what he says it´s wrong.

I remember that when Noakes did post on this LetsRunCom board he wrote that the he doesn´t trust on the positive effect on Lydiard training as the Lydiardism does, and that´s one reason why he did search about one rationale reason to suport whatmakes one runner be fast relate to other. But ironic is that Gipsy (Shipsy) says that the Central Governor agrees with Lydiard training.

I can try the where i read Nokes quote about Lopes training.

Rekrunner. What you say about the Central Governor is not new to me. But you, like you all, and Noakes couldn´t say just one single application of the Central Governor to the training methodology. It´s something like to know that the

extraterrestials beings do exist, but we can get close contact to them. It´s useless knowledge.

Rekrunner. Everything is premature until not proved. I prefer to debate to old training dogmas, the old training paradigms that are not quite right, and that ones we don´t need to wait for a future application. Got not speculation on that because if it´s done, that´s a fact.

People from science speculation they love new theories, that aren´t take for grant. I prefer things with prove.

I don´t see why he CG can bring a better understand of training. the CG can only bring speculation because it´s not quantified. We would be on the wrong track if instead of going in the training objective direction, time and space and distance that´s objective reality, we fall in an attempt to undersand why ne runner is fast than other by the Central Governor. If so, we will be distant, more distant to the training issues that matters.

Rek, nice post as always.

Have you seen Wolverine the movie. Near the end of the movie the colonel is given the intention to walk until his feet bleed and then to keep walking. I guess this is an example where the central governor is over ridden. I have to wonder what is so inherent in our understanding of human beings that can lead to a concept like this in a popular movie. It can only be played out because people generally know we cannot kill ourselves without serious psychological issues, or in this case of this movie, when someone has taken control of you and makes a decision for you that can lead to death. If the central governor or whatever it may truly be does not exist then this concept within the movie would not have worked.

Antonio,

I understand that if you are looking for a practical application now, CG may not ever bring you anything you didn't already know (even if you weren't clear why).

I cannot make any connection for you now. Maybe one day, someone will. But until then, it's like men landing on the moon.

Some people claim Matt Fitzgerald's "Brain Training", is a practical application of CG concepts. But it looks to me like Matt could have written his book without mentioning CG.

I also think you are mistaken about what Noakes said about Lopes' training. Somebody did say that, but it wasn't Noakes. I will respond later with what Noakes really said (and where he got his information), and what my best guess is the faulty statement you attribute to Noakes.

Thanks.Funny you mention Wolverine. I just watched X-men 2 on TV Saturday. (It wasn't "Origins" where the colonel was forced to walk). I know under hypnosis, and in times of extreme crises, humans have done some amazing things, like mothers lifting cars to save their babies (or is that just TV?). It's certainly an interesting area to explore, to find out if there are higher order "protective" barriers that can also be "trained" to relax and unlock potential performance.

shipsy wrote:

Rek, nice post as always.

Have you seen Wolverine the movie. Near the end of the movie the colonel is given the intention to walk until his feet bleed and then to keep walking. I guess this is an example where the central governor is over ridden. I have to wonder what is so inherent in our understanding of human beings that can lead to a concept like this in a popular movie. It can only be played out because people generally know we cannot kill ourselves without serious psychological issues, or in this case of this movie, when someone has taken control of you and makes a decision for you that can lead to death. If the central governor or whatever it may truly be does not exist then this concept within the movie would not have worked.

It is true it is not well quantified yet but it is quite a new concept for the world of sport.

I found it important to gain a feel for the concept because it is an over-arching concept and when filtered down to the practical program level leads to modifications.

I'm going to try and outline how i feel it has altered my own coaching. In the broadest sense i think of it as balance but it is already termed in more specific senses. Noakes CG is physiology's name but a more common one is stasis. When i'm coaching i have to be aware of the athletes 'stasis'. Take them outside their stasis too far and the training that follows becomes compromised. So there is a range within which they remain comfortable and outside that they become stressed. We need stress for adaption but too much stops and reverses adaption. A line that can become as fine as one can detect.

Since skill development is a big part of my coaching, my use of the balance/stasis/CG concept is more developed in that area than in fitness development.

To be able to keep changing the mental stimulus to keep the athletes mind running fresh is an art in itself. To be able to shift from a torso stablisation exercise into a hurdles drill exercise and then to a running drill exercise means i can take a quality developed in one exercise and transfer it into another.

Just taking the extra stability gained from the torso exercise into a fine balance situation like hurdles and then take both the increased stability and the increased balance into actual running is something i have been working on for a while. I probably have 100s of ways of approaching it through each event of our sport but when it comes to running most options have been eliminated along the way leaving one fairly established path now.

This may be a tenuous link to the CG for some but it is inherent in the concept for me. I'm not sure why this concept is so hard to understand. fartlek inherently considers this concept. It's whole process is to progressively take one out of stasis and then allow them to fall back into it, repeatedly. So really anyone who has done fartlek has been training their CG.

I'm fascinated by it as well. I think one reason why humans cannot unlock their full potential is because if we did, we would literally rip ourselves apart. I think as a species we are quite imbalanced right now and that power in an imbalanced system would just tear it apart. Perhaps we earn that power when we refine ourselves enough?

rekrunner wrote:

Thanks.

Funny you mention Wolverine. I just watched X-men 2 on TV Saturday. (It wasn't "Origins" where the colonel was forced to walk). I know under hypnosis, and in times of extreme crises, humans have done some amazing things, like mothers lifting cars to save their babies (or is that just TV?). It's certainly an interesting area to explore, to find out if there are higher order "protective" barriers that can also be "trained" to relax and unlock potential performance.

I know that Noakes did quote Lopes training by the book source "How they train". It happens that what is on that book is quite wrong. But if you know something different let me know please. I will thank you.

I really don´t see nothing in the Noakes theory that is different to the classic sports phychology: attitude, determination, focus in one target, to be confident, to be able to resist to harder effort, all that and more do exist and is well known long ago before the idea of the brain Central Governor.

Anyhow, the land on the moon, i understand your link but I don´t agree. You see this was a president John Kennedy challenge to see how from US and USSR did land on the moon first. Byut it took no longer from the public speak of Kennedy and the Armstrong 1969 first foot on the moon. There is inadequate to link that with the Central Governor challenge and the concretization of a theory. Otherwise the land on the moon is adequate. I use to think that we got so many problems to solve on our earth, from disease to social problems that were never been solved, from wealth questions, poverty, environment, hunger, and most of this earth questions we know the cause and the consequence and we weren´t able to solve it yet and ther´s a debate about how to solve it, but meanwhile we can dream about the intergalactic experience, about any utopia, and what will be science fiction. But my runners what to be coached in a couple of years from now on, and this is my main focus.

I tend to think like once Renato Canova wrote “we all know the future but the past is always changing.

Do you see the idea that is inside this sentence. We don´t all agree about basic things as what´s the best effective way to aerobic enhance and some do say don´t understand past training as the Igloi training- they say it´s complex – how can this individual that thinks the Igloi, that after decades of study says that Igloi training is complex, or that Renato Canova training is hard to understand, or that says that James LI training is Lydiard training how can individual pass over that issues and be interested in the Central Governor theory. Do you know about whom I talk about ? I talk about many people but I talk about Tim Noakes. My problem is one individual that the same that doesn´t understand the basic issues of running uses a new unproved theory (unproved because indeterminate) uses new theories as alienation, as a way to run away from the real questions of the distance run distance training.

When the man land on ten moon, it was a early dream of John Kennedy. It was one scientific project run in mathematics, astrology, special science and other sciences (including physiology) from both sides USS and US and only when in the NASA they took from grant that is a reality is when it was a new for the world as challenge. Or The Central Governor is the opposite, is something that got no solid scientific accuracy and the same people that run away from the real training issues feel that this new theory is very attractive. Why very attractive ? Because since it´s not demonstrate with accuracy it´s open to every kind of speculation.