Can someone summarize Lydiard training in a sentence or two?

Base, then speed.

Phreak wrote:

Base, then speed.

So when they say Mark Wetmore is a fan of Lydiard training, that means he likes base, then speed? There's got to be something more, unless I am missing something. It seems to me that all 5k+ training is like this, and yet there are some critics out there who are even anti-Lydiard but still probably follow this principle.

100 miles a week in singles not jogging.

No it isn't.

Yes it is.

No it isn't.

Where's Nobby?

In before Antonio Cabral

Before Lydiard all coaches didn't have phases of high mileage, followed by a specific phase of higher mileage, etc. Anyway, the guy who said base first, speed later had a good answer. "There's a lot more but you only want a sentence or two.

In two sentences it would be:

Develop a huge aerobic base with nothing at threshold pace and hilly long runs. Then, periodize training with specific phases progressing to speed.

But HRE is right if you want to understand it two sentences is not enough..

Aerobic fitness determines anaerobic performance.

You say you want to understand a principle, yet all you want to read are one to two sentences.

You will never understand anything with that expectation.

Train don't strain?

aslan wrote:

You say you want to understand a principle, yet all you want to read are one to two sentences.

You will never understand anything with that expectation.

Not true. Anything can be summarized.

How about in five principles? As per the Lydiard Foundation, there are five principles, which, although does make up more than two sentences, takes less room than a full-on explanation of course.

But anyway, don't follow the schedules in the back of the books. Lydiard never wanted to print them, the publisher did, guess who won that argument? Must sell books, fair enough.

Now there are five principles that make up the basics for the process or the method that can be described in modern day language, which has been done very well by Keith Livingstone who wrote the book on it, called Healthy Intelligent Training. A nice title for the masses.

If want to read a fantastic magazine-length article, read Lorraine Moller's Running Times article called, "Essential Lydiard".

She breaks it down very nicely using the five principles.

HRE wrote:

Before Lydiard all coaches didn't have phases of high mileage, followed by a specific phase of higher mileage, etc. Anyway, the guy who said base first, speed later had a good answer. "There's a lot more but you only want a sentence or two.

So to go further, what does it mean when Mark Wetmore or somebody is a Lydiard disciple? What does Antonio Cabral or some other people hate about it? I don't really care how many sentences, surely some points can be summarized concisely.

You can indeed summarize pretty much anything. I probably could have summarized the graduate courses I used to teach in a sentence or two. But the people in the classes would not have understood the subject matter or really understood the summary.

"Base then speed" is a good answer, however, to be nitpicky, not speed. Well yes speed, but not quite like that.

Lydiard felt that typical interval training like km repeats or mile repeats or 800m repeats with short recoveries was not really "speed" training, so for him the terminology was "anaerobic training" for interval training and speed...well speed was FAST.

Like 100s, glycolitic-anaerobic, full-on sprints, strides, 200m repeats, where your form changes, where you run at a very fast pace, up on the forefoot, hard torqued push-off/toe-off etc. Speed could be alactic or it could be lactic, it was about the nueromuscular system.

...arms move like pistons.

Whereas interval training, which comes after the hill training, is colloquially called "speed word" today it truly isn't, as it is still in that form of longer races, like 10k pace 1km intervals isn't engaging fast twitch so much and the nervous system isn't being stimulated.

So the real correct answer:

Base, Hills, Anaerobic, Coordination, taper.

Speed was worked on throughout the phases with strides and threshold was indeed worked on throughout the phases AT or anaerobic threshold, what you could race for 60 minutes basically.

Perhaps the person who said, "no threshold" meant LT or lactate threshold???

Anaerobic Threshold is a very important realm.

Long runs throughout, until coordination.

Hill phase, yes, but you don't change it like a light switch, you almost always enjoy the benefits of hilly running, so when you do a hill phase, your musculature isn't suddenly introduced to it.

Strides I think you can do for about 8 seconds veyr hard before lactic acid starts to accumulate, so 8 second strides all year round....preferably on soccer field barefoot or in light shoe....

There is something more.

A lot more. It is upstairs. As much as Lydiard developed the method and the principles, he also engaged in the art of coaching.

As Ron Daws (author: Self Made Olympian) said, "Good and bad training look the same on paper".

You need to be able to look at how a runner responds and know what comes next. A six week anaerobic phase is common Lyidard lore, however, what works for one athlete, might be a three week anaerobic phase to another.

No cookie cutter programs, otherwise life would be boring and we would never need coaches.

Wetmore probably knows exactly what to prescribe in a vast myriad of situations to get the best out of his athletes.

The almighty question might be, "how did that athlete respond to that training?" and..."what does that mean."

If your coach can't explain why you are doing a specific workout, get a new coach.

- Arthur Lydiard.

Thanks Athletics Illustrated, I liked that description, I guess it clarified some things at least.

To HRE, I'm not trying to be obnoxious or anything. I just keep hearing about how XYZ follows Lydiard training (in fact I have read that said about you specifically), and I hear others post about how Lydiard is horrible or was totally WRONG about everything, none of which makes sense if all modern training is somehow similar to him. Maybe a better question would have been, what is controversial about Lydiard training. Also I only said 1-2 sentences because I didn't want someone to link me to a long-ass PDF I've already read.

Also it might be fair to say that Lydiard had the most influence in the English-speaking world although other coaches may have independently discovered the same things in Germany or Italy.

Also, I often hear Lydiard "quotes" yet I can't find any verification for them, and other people will claim Lydiard says the opposite, which can make it more confusing. For example, I heard Lydiard said "You should touch your top speed once a week" (meaning do fast strides even in base phase) but can't verify that came from him.

Miles make champions

Lydiard published a lot of books over a long period of time, and gave countless presentations also. Given that, and the natural evolution of ideas that occurs, it's no shock that "contradictions" appear. His switch from running by distance to time, for the hobbyist, comes to mind.

This is also why so many are called Lydiard influenced; because his ideas were - and still are - very "out there" for quite some time. This is the same reason so many coaches (especially at the HS level, I find) claim to follow Daniels' philosophy. There is so much material that it's easy to think you've got it. Even though, as others have said, no book can coach for you.