I ordered the book a few days ago. Is Vol. 2 any good?
I ordered the book a few days ago. Is Vol. 2 any good?
Vol. 2 is the old one. Vol. 3 has a lot more stuff -- I owned Vol. 2 and after flipping through Vol. 3 at B&N, I thought it was worth the upgrade.
Will be running the time-based marathon schedule later this year.
I actually think Vol. 2 is better than Vol. 3, at least when it comes to the training plans. Daniels has become weirdly obssessed with focusing on threshold work at the end of a training cycle and I don't like it at all. Plus, the workouts are simply more inspired in Vol. 2.
For crying out loud people, they're not Volumes, they're Editions--very different.
I really like Daniels 2nd edition for 5K and 10K training. Used his idea of using 10K plan and just increasing miles. Used his half marathon plan from 3rd edition and did not like it. Lots of good info in 2nd edition. His VDOT charts are great for 5K- half. His full marathon vdot chart is very optimistic for the average runner, under 60 mpw. The 3rd edition does have more good info, just not sure if the plans are any better than 2nd edition.
The 10K comment was about using 10K plan from 2nd edition for half marathon plan. Somehow I deleted this part of the comment.
2nd Edition wrote:
His full marathon vdot chart is very optimistic for the average runner, under 60 mpw. .
I second this.
JD has spent his entire career ignoring the neuroscience involved in the oxygen economy concept.
Running is a skill y'all, it requires a lot more thought than just running at target paces to develop that skill.
real physiology wrote:
JD has spent his entire career ignoring the neuroscience involved in the oxygen economy concept.
Running is a skill y'all, it requires a lot more thought than just running at target paces to develop that skill.
What are the top three other things required, in your opinion?
I'm not sure I trust his training plans completely as I believe he has said that he only put them in the book at the insistence of his editors. I suspect that was because everyone responds differently to various training loads and intensities. They killed me. I could be wrong, I often am.
real physiology wrote:
JD has spent his entire career ignoring the neuroscience involved in the oxygen economy concept.
As has every successful coach in the history of running.
real physiology wrote:
Running is a skill y'all, it requires a lot more thought than just running at target paces to develop that skill.
No it doesn't.
Following training programs like Daniel's will develop the nervous system without giving it any thought.
I really like his plans for 5k and up. I don't know for sure about his 800 plan as 800 training is really beyond me as wtf to do but in his 1500-2 mile plan he has like next to no threshold work, which I think is bad. I feel like threshold work is crazy important in the 3k/two mile and in the 1500/mile I think you need the stamina benefits from doing continuous tempo runs, something not found often in any of the plans really. Like I said, his 5k-10k stuff is good.
Randy Oldman wrote:
I'm not sure I trust his training plans completely as I believe he has said that he only put them in the book at the insistence of his editors. I suspect that was because everyone responds differently to various training loads and intensities. They killed me. I could be wrong, I often am.
That's why you should read his book as a "methodology" book, not a "method" book.
Follow his principles, not his training plans. Training plans are just templates, and the goal is to create your own plan based on the principles you learned in his book.
Such as?? wrote:
real physiology wrote:JD has spent his entire career ignoring the neuroscience involved in the oxygen economy concept.
Running is a skill y'all, it requires a lot more thought than just running at target paces to develop that skill.
What are the top three other things required, in your opinion?
Good foot work. You are accelerating your body mass off the ground upwards and forwards at just the right angle, with just the right force. This requires very subtle movement in the feet. Get them right and the rest of your movements should follow, as long as your torso is aligned correctly.
That's three things just for starters. You have the physics of biomechanics to think about there. Read any good ex phys text book and you will see that there is more to running than cardiovascular conditioning.
And then read Jack Daniels research and you will see that if you interpret his findings correctly, there is so much more... of which more later.
real physiology wrote:
Such as?? wrote:What are the top three other things required, in your opinion?
Good foot work. You are accelerating your body mass off the ground upwards and forwards at just the right angle, with just the right force. This requires very subtle movement in the feet. Get them right and the rest of your movements should follow, as long as your torso is aligned correctly.
That's three things just for starters. You have the physics of biomechanics to think about there. Read any good ex phys text book and you will see that there is more to running than cardiovascular conditioning.
And then read Jack Daniels research and you will see that if you interpret his findings correctly, there is so much more... of which more later.
Thanks for comfirming all of our suspicions with this follow-up post.
Running Formula reader wrote:
Randy Oldman wrote:I'm not sure I trust his training plans completely as I believe he has said that he only put them in the book at the insistence of his editors. I suspect that was because everyone responds differently to various training loads and intensities. They killed me. I could be wrong, I often am.
That's why you should read his book as a "methodology" book, not a "method" book.
Follow his principles, not his training plans. Training plans are just templates, and the goal is to create your own plan based on the principles you learned in his book.
Exactly.
Too many people just "follow the plans" from the Daniels book and it's like they didn't even read the text of the book. Nor try to intelligently apply the principles he teaches.
A very common mistake I've seen people make with Daniels is always, and immediately, going to the max recommended volume for a particular workout. And even worse- completely ignoring (or never being aware of) the maximum guidelines. So many guys mention Daniels not working and then when I probe a little to understand what they did I see stuff like:
a.) 45 mpw, and attempting an interval workout of 5 x 1 mile. Not only are their miles slower than 5:00, but they were completely unaware of the max guideline of 8% of weekly mileage.
b) Jumping into a full 20-minute continuous T workout at the 60 VDOT intensity (based off their 5k race time of 60 VDOT), and completely ignoring that their 10-mile and half marathon times indicate their fitness around lactate threshold speeds are more like 56-57 VDOT level.
c) Trying to include 3 quality workouts + a long run in a week. This might work for some, but it is too much for many. Yet, is it there printed in the schedule so lets do it and blame Daniels when it doesn't work out (nevermind the section in the book that says to include as many easy days between workouts as necessary).
d) Attempting 30-40 minute runs at the "T" pace, and not adjusting it slower since they're going beyond 20 minutes.
It's hard not to get frustrated when you see this stuff over & over.
rekrunner wrote:
real physiology wrote:JD has spent his entire career ignoring the neuroscience involved in the oxygen economy concept.
As has every successful coach in the history of running.
real physiology wrote:
Running is a skill y'all, it requires a lot more thought than just running at target paces to develop that skill.
No it doesn't.
Following training programs like Daniel's will develop the nervous system without giving it any thought.
Wrong rekrunner, lots of coaches have an awareness of the neruoscience.
And wrong on the second point too. Just following Daniels' obsession with target zones is not a good way to train. Ask any top coach.
Um OK -- can you elaborate? That's an honest question. Which coach was more successful than Daniels, as a direct result of his superior awareness of the role neuroscience in the "oxygen economy concept"?Daniels showed us that it's not all about VO2max, by measuring and developing the concept of running economy.Using Daniel's various zones of training is a great way to improve your endurance, your stamina, your speed, and your form, and, without giving it any thought, your running economy.I'm sure Magdalena Lewy-Boulet would agree with that.
real physiology wrote:
rekrunner wrote:As has every successful coach in the history of running.
No it doesn't.
Following training programs like Daniel's will develop the nervous system without giving it any thought.
Wrong rekrunner, lots of coaches have an awareness of the neruoscience.
And wrong on the second point too. Just following Daniels' obsession with target zones is not a good way to train. Ask any top coach.