[ Return to Index ] [ Original Message ]Original Message
By entering these forums you agree to our Rules
on the logo to return to our homepage
|Subject: ||RE: Renato Canova - Arthur Lydiard Coaches Roundtable|
If we have a completely different idea of what the word "principles" means, we will never converge. I prefer to stick with the idea of a set of constant basic training principles, such as from "Physiology of sport and exercise" by Jack Wilmore and David Costill:
If the question is to list all the differences between Canova and Lydiard, there are many possible answers, e.g. "philosophy", "methodology", "approach", "implementation", "focus", "timing", etc., but for me, "principles" is not one of them.
Regarding your Lydiard-advocate friend, if he thinks he has to run his best aerobic pace everyday, and he doesn't understand the concept of recovery, then I think he doesn't understand Lydiard the way I do. I see 1/4 efforts, 1/2 efforts, 1/2 hour jog, easy fartlek, etc. as something less than "best aerobic pace", designed to avoid accumulating the need for recovery. Many days are less than "best aerobic pace", every week of every phase of every year. If you see my views the same as your friend, in spite of this seemingly clear contradiction, I cannot help your vision.
What's also interesting, is that this originally comes from a statement where Canova says Lydiard's aerobic base-building paces are too slow. Canova claims to be very far from Lydiard on this point. I responded by saying maybe not so very far after all, because after a certain point, Lydiard says to start running your mileage faster. But your immediate response, ironically as a self-proclaimed Canova follower, is reminding me of the example of your Lydiard-advocate friend who runs too fast too often, and needs to slow down some days.
To combat message board spam (by non runners). We are making people answer a brief question before they can post on a thread that is over 20 days old.
If you answer this question you should be able to post.