What do we really know about training?

I have a theory too wrote:

who's 'we'?

We as in physiologist, coaches, and the running community in general. You are included (unless you have discovered the perfect training methods and just forgot to mention it to the rest of the world).

hmmmm wrote:

We as in physiologist, coaches, and the running community in general. You are included (unless you have discovered the perfect training methods and just forgot to mention it to the rest of the world).

Which means the knowledge itself is likely quite extensive. What would be lacking is collective access to it (all).

hmmmm wrote:

That was my original point, after 120+ years we still haven't got it figured out. So how much "foolishness" is left? Are we just fine tuning or is there still a lot of ground to be covered?

If we ever "figured it out," most runners would stop running. All the running fraternity has accomplished has been to discover more efficient ways to get hurt and emasculate themselves for the sake of improve their performances at an idiotic, worthless activity that they use as an escape from reality.

Rational Exercise wrote:

If we ever "figured it out," most runners would stop running. All the running fraternity has accomplished has been to discover more efficient ways to get hurt and emasculate themselves for the sake of improve their performances at an idiotic, worthless activity that they use as an escape from reality.

Why are you even on letsrun?

hmmmm wrote:

Rational Exercise wrote:

If we ever "figured it out," most runners would stop running. All the running fraternity has accomplished has been to discover more efficient ways to get hurt and emasculate themselves for the sake of improve their performances at an idiotic, worthless activity that they use as an escape from reality.

Why are you even on letsrun?

I am not Rational Exercise but I agree with him/her.

Why am I on LetsRun? Mostly waiting for someone to respond to Mr. Obvious' queries.

hmmmm wrote:

Why are you even on letsrun?

I've posted here for 10 years. It's like a smoking habit I guess.

One thing I learned this year from Renato is that training mileage under Colm O'Connell at St. Patricks in Kenya was 30mpw for 800 people to 60mpw for long distance. Now, Brother Colm is ONLY the most successful middle/distance coach in history (Rudisha being his latest pupil).

So I learned this year that Lydiard and related programs are even more full of shit than I thought they were, particularly for more talented young people and those not running marathons.

I also learned that everything I knew about strength training for distance people last year was wrong:

http://www.elitetrack.com/articles/read/4683/

It appears now that you want trained distance runners doing heavy weights for the best improvement in RE, and you want sprinters doing lighter weights explosively. There are other citations that agree with this.

I learn knew things every year. I suspect that people who want to claim we already know everything don't particularly like the messages that science is trying to send them.

coach d wrote:

One thing I learned this year from Renato is that training mileage under Colm O'Connell at St. Patricks in Kenya was 30mpw for 800 people to 60mpw for long distance. Now, Brother Colm is ONLY the most successful middle/distance coach in history (Rudisha being his latest pupil).

Which of his long distance stars are running 60 miles per week?

Rational Exercise wrote:

hmmmm wrote:

Why are you even on letsrun?

I've posted here for 10 years. It's like a smoking habit I guess.

Fair enough.

coach d wrote:

I also learned that everything I knew about strength training for distance people last year was wrong:

http://www.elitetrack.com/articles/read/4683/

It appears now that you want trained distance runners doing heavy weights for the best improvement in RE, and you want sprinters doing lighter weights explosively. There are other citations that agree with this..

I also learned that people who cite studies often don't read them.

They tested running economy in that study at 7:30 mile pace.

'30mpw for 800 people to 60mpw for long distance'

I've trained with Ethiopians and Kenyan's and they will write down their training for you. Then you find out they are doing another easy run once a day which they didn't think worth mentioning

From memory I read a Colm quote 'we have 13 year old girls training 3 times a day' when asked about western training for seniors

If you look at the training for gymnasts or even a pianist running training has a long way to go, its a question of how much the body can take and also actually testing a lot of training methods which have no actual scientific backing

Having said that my motto is 'don't think run' I once had some nutters chasing me in a car I did a pr in shoes that day

I'm going to ask him tomorrow if I get the chance.

But do Sang, Kiprop, Choge, Kipketer, and Rudisha mean anything to you? Brother Colm coached ALL of them, and they are part of a very long list of successful international athletes.

Lydiard coached a few locals, Brother Colm opened the floodgates, and everyone who has seen the program describes it as not high mileage. Marius has some of Colm's training on his website.

I took a Philosophy of Science class, and as a science major, it kind of scared me. Every generation people believe that their science is the truth, and they scoff at all of the old theories. But then something new comes along and it turns out everything you were learning is now wrong.

Maybe we will find that with running, and training will change drastically someday.

Care to list what AlSal does that is revolutionary? A lot of it seems like border line quackery (i.e the cyrosauna) while the rest seems like a solid fundamentals combined with resources (i.e. if money was no object, why not live in an altitude house?).I can easily imagine tons of improvements (i.e. what about a device that tells that helps you monitor recovery. And the listen to your body response is crap given the injury rate of elite guys) for the next couple 100 years but I am guessing that they are not going to be on the order of Lydiard and the rest of the 1950s improvements.

coach d wrote:

Does anyone want to look at what Salz does and say we haven't learned anything??

I'm at the Nike Distance Summit which really starts tomorrow. Some of what we'll see tomorrow:

Renato Canova: Strength Endurance - The Key To Improvement In Middle & LD Events

Jay Dicharry: Developing Better Runners - Focus on Biomechanics To Understand Gait, Assessment, & Prescription

There is a LARGE gap between what we see from Dr. Li, Salazar, Dr. Vigil, Mahon and others, not to mention people like Canova and Kostre, and what I see posted in places like letsrun. Much of the difference I see is what has been learned in the last 50 years, and the willingness (or unwillingness) to apply that knowledge.

The correct school of thought on exercise was discovered by Arthur Jones, the inventor of Nautilus equipment. His theories are still widely scoffed at/ignored today. But he was right, and the world is missing out on the enormous value of his discoveries because.

The trouble with understanding athletic training, especially in a scientific sense, is that so many of the variables are so hard to qualify, much less quantify. An analogy is to create the best strategy to tweak a race car and directions to drive to a certain finish line. Except no two cars are alike and each starting place is different.

The trap that so many fall into is seeing training tools (workouts) as the plan. The plan is to attain a certain product (the ability to run x distance faster). Home builders don't grab a saw, hammer, and nails and go straight to building a house. They envision the product and work backwards, seeing the individual phases along the way. So it is ridiculous to ever think that there could be scientific proof that an 16 oz hammer is better than a 12 oz, or vice versa. The key is to understand the usefulness of certain tools in certain situations.

asdfasdfas wrote:

Care to list what AlSal does that is revolutionary? A lot of it seems like border line quackery (i.e the cyrosauna) while the rest seems like a solid fundamentals combined with resources (i.e. if money was no object, why not live in an altitude house?).

Correct. There is nothing 'revolutionary' or 'scientific' about Salazar nor is Salazars obsession with finding the Holy grail news. He has always been chasing after something that's not there. He requires Prozac to function normally and once flew to Yugoslavia on a pilgrimage to see a bunch of teenagers that said they saw the Virgin Mary.

Dr Li coaches one runner, who was world class before he got him. Vigil, and Mahon haven't done anything that wasn't known in the 60s. The same with Canova and Kostre.

There is no ground breaking training methods coming out of Kenya or Ethiopia. You might even call them 'throw-back' programs.

asdfasdfas wrote:

I can easily imagine tons of improvements (i.e. what about a device that tells that helps you monitor recovery. And the listen to your body response is crap given the injury rate of elite guys) for the next couple 100 years but I am guessing that they are not going to be on the order of Lydiard and the rest of the 1950s improvements.

Care to define what the injury rate is in elites and how that is crap?

A device that monitors 'recovery'? How do you define recovery in the first place? Recovery is a relative term, as athletes are constantly stressing the body and constantly recovering.

The continuous feedback that your body is giving you coupled with the experience to know how to manage it is the perfect way of monitoring the body. You know recovery just as well as you know hunger or balance or smell or taste.

But let your imagination run wild, George Jetson.

Well Malmo you must be the luckiest guy in the world never to have been injured in your running career from too much training overload. Very few other people are that perfect. And given most peoples eating habbits, I would argue that hunger works about as well as listening to your body in preventing injury.Is the device currently a fantasy? Sure. Is it impossible? Maybe. We can check back in 50 years