LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

Old Kiwi wrote:

Hey, It's a cold winter down under. Wake us up in the spring

puh c

To simplify this whole thread: Ed Whitlock has the right idea, massive endurance running topped off by a dose of tempo.

That's pretty much it, right? The bigger your base, the better your potential performance.

what if you aren't talented enough to run 10 miles in under 70:00?

is it advisable to just go out for your first time on a 90-minute long run by starting your watch, running steady for 45:00 then turn around and come back and just let the weeks or months, if necessary, take their course?

is it as easy that that?

the midwest connection wrote:

Leigh Daniels. definitely. younger, more energetic.

Nick Cordes took your advice.

reply to ? for Nobby

yes it is as easy as that. Just do the time, after a while you will cover the time faster.

Glenn

I live close to Cortland, NY. I know people, mediocre runners at best, who had Daniels as a coach and he brought on tremendous improvement. I'd take Daniels.

I will second Glenn here. It's as easy as that.

I remeber the days when Jack Danile's was here in Peru, training one team....Really He did Great things, was amazing the devolpment, with out any doubt Jack Daniels is better of Lydriad....For me is very difficult understand Why Lydriad never gave one Plan or schedule to follow, any pace, and direction...Why, May be because he never felt that was doing correct the things.

I'll third Glenn. It's as easy as that.

No one can tell you what potential you have until you engage yourself with a systmatic and intelligent training program over several years (5 is probably better than 2). You may be a 70-minutes-10-miler today. You may become a 55-minutes-10-miler next year, or two years from now. So what if it takes 2 years instead of 1? No difference in the scheme of things.

Then I've been doing it Wrong for years. Hmmm. I have some changes to make.

My initial experience was with a HS coach who was big into intervals. I have to unthink that mindset. Wow.

Training does not have to be constant, chronic, borderline anaerobic character-building. What a concept.

This could be interesting. Thanks all.

I still won't forgive Lydiard for up and DYING a week before I was gonna hear him speak. Selfish batarde.

Thats stupid. Just because you witnessed Daniel's work first hand doesn't mean that you can say he is better than Lydiard. Who can say Lydiard wouldn't have brought on the same development?

Hieronymous:

That's the nicest "criticism" I heard for a while. Send me an e-mail and send me your mailing address. I want to send you something (no, it's not the ghost of Lydiard in a box!).

With all due respect to JD, are you really comparing the results he got with those that Lydiard did?

The ATHLETES got the results. Damn! A coach coaches: Inspires, motivates, leads....The coach might take credit for 10%. Discuss.

HRE wrote:

With all due respect to JD, are you really comparing the results he got with those that Lydiard did?

The horse wins the races, damn it! Jocky only whips and steers...

Do you really think Snell would have won 3 gold medals all on his own? You might say he would have won them anyways regardless of who had coached him. Think about all those who threw a rock at his window to get him out and for a long run; or the time when he wasn't sure of himself... It's like saying a runner runs on physical attribute alone. Lorraine Moller says, "It's 100% physical, and 100% mental."

Do you really think Deena would have won the bronze medal without Vigil? Do you really think Carl Lewis would have won 9 gold medals without Tellez...of are you just saying that because it's Lydiard? Cut the crap.

Skuj wrote:

The ATHLETES got the results. Damn! A coach coaches: Inspires, motivates, leads....

The coach might take credit for 10%.

Discuss.

You know, Skuj, I always thought you're a funny guy. But this one went too far. I always wanted to be a coach because I didn't have one and I screwed up. I wanted to become a teacher (or, more accurately, I think it would have been nice to become a teacher) because teachers teach, inspire, motivate and lead (just like you said); and they CHANGE KIDS LIFE! What you just said, in effort to put down Lydiard, is an insul to all the coaches, teachers and parents. This really proves you don't know Jack about human being and want to "play a coach" with number games.

I just watched that movie, "Miracle" this weekend. Do you really think those US college kids could have beaten Russian hocky team without Herb Brooks? His teaching, his guidance, his motivation? Do you really think coaching means NOTHING? Do you honestly think motivating people to get out and run means NOTHING? Or you just want to put down what Lydiard did and take all the credit away from him so desperately? You should not claim yourself a "coach" and have a website and gather people to run track workout every week. I feel sorry for YOUR runners...

HRE wrote:

With all due respect to JD, are you really comparing the results he got with those that Lydiard did?

...or maybe Lydiard went to Peru as their national coach without any of us knowing and failed miserably...

The guy's comparing "Daniels" and "no Daniels".

Whoaaa, easy Nobby-san. I don't see how Skuj is putting down Lydiard or others with what he is saying.

If the athlete don't have "it" no coach in the world will bring it out.

If the athlete does not have the coach or other stimulas to inspire they will never reach the achievements that they could have aspired to.

A two way street, but in the end the athlete is primarily responsible for his or her achievement.

For the most part the coaching gets far too much credit.

OK, Nobby-san, I hope I didn't make you angry, I love what you are doing with Lydiard Foundation. (where can I get my certification, haha)

Everyone know Lydiard influence everyone else, the King among coaches!