LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

in the food for thought category, for my first week on the track, like you, i was concerned about too short/too fast and burnout/injury. i was trying to keep the volume to 3 miles total work. i started with 6 x 800 w400r. no pre-determined pace. just did them how i felt. actually all were pretty consistent. for a second workout later in the week i did 2 x 1200, 2 x 800, 2 x 400 all w400r. again the philosophy was to total 3 miles of work, no pre-determined pace. as Nobby stated after two to three weeks, without even thinking about it, the effort was much easier and the times came down naturally.

I agree with Nobby. Don't set a time for yourself. Your brain/body has a certain pace it can tolerate given the work you are about to do. So, if the workout is 4 x 1 mile with a 5 min. jog/walk between reps, you run at an intensity that will allow you to complete this workout without straining, grimacing, tightening, or otherwise overdoing it. Run up to, but not beyond that effort level. This means if it is hot and humid, windy, or you are just feeling a little tired beforehand, you will naturally run slower than if conditions were perfect.

Thanks guys, appreciate the comments. I'd just like to add that last year I was amazed at how long I kept improving once I dropped the mileage down. From my experiences.....

Last summer I worked my way up the whole summer and touched 100 miles twice in the late weeks of August. I came into the season and couldn't manage to run under 28 for the 8K and I was getting discouraged. I found the issue was I was trying to maintain 80 mpw in the season with all the intervals. I dropped down to 50-60 mpw in late September and when Regionals came around early November I was down to 33:24 in the 10k. I think I probably ran 60 miles in the two weeks prior to Regionals (Thats the two weeks combined aka 30 mpw)....I was just amazed at how low I dropped it and how much faster I kept getting.

The return of the thread that would not die.

bump 2

buuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmppppp

I'm thinking the same thing might be happening to me, dropping at the time of quality = results....

LYDIARD. Endurance always comes before speed.

You are 108 pages late ha ha...

Actually that is what I am reiterating. I think no wtha ti have a good base (for me) behind me, I can get some quality in and feel faster.

But yes, I ran a lot of twice and thrice per week longer runs for months on end.

...sorry 'now that I'

The_Big_Mazungo wrote:

LYDIARD. Endurance always comes before speed.

But we can and must walk and chew gum at the same time.

The Other wrote:

But we can and must walk and chew gum at the same time.

Thus, Lydiard's Coordination Phase of training.

Timetrials are 100%

The_Big_Mazungo wrote:

LYDIARD. Endurance always comes before speed.

There isn't the same amount of endurance perhaps, but I don't think Daniels really believes speed comes before endurance.

Well I can't seem to find a VERY successful coach who beleives in speed first. I think I found a couple of guy who will push speed after a period of lighter running but with athletes who already have had years of base building.

I recall hearing Jeff Johnson speak at one of the Rocky Mtn Distance summits about his successes coaching a HS team in New Hampshire. They were many times state champs and won the New England HS girls title at least once. He talked about starting the team out with light intervals to get have them make quicker progress and prepare them for racing. While that is not true speed work, it is anaerobic work which is the opposite of where Arthur would have his anaerobic work. But then again Arthur never was very pleased with the US scholatic approach to training.

Glenn

"light intervals" can be totally aerobic of course, so the question here is, how light were they for these kids.

Nobby,

Can you give me a brief outline for the marathon build up.

I have a race set out for April.My history is a 2.50 runner who has run in over 10 marathons and have faded badly in all of them in the final miles.

I run about 50 -60 miles a week with a long run of 20 miles each week.

thanks

I could NEVER get consistently over 45MPW without getting ill. I only made it over 50MPW two or three times.

My training pace rarely got faster than 7:20. I get the impression now that, if I had just run for time and with no regard for pace (I was always envious of the guys and gals who could do 6:30-per-mile with dispatch), since I timed every mile of every run, that I was training too hard.

Lots of colds, flus, bronchitis, walking pneumonia.

Is it possible I just wasn't that good and that 40-45MPW and 36:36 for 10k was my opus?