Lydiard Aerobic Phase

Seriously though i Don't even know if you are Antonio or not. I was just told of this and yours and his writings do appear to be the same.

So what has gone wrong? People like Renato's writings more than yours? Or are you someone just pretending to be him?

If you are Antonio i think you suffer from my problem. Too many words. Renato on the other hand is very selective with his words. So as i read your knowledge it is more difficult to decipher than Renato's. I think for this reason added to the fact that most people don't want to have to think too hard into something, your posts are not read as broadly as Renato's.

For example from Renato, and i think this is about as broad as he thinks.

"So, coaches must remember that THEIR FINAL GOAL IS TO FIND THE BEST SYSTEM OF TRAINING INSIDE THEIR AMBIENCE, using the opportunity of the habitat, and the mentality of the athletes, OF COURSE INFLUENCED BY SOCIAL STYLES OF LIFE."

So to me this sentence is very clear. It mentions what the final goal for a coach can be and the fundamental limitations/advantages that should be observed. The words/phrases ambience, habitat and mentality modified by social lifestyle are all so rich in their descriptiveness and leave wonderful images.

"So,the first step of training is WHAT YOU CAN DO, and ARE USED TO DO, in your society, when you are young. Because, BEFORE KNOWING N OFFICIAL TRAINING, you have to live 15-18 years WITH YOUR NATURAL TRAINING, DURING THE MOST IMPORTANT PERIOD OF YOUR FORMATION, WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR "PRINTS" FOR ALL YOUR LIFE."

And this further clarification on the same subject but talking from a completely different perspective. The first paragraph was broad environmental influences and this paragraph has refers to the personal environmental influences. What has led the athlete up to the point of official training Again the image of 'prints' as those experiences and influences that formed us throughout our developmental years is a lovely one as is the distinction between natural training and official training.

So it's well thought out, clear and concise and containing plenty of images for people to tune into. There is a consistent rationality that shows an emotional stability which may also be an important distinction with yourself.

Apparently we won't hear from you again so ... ciao.

Ciao George and thanks for your support. You are very imaginative.

"sim",

I don't believe "not a fanatic" and Antonio are the same.

In spite of some similarities, I see big differences.

It's been mentioned here that nothing Lydiard had his athletes do had not been done prior to his coaching career. None of us from The Cult would disagree with that. We've said all along that he took things that people had done and put them together in the most effective way that anyone ahd done and revolutionized distance training.

My own contention is that he revolutionized training by getting track men to incorporate some elements of the training of marathon runners and to get marathon runners to incorporate some elements of track men's training.

With that as background, I decided to do a little checking. The most common part of a marathoner's training is the long, steady run. The most common part of a track runner's training has traditionally been some sort of repeat work.

If you found that prior to Lydiard trackmen did little or no long, steady running and marathoners did little or no track work, and that after Lydiard appeared on the scene it became common for each group to have a mixture of each sort of work I think you can attribute the change to Lydaird's influence.

Probably the best source for the specifics of training of distance runners up to the Montreal Olympics is Fred Wilt's "How They Train" series. Looking at three volumes, "Middle Distances," "Long Distances," and "880 to Six Mile," I studied the profiles of 92 athletes who raced between 1500-10,000 meters. Forty six of them had careers that were at their peak at or prior to the Rome Olympics and forty six had their careers peak after Rome.

Of the forty six whose careers were at their peaks at or prior to the 1960 Olympics, seven, 15.2%, acknowledged doing some sort of long steady run as an at least somewhat regular part oft heir training. I'm defining a long steady run as something lasting at least as long as 90 minutes or fourteen miles and NOT including any sort of repetition work along the way. So Zatopek's massive interval sessions would not count as long, steady runs because they aren't "steady." Nor would something like ninety minutes of fartlek.

Of the forty six athletes who competed at 1500-10,000 meters whose careers peaked after the Rome Olympics, twenty nine, 63%, mentioned doing a long steady run as defined above.

Profiles of marathoners training are in much shorter supply in Wilt's books. Only Johnny Hayes and Jim Peters are profiled. Neither of them did any sort of interval or repetition work, at least according to their profiels. This is consistent with accounts I've read of people like Johnny Miles, Les Pawson, and Clarence DeMar in places other than Wilt's books.

There are twenty one athletes who ran marathons after the Rome Olympics profiled in Wilt's books. All but two of them, Derek Clayton and Ron Clarke are shown to do some sort of repeat work.

Of course we can only infer causality. To determine it we'd need to talk to all of the athletes mentioned here. But looking at history, it's very hard not to infer that the success of Lydiard's athletes combined with his willingness to explain to anyone anywhere what they were doing, was a major factor in the different and really much more similar approaches to training seen after Rome than before it.

Runners are notoriously imitative and when someone has tremendous success doing things a particular way there is generally a stampede of people to that approach. Look at the general drop in volume and increased interest in cross training that happened when people thought that was how Sebastian Coe trained.

I have always found it very hard to believe that it's possible to be a serious distance runner or coach today, or at any time in the past forty or so years and NOT have been influenced by Arthur Lydiard, though his ideas may have reached you indirectly and perhaps mutated somewhat.

But I think it was malmo who said, "A runner who doesn't know Lydiard is likea physicist who doesn't know Newton."

[quote]HRE wrote:

Profiles of marathoners training are in much shorter supply in Wilt's books. Only Johnny Hayes and Jim Peters are profiled. Neither of them did any sort of interval or repetition work, at least according to their profiels. This is consistent with accounts I've read of people like Johnny Miles, Les Pawson, and Clarence DeMar in places other than Wilt's books.

Should say, "Profiles of pre-1960 marathoners' training...

Not a fanatic....

If it's any consolation, I can't understand anything Renato Canova writes either.....no disrespect to you or Renato intended.

Also, it would help your "case" if you didn't have so much contempt for humans. Your hatred distances you from people....as you know....and it makes it difficult for most of us to even consider your opinions.....whatever they may be.

I wish you the best....

HRE wrote:

Look at the general drop in volume and increased interest in cross training that happened when people thought that was how Sebastian Coe trained.

Good posting and, yes, true about the above.

HRE wrote:

I'm defining a long steady run as something lasting at least as long as 90 minutes or fourteen miles and NOT including any sort of repetition work along the way. So Zatopek's massive interval sessions would not count as long, steady runs because they aren't "steady." Nor would something like ninety minutes of fartlek.

Some hours after do a morning run of 2 hours steady Peter Snell did 22 mile Waiatarua in 2:22 the evening of that April 24 1968. That´s not a long steady run either.

"not a fanatic",

Shall I still wait patiently for more answers, or are you finished?

Then what is it? Not that it really has anything to do with my post because I never said that track men didn't do other things.

Mr. Ray wrote:

"sim",

I don't believe "not a fanatic" and Antonio are the same.

In spite of some similarities, I see big differences.

You could be right. Maybe Mr Cabral can come in and clear it up? If so oops but i have been informed from more than one source it was. ???

Those of you interested in lydaird i am selling a few of the best books...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&item=330274660754

Hmmm. I was planning linear running: 2 miles a day for a month, then 3, then 4, then 5, etc until I got back to my old standard of ~40MPW, then consider at that time what to do.

I tried the "by minutes" thing, but must have been doing it all wrongly as I was totally trashed after a 50-minute run last Sunday. At 40-minutes I was ok, but the final ten were grueling. It was quite hot and humid out.

I did some research and it appears Mr Lydiard suggested alternating 30 and 15 minute runs until one got accustomed to being back into regular training again.

Perhaps I over did it?

bump

sim wrote:

[quote]Mr. Ray wrote:

"sim",

Maybe Mr Cabral can come in and clear it up?

AEROBIC ?

What is that supposed to mean? Is physical exercise of relatively low intensity that depends primarily on the aerobic energy.

But I have no time for the words aerobic and anaerobic, and scalp what they are. They just confuse people. WE NEED SOME NEW TERMINOLOGY AND NEW REFERENTIAL COACHES AND MODERN METHODOLOGISTS agree upon.

A good guideline is time and space/distance to define the pace charge relate to each the individual capacity, and not aerobic or anaerobic, since that both are always present in middle and long distance training stimuli. In different percents of course.

Since many times it´s hard or inaccurate to define one effort by aerobic-anaerobic percent, it´s more accurate to define the pace relted to the individual talent.

Renato Canova he tries to replace the use of VO2max, aerobic and anaerobic and some more expressions by modern referential methodology and more significant with accurate meaning like pace percents of race pace and duration or index of resistance erelated to the runner shape or runner capacity.

SEASONAL AEROBIC DEVELOPMENT ?

First, it depends upon some key factors. First instance, it depends upon the individual. What works for one runner not work for another runner. One may have a high percentage of FT fibers and therefore could handle far more "anaerobic" work than the other.

Aerobic development. I agree. Seasonal I don´t. Any season requires aerobic development, I would say aerobic development is a run career talk.

The second factor is the event requirement the event you are going to focus on. Is it the 800m the 1500m or the 10k or the marathon? This makes a lot of difference.

To the question of “how much aerobic training someone needs” there is no pat answer. It depends upon the person and the event he wants participate on to how much emphasis should be placed on aerobic and anaerobic development. This is where the art of coaching might be used.

The easy way is to run from all this questions of individualisation and advice simply the standard 100mile for almost everybody and independently of the distance event. Advice based in standard/fixed volume training and aerobic define is something outdate to define stimuli with accuracy.

I can't belive so many good luck: Antonio resurrecting this old thread!

Dear namesake, pelase, keep going. What kind of workouts would you include for each tupe of runner building up to a marathon six months anead (in orden to peak twice a year?)

Tromala wrote:

What kind of workouts would you include for each tupe of runner building up to a marathon six months anead (in orden to peak twice a year?)

First tip for one marathon 6 months ahead for every kind of runner talent.

Take the first 3 months focused inn 10k road runs and training as a 10k runner, and try to progress on 10k before to buid one 3 months marathon plan.

Obrigado. I expected that you would advise to establish apeed first. But what kind of workouts should one do the last three months?

apeed second and anarobik thired.