Renato Canova - Arthur Lydiard Coaches Roundtable

Hello Renato, would you have time to answer my question above? I would be interested to hear your view.

Also Renato please give your opinion on this

You have probably seen this - from Nixon Kiprotich?

Do you agree? What are its implications, should an 800 m runner avoid tempo runs?

-------------------------

Q: Is having a high lactate threshold important for the 800-metre runner?

A: Not necessarily. In an endurance runner, a high threshold is critical -so that the runner never strays too far above threshold when running 5Ks, 10Ks, and marathons. The 800-metre runner doesn't have to worry about roaming above threshold; he/she is always far above threshold during races.

is that you , Antonio?

time out rob wrote:

rekrunner,

nobody cares.

is that you, rek?

time in rob wrote:

is that you , Antonio?

time out rob wrote:

rekrunner,

nobody cares.

Well, Lydiard had you do fartlek in the base period. A friend who knows Bill Baillie quite well says that Bill would do 220s during his base phase. And when people talk about Lydiard's athletes "getting away" from their racing speeds during the base phase they may overlook the fact that his guys actually ran races during base work. Not serious races as they'd do later. But they'd show up for the ubiquitous "club" races that are common in NZ.

Anyway, I think Peter's focus in the last few years has been fitness and aging and how the two affect each other. I don't believe he's really focused on high level racing and training these days.

I asked because I know law is a complex thing, and there is uncertainty about what gypsy did illegally that damaged Lydiardism (especially since he's a strong proponent for Lydiard).In the US, when you assign copyrights, the moral rights associated with them do not transfer. The Foundation may not have the standing to sue for things like defamation or unfair competition. So the answer to the question depends on what gypsy is alleged to have done, and whether the Foundation was damaged by such acts, as well as which rights transferred to the Foundation.

HRE wrote:

All I was doing was answering your question about whether the LF has any legal standing to sue anyone. They do and evidently you knew that when you asked the question which makes me wonder why you asked that.

Whether they'd ever do it, who it would be, why they'd do it, how they'd do it, where the suit would be filed, is just chatter from people here who seem to get overly worked up when Arthur's name gets into a thread title.

No. And I don't care if nobody cares.

time out rob wrote:

is that you, rek?

time in rob wrote:

is that you , Antonio?

time out rob wrote:

rekrunner,

nobody cares.

Once again, the answer depends on the typology of the athlete, not on the event.

Nixon was a type of athlete, such as Paul Ereng, Alberto Juantorena, Marcello Fiasconaro, Luciano Susanj, Tom Courtney, Bill Crothers (the best competitor of Peter Snell), Billy Konchellah and many other, having the attitude of a 400m runner, with a high percentage of fast fibers. Of course, for this type of athletes, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS TO ENHANCE THEIR LACTIC ABILITY, and only in a second time, maintaining the ability in producing lactate, they can try to enhance their LT.

So, OPPOSITE TO WHAT LYDIARD SAID, ANAEROBIC FIRST (Because is their main quality), and AEROBIC SECOND.

But, if we speak about other runners RESISTANT TYPE (like all the athletes running fast 1500m : Seb Coe, Cram, Ovett, Asbel Kiprop, Andre Bucher and many others), ENHANCING THEIR LT IS THE FIRST GOAL THEY HAVE TO HAVE.

Finally, there is a third type of athletes (the real SPECIALIST) that must work at the same time for increasing their LT and for increasing the Anaerobic ability. Athletes as Rudisha, Wilfred Bungei, Borzakovskiy, Mulaudzi, Johnny Gray, Barbosa, Doubell and many other belong to that category.

About Peter Snell, I think he was a RESISTANT type, so for him to enhance his LT was the primarly goal. But I cant accept the idea that what worked for Peter is the best option for everybody. And I'm sure that Lydiard, with his personal ability in understanding the real necessities in training of his athletes, if could be a coach in the athletics of today, could change a lot his plan, speaking about AEROBIC MOST IMPORTANT QUALITY FOR SUPPORTING THE LACTIC ABILITY THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT QUALITY FOR RUNNING FAST 800 and 1500m.

As it was explained to me, the intent on passing Arthur's intellectual property to Nobby was to make sure his ideas were presented as he'd have presented them.

For example, if I created an on line marathon training program and used my connection to Lydiard as a selling point I would need to have a program that Arthur would have tolerated. If, say, I decided the program would sell to people who didn't like running for more than an hour at a time so I split the weekly two hour run into a couple runs of an hour or so each claiming that Lydiard favored running twice a day so there is no need for a 2 hour plus run I wouldn't be surprised if the LF told me that I either need to change that part of my plan or, if I really wanted to keep the long run split, disassociate my plan from Lydiard's name. If I refused to do either they MIGHT take legal action.

A few quick points:

I'm amused at JR's use of an imaginary 'friend' to tear down Lydiard. Is that sort of like buying an embarassing product at the drug store & telling the cashier 'it's for my friend'?

Nowhere in Lydiard's extensive writings & lectures does he advocate anything close to running at best aerobic pace every day. Why do you persist in perpetuating this silly myth, JR?

Lydiard worked with neighborhood kids & turned them into world champions. Renato (inarguably a great coach), works with athletes already at wolrd class level. Big difference there..

The document under discussion here was created as a response this forum

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=75485448

Which was a discussion on Renato Canovas training principles and in particular how they might apply to sub-elite runners.

To Renato Canova:

Hi Renato,

Im a 39 year old male training for Rotterdam sub 2:30

I have followed a fundamental phase "attacking the organism" with a multitude of aerobic stimulii.

Onto the specific phase and i have borrowed some runs from your schedule for Lydia Cheromeis Rotterdam marathon 2010.

I have completed some of the specific runs: the inc. 20k @4:05 5k 1' fast 1' easy 10k@marathon pace (3:33) 2k easy 3k very hard uphill.

My global volume is only 150-160k.

My worry is that i am neglecting moderate runs in the lipid range between these hard workouts. (almost all of my runs are regeneration runs between EXTENSIVE INTENSIVE long runs. ) Usually my recovery is 6-7 days between these long and hard workouts.

Question: Which is best for a 2:30 RUNNER ON 160KPW 5 weeks from target marathon.

a. EXTENSIVE INTENSIVE runs every 6-7 days with only regeneration between.

b. EXTENSIVE running with some INTENSITY every 6-7 days with lipid runs, uphill max sprints etc. Between

I think the last one now that i see it written.

Thanks Renato. A lot of recreational runners here interested in applying your training philosophies to their own marathon training so your input would be hugely appreciated its safe to say.

The document under discussion here was created as a response this forum

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=75485448

Which was a discussion on Renato Canovas training principles and in particular how they might apply to sub-elite runners.

To Renato Canova:

Hi Renato,

Im a 39 year old male training for Rotterdam sub 2:30

I have followed a fundamental phase "attacking the organism" with a multitude of aerobic stimulii.

Onto the specific phase and i have borrowed some runs from your schedule for Lydia Cheromeis Rotterdam marathon 2010.

I have completed some of the specific runs: the inc. 20k @4:05 5k 1' fast 1' easy 10k@marathon pace (3:33) 2k easy 3k very hard uphill.

My global volume is only 150-160k.

My worry is that i am neglecting moderate runs in the lipid range between these hard workouts. (almost all of my runs are regeneration runs between EXTENSIVE INTENSIVE long runs. ) Usually my recovery is 6-7 days between these long and hard workouts.

Question: Which is best for a 2:30 RUNNER ON 160KPW 5 weeks from target marathon.

a. EXTENSIVE INTENSIVE runs every 6-7 days with only regeneration between.

b. EXTENSIVE running with some INTENSITY every 6-7 days with lipid runs, uphill max sprints etc. Between

I think the last one now that i see it written.

Thanks Renato. A lot of recreational runners here interested in applying your training philosophies to their own marathon training so your input would be hugely appreciated its safe to say.

MAURICE wrote:

A few quick points:

I'm amused at JR's use of an imaginary 'friend' to tear down Lydiard. Is that sort of like buying an embarassing product at the drug store & telling the cashier 'it's for my friend'?

Nowhere in Lydiard's extensive writings & lectures does he advocate anything close to running at best aerobic pace every day. Why do you persist in perpetuating this silly myth, JR?

Lydiard worked with neighborhood kids & turned them into world champions. Renato (inarguably a great coach), works with athletes already at wolrd class level. Big difference there..

Lydiard advocates marathon block and the runs shall be at best aerobic pace as much as possible which means highest number of days or everyday if can be hold.

Lydiard didn´t turn runners into world champions, turn them into world recordistas and olympic winners.

Renato works with world class level, but Lydiard did work with neighborhood kids of local class level ?

Finns Viren and Vasala olympics and what they did with Lydiard training were neighborhood kids of what block ?

Reference?

Joe maggio wrote:

Lydiard advocates marathon block and the runs shall be at best aerobic pace as much as possible which means highest number of days or everyday if can be hold.

HRE,

OK fine, thanks.

Thanks for that extra background information. It looks like the subject got a much healthier discussion there.So if I'm not mistaken, it looks like the whole discussion there was initially based on Northern Star's compilation of Renato's Training. The article mentioned here in the OP, was the second in a series triggered by that discussion, (reading the first one first would have been more helpful) and it looks the Lydiard Roundtable is critiquing Canova's methods, as told by Northern Star, with some extra information (such as Nobby's personal discussions with Canova).

mountainrunner wrote:

The document under discussion here was created as a response this forum

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=75485448

Which was a discussion on Renato Canovas training principles and in particular how they might apply to sub-elite runners.

Joe maggio

My point was that JR insists on mischaracterizing Lydiard training as best aerobic effort every single day. Obviously running this pace 'as much as possible', i.e. as much as your body can handle with a 'train, don't strain' approach is different than saying you should run max aerobic effort every day, no matter what.

Not sure what your point is, or if you have one at all, as far as Lydiard training world champions, vs. OG medalists or record holders. I'll dumb it down for you - see if this helps: Lydiard trained a lot of people to run very, very fast - much faster than they ran before he coached them. Some of these athletes were coached directly by him to impressive victories in the biggest races of their day; many more were indirectly coached by Lydiard as a result of his travels around the world to work with the Japanese, Finns, Mexicans, etc. etc......

Yes, Joe, Lydiard literally worked with neighborhid kids in NZ & turned them into elite, world class runners & champions. He took athletes completely unknown outside their village/town to competing in the Olympics. He did this with men & women in various events over a period of time. I'm perplexed if you managed to somehow interpret this as meaning every runner Lydiard ever coached was a kid who lived in his neighborhood?

And yes, obviously Renato seeks out athletes who are already world class elite & successfully trains them to run even faster. Nothing wrong with that at all. I was just pointing out that in many cases, Lydiard didn't begin with athletes already running elite times. He worked with kids who were just starting out..

Where is the Lydiard reference that the best aerobic pace can't be done

everyday ? Lydiard best aerobic pace is the pace your body can handle with a 'train, don't strain', can be done everyday. It's not an obligation but must be done everyday since he says that on that pace the aerobic improve is quickly. Lydiard best aerobic pace It's not a myth, it's a Lydiard open possibility.

Again. Lydiard didn't coach NZ neighborhood kids of the block, that were world champions. If you are so sure of everything as you are on this matter, i see you miss something.

Renato Canova did train kids who just starting out as well. I don't know nothing at all about Renato Canova.

rekrunner wrote:

Elephant in the room? Canova's training is suitable for everyone. There is no reason to think you are at increased risk of getting injured/burned out, so long as you respect certain principles.

Reference ? Renato said the opposite. He says isn't able to train the average runner.

rekrunner wrote:

In the first case, Lydiard says in one of his books, regarding 100 mpw, something like "when you can run 100mpw, don't run more, but run them faster". Lydiard also increased the intensity of the easy runs, as the athlete progresses. Maybe Canova's paces end up faster, but it seems a common mistake to think that all of Lydiard's "aerobic" mileage remains slow and easy as the athlete progresses over the years.

Reference ? In fact Canova increases the intensity but the volume as well. Canova says speed and volume, faster and longer.