I want to put an stop on this debate with you.
The story of this debate is simple and straight and the conclusion is also straight and simple.
the story of this debate is that you were the first to ask me about references to what i said, but you have nothing to offer as undeniable references what you say. You just zig-zag and you present tranversal and not direct and straight references to your points.
In one issue of debate you said didn´t post about Canova on that post but name of Canova is on the post. With you reference to Canova you still miss to confess the obvious that you refer Canova. What you want as more evidence that your are an functional analphabet ? This you deny that you write about Canova aerobic training, is a your self-defense to catch your ignorance about Canova training.
In the other issue of debate, you acting as many of you as Lydist parrots, You asked about one reference that Lydiard interdicts best aerobic pace everyday basis or so. But actually you aren´t able to present just one LITERALLY straight and clear Lydiard reference which the meaning is the kind of "don´t do the best aerobic pace everyday" or the kind of "do the aerobic pace x days of the week". Just one Rekrunner.
What you present is some Lydiard parrot ideas that even with good will i might consider that does a direct recommendation that best aerobic pace can´t be done on everyday basis or just, Even if it´s just one mile or so everyday at the final part of one daily run. You don´t got it actually. What you did are to elaborate dubious applications as is the effort fractions or you take one recommendation from one schedule to extrapolate as Lydiard universal and undeniable rule to every Kind of runner. Of course that not everybody can train at his best aerobic pace everyday. that might be the case of the runner you present one Lydiard recommendation. But can´t be take for granted that specific Lydiard example can can´t be a Lydiard rule. The other your last argument is something silly and out of any mathematic criteria, a mathematic absurd. Lydiard advices fractions of effort (or percents, because a fractions is also a percent). Therefore the source of calculus it´s the unity, or 100%, and in the Lydiard recommendation you got the calculus of the fraction from 100% effort, or from the 4/4 effort. Or the 100%=4/4 of effort run isn´t got from the best aerobic pace, it´s got from the "best" effort run. The best effort (100% or 4/4 effort) it´s not on the Lydiard aerobic effort. Everyone runs,
let´s say, 30-50min or longer at his best (100% or 4/4) effort aerobically ? You are out of your mind.
Resuming. Next time that you ask for references, that you ask me often, be sure that you have your own to support your own opinion. Anyhow, i took many time to be a teacher to someone that doesn´t deserve, because someone that asks often about reference, source, site address and about the same matter doesn´t got his own undeniable reference to support his own opinion is a hypocrite. Conclusion. I might post about what you say, it´s my own freedom and my own right, but i will never reply your reference asks, in what book, where, because you don´t got trustufull source what you say. Your silly asks for references while be one Lydiard parrot.
And yes, i´m Antonio Cabral. No doubt.