Lydiard anaerobic phase

HRE

Just to point out. I speak for myself. I ever respect Lydiard and his memory. The issue is about Lydiardism cult not with Lydiard himself.

But let me ask you. Does ever Lydiard said that his training is “the perfect combination of aerobic and anaerobic training as it´s said in the Lydiard Foundation site ?

If that´s "the perfect combination" it have to be the perfet number of repetitions and the perfect interval recover. If thet´s perfect that´s because that´s te best, nothing is as good as that.

The original question was about the sorts of workouts Lydiard had his athletes do when they began anaerobic work, so if it is the perfect combination it have to be precise, not vague.[/quote]

Skuj,

The stuff you put here on the Lydiard threads under all of your multiple identities, your refusal to acknowledge other's points or answers to your questions does not show respect for Lydiard or his memory. And that's ok. I only get involved in these threads because I did know Arthur reasonably well, Barry Magee even better and have learned somethings from them, and from Nobby, Kim, Glen, and others which I think might be useful to people who ask questions about Arthur's method. But I have no interest in converting anyone.

Yes, I do believe Arthur said something about a perfect balance of aerobic and anaerobic training. But he did not say anything about a PRECISE balance of aerobic and anaerobic training. That's your cute little rhetorical attempt at measuring his approach by your standards as is your absurd comment that a guy who took fifteen or twenty runners from his neighborhood and got six Olympic medals out of them being unqualified to coach anaerobic training. Yes, I'm sure you're much more qualified for that and have the results to prove it.

I'm not sure what perfection is but if it were the same thing as precision we wouldn't need both words.

What Arthur believed was that people differ and even the same person is not always capable of the same thing on Monday as on Wednesday and so giving people a formula for what sorts of intervals to do on each of those days is NOT perfection. Perfection, more likely, would be sorting out what that athlete can do on Monday without "straining" and then doing the same thing again on Wednesday which may or may not involve the same length of reps at the same speed with the same recovery.

But again, if your definition of perfection involves precision, you should find an approach that gives precise directions. I will continue to point out that there is a different approach that has been extremely successful.

HRE

Just to point out. I speak for myself. I ever respect Lydiard and his memory. The issue is about Lydiardism cult not with Lydiard himself.

But let me ask you. Does ever Lydiard said that his training is “the perfect combination of aerobic and anaerobic training as it´s said in the Lydiard Foundation site ?

If that´s "the perfect combination" it have to be the perfet number of repetitions and the perfect interval recover. If thet´s perfect that´s because that´s te best, nothing is as good as that.

The original question was about the sorts of workouts Lydiard had his athletes do when they began anaerobic work, so if it is the perfect combination it have to be precise, not vague.[/quote]

Skuj,

The stuff you put here on the Lydiard threads under all of your multiple identities, your refusal to acknowledge other's points or answers to your questions does not show respect for Lydiard or his memory. And that's ok. I only get involved in these threads because I did know Arthur reasonably well, Barry Magee even better and have learned somethings from them, and from Nobby, Kim, Glen, and others which I think might be useful to people who ask questions about Arthur's method. But I have no interest in converting anyone.

Yes, I do believe Arthur said something about a perfect balance of aerobic and anaerobic training. But he did not say anything about a PRECISE balance of aerobic and anaerobic training. That's your cute little rhetorical attempt at measuring his approach by your standards as is your absurd comment that a guy who took fifteen or twenty runners from his neighborhood and got six Olympic medals out of them being unqualified to coach anaerobic training. Yes, I'm sure you're much more qualified for that and have the results to prove it.

I'm not sure what perfection is but if it were the same thing as precision we wouldn't need both words.

What Arthur believed was that people differ and even the same person is not always capable of the same thing on Monday as on Wednesday and so giving people a formula for what sorts of intervals to do on each of those days is NOT perfection. Perfection, more likely, would be sorting out what that athlete can do on Monday without "straining" and then doing the same thing again on Wednesday which may or may not involve the same length of reps at the same speed with the same recovery.

But again, if your definition of perfection involves precision, you should find an approach that gives precise directions. I will continue to point out that there is a different approach that has been extremely successful.

HRE and Wetcoast; WAKE UP and leave Skuj alone. If you cannot figure out that IQ100 is not Skuj then you need to be slapped. By Skuj!

HRE

First of all I’m not Skuj at all, so what you say that’s not PRECISE neither PERFECT. As you see when someone fails in a judgement he isn´t perfect neither precise. As you may understand by your own mistake both words have a similar significance.

Second when i say that i respect Lydiard I do. I respect his memory as a man and as a coach and I respect their achievements. I do really indeed, despite what you may think. Besides I have respect for all Lydiard runners and all Lydiardists and it includes Nobby. I respect the their teach of Lydiard knowledge under the Lydiard Foundation activity. Simply it happens that i don’t agree with some of Lydiardism training ideas and comments. In my opinion some parts of what they say are wrong conclusions or not true according the training knowledge. In most of the occasions when someone comes with a serious critic about what they say about Lydiardism they aren´t able to stand a good discussion. We have lots of posts that are the prove of what i say. But like it or not i will keep post my opinion like it or you don´t. You or some of you think that my target is to offence Lydiard or Lydiard memory. You are wrong. I will keep on going until i want and the site doesn’t delete my posts. Besides I don´t post just against Lidiardists precisely. In one point i´m happy for the ones of the Lydiardism cult. After several posts with a different perspective about Lydiard training – his early arrogant attitude is vanish. Actually they are less arrogant and they are more mind flexible they used to be in the past.

Right. Leave Skuj alone.

Antonio, don't you think that one of the biggest problems is that Lydiardists don't know the real definition of anaerobic?

That´s a false argument. There were there are and there will be other coaches as successful as Lydiard was and that their results speak for themselves simply they train in different training structures than Lydiard method so what the hell Lydiard did that some other didn´t ?

Since the early days of Paavo Nurmi or the self coached Zatopec that were kids of the block that become Olympians while their coaches made them train very differently or quite opposed to the Lydiard method. Some of them they did win over Lydiard runners. Just to name a few. Since Vladimir Kuts or Herb Elliott to the more recent Kip Keino or Seb Coe or El Guerrouj that have been kids of the block that someone made them the very best and the very special. What did Lydiard something special or extra that Percy Cerruti didn´t with Herb or that Mr. Kostre doesn’t with Gebrelassie or with Kenenisa Bekele that he trains both ? It´s Nothing really.

About the claimed science validation or accuracy or superiority of the Lydiard method relate to other one else, most of training methods that are validate by the same science physiology as the Lydiard one is, despite their different structures.

Every good science can teach us that the aerobic training is determinant in the distance run events. But no science can say how man mileage you shall run. No good science can say that Lydiard training is “the perfect combination of aerobic and anaerobic training as it´s said in the Lydiard Foundation site. The perfect combination ? If that´s the perfect that have no one other alternative as good as the Lydiard one. Oh…they try to say that Lydiard is the best one and no one can be as good as the Lydiard one. I don’t buy that. May be that’s good. But perfect one?

What´s the science behind the 2 hours long run for a less than 2 minutes 800m run ? Ther´s no trust physiology or correct science argument behind the need of Lydiard long runs for a 800m runner. I don´t say that long runs are wrong. If that are aerobic runs mainly, may be that it may have a positive aerobic impact but that’s not undeniable in the training context as Lydiard or Lydiardism they want let us believe in it. No way. Please, don’t come with the Peter Snell or Murray medals and all the same WRs argument to justify Lydiard long runs. How many runners were gold Olympians and WRs before and after Peter Snell and they don’t do long runs? How many thousands 800m, 1500m 5000m or 10000m specialists they did best performances than the Lydiard runners and they never did long runs or rarely did it? Some of the Lydiardism training ideas that are false arguments.

100% agree. But unique doesn’t mean the best or perfect necessary or that he is "the father" despite that’s what Lydiard cult they want that people agrees. Simply unique is something non repeatable. For example the Lydiard influence on Shorter or every other individual runner this is something illegitimate and non-sense if the main items that the Lydiardism considers as the Lydiard method aren´t present.

The Lydiardism argument is like this. Gebre you see what he did it´s Lydiard training. Don´t you know that he did long ones longer than 3 hours as training for the the recent marathon WR ? Lydiardism arguments are like this. El Guerrouj. Yes. He is Lydiard influenced, despite he did weight training he also does hills and many miles. Lydiardism arguments are like this. That japaneese runners they all those coaches they say the training is influenced by the Lydiard method.

The Lydiardists they need to stop and re-think what legitimises one training method.

Skuj,

Stop pretending to be foreign and have English as a second langauge.

HRE made it clear that he does not try to convert anyone, he simply answers their questions when they are asking about the Lydiard method. Pretty simple really.

Yes Peter Snell's accomplishments are dated, so is human physiology, it's thousands of years old and hasn't changed.

Both of your running heroes very much appreciated the Lydiard method, it did not put a chasm between them, it's not like Beatles met Elvis and found out later that Elvis tried to have them deported.

It's INFORMATION.

Ryan Hall is not dated, his story is the latest! Alan Culpepper...go to flocast and check out Greg McMillan's altitude camp and listen to what he says about Lydiard method. LYDIARD method is what they do.

Zatopec was like all the real innovators out there, he did his own experimentation, which at the time looked odd and now looking back looks crazier than ever. You need innovators...Lydiard was an innovator...and yes so have others been innovators, but since Lydiard there have not been any major new advancements in long distance training information. You do respect Jon Brown, 2:09 marathoner correct? He who said that!!!!

He also said he would not be the runner he is today if Lydiard didn't happen or his coach didn't switch him over to the Lydiard method. Jon Brown is recent....current. I have a pod cast of him saying that.

You mentioned the names Haile Gebrelassie and Kenenisa Bekele. You do know that Gebre has a crook in his arm, he beleives this was caused by running to school with his books everyday and home. Now he first built a very large aerobic base by lifestyle, as did Bekele....that's the foundation of the Lydiard method...

Henry Rono, is a recent-slash-current story....he has been documenting his base conditioning phase for a long time here at Let's Run, much to the consternation of the impatient types who want him to jump into a speed phase. Rono, wrote something to the Lydiard Foundation (in his broken English) for their site.

Is their some sort of theoritical jealousy here, because no one mentions running a Coe method of training?

Coe had a large aerobic base...hmmmm? what does that mean to you?

Wetcoast you were warned. YOU ARE AN IDIOT and the laughing stock of letsrun if you think that is Skuj.

Thank you for the warning, I was afraid I might be an idiot all this time. Now the pressure and anticipation is gone, I feel releived.

Now I just need affirmation.

...oh, I am experiencing affirmation, to get tugged along into responding confirms my lack of intelligence.

Oh well...I hope this reduces everyone's expectations now.

I see your point. Paavo Nurmi did train by what´s now considered the Lydiard method. Zatopec did Ldiard training also indeed. Vladimir Kuts or Herb Elliott, Kip Keino or Coe, El Guerrouj, Gebrelassie or Kenenisa Bekele that´s Lydiard training really. Excuse me. I did forget Ron Clark. Ryan Hall and the poor Alan Culpepper Lydiard method is what they do. The UK-Welsh Canadian Jon Brown that´s pure Lydiard training. Thanks for let me know it. Henry Rono that´s Lydiard traning. All sucessefull runners or coaches they train by the Lydiard method or some influence. Those that fail they don´t. The runners from Kenya, the best european runners they they do the Lydiard method. Take a look in some details about the training of Renato Canova and he without know it what he does that´s Lydiard training really indeed.

I do confess. My name is Skuj and without know i´m deeply influenced by Lydiard training.

Did i miss anything ?

To recount, the original question that I responded to was what sorts of sessions a person might do inLydiard's anaerobic phase. The OP said he wasn't comfortable with that. I answered that he should do something else that he was comfortable with which set you off on this thing about me being, what was it, snarky and defensive, I believe.

Ok, see if you can answer a simple question directly. Knowing what I do of how Arthur approached anaerobic training, what should I have said in answer to the original question? Obviously it bothers you that I answered it as Arthur might have, so what SHOULD I have said so as not to look snarky and defensive?

IQ100 wrote:

Did i miss anything ?

You forgot to mention Bob Timmons and Jim Ryun as close followers of Lydiard's training principles.

I love you.

I myself have read all Lydiards books and do in fact implement his methods in my own training with success. To the OP- that link posted by mystery coach above is the best advice in the forum hands down. Take a look at the guy's training he coaches in that blog for a solid understanding of a lydiard anaerobic phase. Just like everything else Lydiard the philosophy "train don't strain" comes into play.

About iq100's last post- in a way I agree with him. It seems that every method of training that is successful people try to link to Lydiard. I have read Coe's books and I see a completely different training method. Daniels though has some similarties I still see a pretty big difference(I would say Daniels is more like Coe). As mentioned Renato Canova is one of the worlds best coaches and he admits himself that he IS NOT Lydiard influenced. Just because a runner runs upwards of 100 miles a week and includes a 12 week base phase with a long Sunday run doesn't make them Lydiard.

The confusion comes in because Lydiard created such a wide base of principles that most coaches just follow out of common knowledge. Coaches everywhere might train their athletes to buid up a high level of aerobic capacity before adding anaerobic conditioning. Thats a basic principle that many will trace back to Lydiard but you have to see how how they went about implementing it before you can credit the success to Lydiard. Their is more than one way to skin a cat. I myself have great success with Lydiard so I'm not about to change that.

Zatopek, no. Kuts, Keino, no. Coe, somewhat. El Guerrouj, don't know. Gebreselassie, don't know but it looks like something a Lydiard guy would do. Ron Clark, absolutely, Jon Brown, yes, like Clark in his own words, Rono, yes, mostly from watching Viren. It's in his book.

But there's nothing useful going on here now so the thread is all yours. And for someone who isn't Skuj, you do a heck of a good impression. Nice job with improving your English after it had deteriorated so badly in that last post.

Hi.I'm curious abut this statement quoted below and would like you to expand on it please. I have a book that documents the training of Ryan and never did I make the Lydiard connection. Thank you for any further assisstance that you can provide.

Living in the Past wrote:

You forgot to mention Bob Timmons and Jim Ryun as close followers of Lydiard's training principles.

Timmons was NOT a Lydiard follower. He had his runners run mileage and intervals year round. Arthur's opinion was that had Ryun followed a more systematic approach that he would have run sub 3:50 in '67 with a dirt track. He was that talented.

Glenn

His 3:51 wr wasn't good enough for the Lydiardites. If only all the other wr-holders did the Lydiardism, they all would have been so much faster. Coe could have gotten 1:39,

Discuss.

I thought it was obvious that I was being fascetious. There was little or no connection between Jim Ryun's training and Lydiard's training principles.