I remember Paul Bllinger saying in a NZ Runner interview that Arthur was using shedule's more lke that used by Clohessy.
I remember Paul Bllinger saying in a NZ Runner interview that Arthur was using shedule's more lke that used by Clohessy.
Man, I would love to find a stash of NZRs from before 1990. I had a subscription from 1990 to its end but I know there were a lot of great articles before then.
I hear you HRE. I think the books would be a good idea for me as well. Found this.http://runningtimes.com/Print.aspx?articleID=5239some pertinent training bits
RAY PUCKETT (five-time national marathon champion): "Arthur shaped me, as a 22-year-old, in 1958. He trained with me often. I actually ran three marathons in the matter of five weeks. He had me running the 22-mile Waiatarua three days in a row. On the last one, I complained to him that my legs were raw. He replied: 'So are mine,' and took off. There was no sympathy from Arthur. But I absorbed it all, and got into the 1958 Empire Games team. Arthur was essential to my development. He knew what he was doing—for the third marathon was the fastest."
MATHEW AND DAMIAN SHIRLEY (runners from Beachlands—where Arthur lived): Mathew: "I ran 80 miles a week. I went to Arthur hoping for a pat on the back. His retort was: 'Great, but next week run 100 miles.' Back to Arthur's: I've run 100. 'Great, now run 120 miles.' There are those who make a difference, and there are those who are the difference." Damian: "I was amazed at how easy it was to get Arthur's help. He was a man who was not concerned with trophies. He told me that all his cups had been left at the tip, years ago."
Sure it is dangerous to draw conclusions from one-offs like this reporting, yet we can still draw them, just not rely on them yet. IF Arthur says 100miles he is giving a goal for all those people he isn't interacting with personally. Yet it seems in individual situations like these, he is mainly interested in overload. Also 100miles is probably for MD as it never seems to apply to the marathoners.
Damien talks about another side to Arthur, the humility or rather lack of obvious ego. He wasn't attaching to any achievements, he was 'getting on with the job' so to speak as Barry Magee alludes to.
BARRY MAGEE (There was no closer friend of Arthur Lydiard. He had this to say): "Christ of Christmas revolutionized the world. Arthur did the same. Those who would mourn his death—leave now. He would have said: 'Do not mourn for me. Get on with it.'
Yet Barry goes further to anoint Arthur with a Christ-like association, which fits in line with Barry's belief. Both Jesus and Arthur were revolutionaries so i agree at least in this way. With so many different angles to Arthur it does make you wonder so when Murray Halberg refers to this side of Arthur:
SIR MURRAY HALBERG: "I quickly found Arthur to be a man you could follow. He was a leader. He talked and acted like one—a human dynamo. He was also considerate. He had a milk run in the suburb of Kingsland, Auckland, in the days when the milkman delivered the bottles in the early hours. He would handle the crates quietly. He would never 'rev' the truck. Then Bill Baillie and I took over his round for a short while. We yelled, dumped the bottles loudly in the letterboxes and revved the truck. Immediately upon resuming his round, Lydiard, was approached by some of the residents he delivered the milk to, and was told: 'You know, Arthur, last week was the first time ever, that we actually heard you delivering the milk!"
It draws me to see Arthur as a gentle man, living in silence and reminds me of one of my favourite ideas 'walk gently on the earth'. Then we get to Lorraine Mollers's words and whilst i may empathise with the to some degree, not being female is a drawback to getting her full meaning.
LORRAINE MOLLER (via e-mail): "Leading up to the marathon at the Barcelona Olympics [where Moller won the bronze medal], Arthur said this to me: 'Just remember that 90 percent of runners perform below their best. You have trained right for years. You will do well.' I thought: 'This leaves 10 percent. There are 60 in the field. That means that I will be competing against just six people.' Suddenly my task seemed so simple. I never considered that I would be in that 90 percent. I was a 10-percent person. From all this I could feel myself lifting. The God of Running had just spoken to me. On his last tour of the USA, he visited 16 cities. He magnetized huge crowds wherever he went. In Houston, the day before he died, Arthur spoke to a crowd of 600. And when he wasn't lecturing he loved to be propped in a chair in a running store, and to talk 'shop'. There is so much I would like to tell him. But without his presence I can only speak my words into the air we breathe, and onto the earth we run over, knowing that Arthur is everywhere. Thank you, Arthur, for gracing my stage."
I wish he was still alive, i would hunt him down :)
I hear you HRE. I think the books would be a good idea for me as well. Found this.http://runningtimes.com/Print.aspx?articleID=5239some pertinent training bits
RAY PUCKETT (five-time national marathon champion): "Arthur shaped me, as a 22-year-old, in 1958. He trained with me often. I actually ran three marathons in the matter of five weeks. He had me running the 22-mile Waiatarua three days in a row. On the last one, I complained to him that my legs were raw. He replied: 'So are mine,' and took off. There was no sympathy from Arthur. But I absorbed it all, and got into the 1958 Empire Games team. Arthur was essential to my development. He knew what he was doing—for the third marathon was the fastest."
MATHEW AND DAMIAN SHIRLEY (runners from Beachlands—where Arthur lived): Mathew: "I ran 80 miles a week. I went to Arthur hoping for a pat on the back. His retort was: 'Great, but next week run 100 miles.' Back to Arthur's: I've run 100. 'Great, now run 120 miles.' There are those who make a difference, and there are those who are the difference." Damian: "I was amazed at how easy it was to get Arthur's help. He was a man who was not concerned with trophies. He told me that all his cups had been left at the tip, years ago."
Sure it is dangerous to draw conclusions from one-offs like this reporting, yet we can still draw them, just not rely on them yet. IF Arthur says 100miles he is giving a goal for all those people he isn't interacting with personally. Yet it seems in individual situations like these, he is mainly interested in overload. Also 100miles is probably for MD as it never seems to apply to the marathoners.
Damien talks about another side to Arthur, the humility or rather lack of obvious ego. He wasn't attaching to any achievements, he was 'getting on with the job' so to speak as Barry Magee alludes to.
BARRY MAGEE (There was no closer friend of Arthur Lydiard. He had this to say): "Christ of Christmas revolutionized the world. Arthur did the same. Those who would mourn his death—leave now. He would have said: 'Do not mourn for me. Get on with it.'
Yet Barry goes further to anoint Arthur with a Christ-like association, which fits in line with Barry's belief. Both Jesus and Arthur were revolutionaries so i agree at least in this way. With so many different angles to Arthur it does make you wonder so when Murray Halberg refers to this side of Arthur:
SIR MURRAY HALBERG: "I quickly found Arthur to be a man you could follow. He was a leader. He talked and acted like one—a human dynamo. He was also considerate. He had a milk run in the suburb of Kingsland, Auckland, in the days when the milkman delivered the bottles in the early hours. He would handle the crates quietly. He would never 'rev' the truck. Then Bill Baillie and I took over his round for a short while. We yelled, dumped the bottles loudly in the letterboxes and revved the truck. Immediately upon resuming his round, Lydiard, was approached by some of the residents he delivered the milk to, and was told: 'You know, Arthur, last week was the first time ever, that we actually heard you delivering the milk!"
It draws me to see Arthur as a gentle man, living in silence and reminds me of one of my favourite ideas 'walk gently on the earth'. Then we get to Lorraine Mollers's words and whilst i may empathise with the to some degree, not being female is a drawback to getting her full meaning.
LORRAINE MOLLER (via e-mail): "Leading up to the marathon at the Barcelona Olympics [where Moller won the bronze medal], Arthur said this to me: 'Just remember that 90 percent of runners perform below their best. You have trained right for years. You will do well.' I thought: 'This leaves 10 percent. There are 60 in the field. That means that I will be competing against just six people.' Suddenly my task seemed so simple. I never considered that I would be in that 90 percent. I was a 10-percent person. From all this I could feel myself lifting. The God of Running had just spoken to me. On his last tour of the USA, he visited 16 cities. He magnetized huge crowds wherever he went. In Houston, the day before he died, Arthur spoke to a crowd of 600. And when he wasn't lecturing he loved to be propped in a chair in a running store, and to talk 'shop'. There is so much I would like to tell him. But without his presence I can only speak my words into the air we breathe, and onto the earth we run over, knowing that Arthur is everywhere. Thank you, Arthur, for gracing my stage."
I wish he was still alive, i would hunt him down :)
I don't have many of the 80s NZR's still intact. I will look around for the one with the Paul Ballinger interview, I think I still have it somewhere. If I find it I will copy the article and pass it on to you. There were wonderful interviews with Jack Foster, Barry Magee, John Robinson and others in those 80s editions. Unfortunately may of them never survived the dozen or so house moves since.
That would be great.
Contradict Yourself Much? wrote:
More real than realest man wrote:You need to learn what a putdown is and what a contradiction is. What I said is we have no way of knowing if Wynn is a good coach or not. I have little knowledge of what he does. The fact is that Canadian runners are rewarded financially by getting coached by him. He has all the funding and all the resourses. If there was another great coach in Canada, we would never know, as it is a very uneven playing field. I said nothing critical about the way he coaches.
If you are going "skirt around" and implicate like you did, against a NAMED person, AT LEAST HAVE THE BALLS TO USE YOUR REAL FVCKING NAME.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implicated?
I implicated him in what? Coaching the top athletes?
You ask me about my training.
Let´s try without discuss Lydiard.
Basically my training is nothing but Lydiard influenced.
Lydiard prescribes aerobic first and 100miles as the optimal volume for that period. Well...my training sometimes is less than 100miles really and some other times i did 180miles, because i got the 100miles and i don´t want to stop and take 2 days of rest, i keep running and running. My aerobic runs...well, often i do very fast workouts during that period, but since my target it´s to develop the aerobic system i´m still in Lydiard track.
Lydiard prescribes hill and during one fix phase. Well...i do different kind of hills, and some past seasons i skip the hills totally, however i´m still Lydiard influenced by all the rest of the training that i do. I´m not a Lydiard expert by I guess that Mr. Wetycoast is not right, iI can be consider a typical Lydiard one, the day I will sign for the LF I will be a Lydiardist.
Lydiard prescribes the regular weekly kind of long run. Well...during the winter as well as during every season i miss the long one, but i´m still on Lydiard. Don´t you remember that Lydiard runner that also misses the long one, but what really matters, every interview he says he is Lydiard influenced.
I read that Lydiard denies the interest of interval training during the aerobic block. But what really matters, i´m still Lydiard. Don´t you know that i read that Lydiard "in private" advices interval training to some people. It´s what i do precisely, interval training all the way.
I´m informed by one Lydiard expert that to be Lydiard we just got to respect 4 norms: Aerobic development, Feeling-based, Response regulated, Sequential training pattern, Peaking. As i follow all the 4 items, but well...in different style, but i follow it, then basically my training is Lydiard.
Let me confess another issue of my opinion. Out of the Lydiard training, i got one interesting conclusion. When i think about one rich coach among the thousand that aren´t Lydiard coaches, the best one as my role model ...who else rather than Deek ? Deek of course !
I know...i know, he was been with Lydiard, he is Lydiard influenced but he does the things differently, the same things that Lydiard would disagree eventually, but what really matters, he is the world best non-Lydiard coach, the world biggest success, and he is influenced by Lydiard. Besides my training is very similar to Deek.
ps – I guess did respect your ask. I avoid to discuss Lydiard training on this post as the Lydiardists they do avoid, i just relate my training to the world´s best.
HRE wrote:
In the late 70s Lydiard suggested to me, because I responded poorly to repetition work, that I "race (myself) fit," essentially doing nothing but distance work and using early races as sharpeners.
Few, if any, of these variants, which HE created, seem to have penetrated the consciousness of many who study training methodology. For most people, those "Run to the Top" schedules seem to have cast "Lydiard Training" into stone. I've always considered myself a "Lydiard guy" to a significant extent but I have never only once come close to doing the complete schedule that people associate with Lydiard and even that was shortened because I was getting slower as we went through the interval phase.
One detailed study of training methodology would suggest that instead of your miss of intervals you might keep the intervals but do it differently eventually and that way you will got more performance progress that you really did
Why instead of just let us know what Lydiard advised, why don´t you let us know how wrong you did the interval training as well, WHAT KIND OF INTERVALS YOU USED TO RUN AND IN WHAT PACE AND WHAT LENGHT RECOVERY YOU DID THAT INTERVALS RELATE TO YOUR TALENT AND YOUR TRAINING PERFORMANCES.
I know one or two things about how wrong you did that intervals. John Hadd told me how wrong and inadequate you use to train even quite recently. He said that you tend to train vary hard always relate to your talent. Don´t you ?
I guess that when you will inform us about your "crazy" intervals we will realize that the problem and rich solution, the solve of your problem with the intervals doesn´t require the miss of intervals necessary, but more controlled intervals. it´s not just keep out of the intervals, but do it right, and of course run many miles in between as Lydiard did prescribed you right - to run miles, but he was wrong - when he advices you to be out of the intervals.
Please. Let us know what were your performances and what kind of intervals you did, volume, number of repetitions, the sets, the frequency, how you combine the intervals with the days you did recovery, in what pace you did the recovery.
I guess that we will understand that your problem it´s not on the intervals and the solution it´s not on the miss of intervals but keep the intervals while do that differently.
However i guess that you willn´t post your interval training. You prefer to live one fantasy and the fantasy is that "what Lydiard told you in private is the best advice and that´s nothing best than the Lydiard training".
Antonio, with all seriousness can you give me some indication of the basis of your coaching.
Some example of how you might progress an athlete throughout the year and from year to year.
For example myself 31 years ago (age 21). My background. Playing a lot of general sport. Started regular jogging at 12 years old. 6 years heavy farm work. Started to run more distance at 19 years, hilly 10-20km runs, pushing hills but no structure and no speedwork/intervals. Ran some races, 4.35 for 1500m, 17.30 for 5k, 35.30 for 10k, 2.55 for marathon.
I come to you to help me run faster,what would you have me start doing?
Antonio,
I didn't really ask, but thanks anyway for your response. If it's close to the methodology you describe, I think I have a good idea where it overlaps with Lydiard, and where it departs.
But I still do have a question for you. I want to do conduct some more personal research on modern training methods. Can you give me some keywords to help direct my search, e.g. the names of coaches and/or athletes who apply a modern approach? Thanks.
Nah. You never understand what people write. It's not worth the aggravation. I did the usual sorts of intervals that everyone else did.
Mopak - here's the "summer of Antonio" in his own words.
But I did understood that you did the usual sorts of intervals that everyone else did, and I did understood that mr. Lydiard advises you to change you training, and I did understood what were the changes. What I didn´t understood ?
I hope that this time i could understand that you write you did “the usual sort of intervals that EVERYONE did.“ Right ? Or do I miss something ?
I hope that last time I did read that you “responded poorly to repetition work” Right ? Or do I miss something ?
Therefore it´s not unusual that I did ask what repetitions (I name it intervals to what you name repetitions that you used to run). Did I miss something ?
My source of my question is because i got one clue that the intervals/repetitions you did, you did the wrong way, and the problem of respond poorly it´s not because you did it, but because you did it the poor way, the poor sort.
HRE. Don´t think that i´m curious to know what you did as an individual. I just need some information to know what´s the sort of intervals you did just as one “case of study”.
Since many requests of this thread is that I say something about my training, and they aren´t satisfied with my training methodology principles, would be better to comment on something factual.
During the last decades - the 60s, the 70s, the 80s intervals/repetitions were of many sorts and each sort leads to different training charge. Everyone who ? Everyone from the Lydiard runners, from the "crazy" 50s-60s-70s US way to run that intervals, that still exists today. I guess that it doesn´t need to be rocky scientific or know many things about physiology to agree with what I say.
It would be more clear if you answer my specific question: what kind of repetitions you did after all ? If it´s the sort that everyone did you will remember that eventually. Interval sets; average pace; length recovery, weekly frequency and very important what was your talent performance (your pbs) during the period that you did it that intervals didn´t fit into your training package the way Lydiard did change your training schedule ?
Even Lydiard did criticize the way some people did intervals. Therefore instead of say that you did what everybody else did, and since you said you”… responded poorly to repetition work” it would be a good thing to tell us what kind of repetitions you did.
I still think that they way you did that intervals, be the intervals that everyone else did, or don´t, you didn´t the right way, and i have some information from another person that unhappily did die, that is John Hadd that he told me that you did your intervals too fast to your run talent in what would be interval training deficiency. That this was the main source of your training deficiency. Am I wrong again or I did i miss something ?
Danno67 wrote:
Mopak - here's the "summer of Antonio" in his own words.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4062525
Summer of Antonio it´s my soft training, niot soft the way it´s easy, but soft because it´s not my main training, it´s just the kind of training for one specific case, someone that wants to build one seummer season to face the cross country runs in the Fall-early Winter season.
I did one interview to Mr. Keshall when i did detail all my training principles and my training methodology. The site address of that interview is on this same thread.
Someone else did address another interview that i did to Running times about my training.
Just on this LetsRun.com board i did posts about the Portuguese marathon training.
I did posts about Rui Silva training, one season in detail. Despite it´s not my own training but since i agree with most of what he did, you can link that Rui´s training to what is similar to my training.
I did post on this board about "interval training" that is one interesting part of my training method
With cooperation with John Hadd we both did post about our training approach.
I did posts the day by day schedule last 12 weeks (?) - i guess - from Alberto Chaiça that did 2h09m 4th marathon world champs and that did win over Paul Tergat on the Olympic marathon.
I did post about many subjects and many times and all that reveals what´s my training ideas.
It´s normal that in 10 years that i posts on LRC i did change my opinion about some issues of training. It´s result of my training experience with the ones i coach, and what i learn from training methodology.
Renato Canova wrote:
In conclusion, we need to learn from the past, in order to build a different future. Lydiard was a miliar stone in the history of methodologies, such as Igloi, Gerschler and other coaches, but the house we build today, starting from their fundation, is made following a different plan.
To continue to give examples of athletes that were the bests many years ago, but now are very far from any international value (think that Zatopek won Olympic Marathon in 1952 in a time that today 10 women can run, having PB of 13'54" and 28'54" : so, how is it possible to think his plan, looking for a marathon, was good ?), is in my opinion an exercise of stupidity that can't contribute to the development of any methodology. It's like to think that cooking using the fire from wood can be better than having a comfortable kitchen with gas we can use at different intensity.
At the end of every thing, people having still the idea of "Lydiardism" can make a very bad service to Lydiard himself, because of sure, if Arthur was still alive and in activity, he was able to develop his methodology according to the needs of the athletic of todays, discovering something new in training, as he did 50 years ago.
I agree about building on the past but I rarely if ever read any methodology here or elsewhere that is actually "new"
I like Zatopek methodology.
"Simple," he said. "I run, and run and run."
Printed from
The TIMES of INDIA
He ran and ran and ran
8 Aug 2004, 2312 hrs IST
With the Athens Games barely four days away it's time for Olympic gup-shup . The other day SS Narayanan, one of our 1956 Melbourne Olympic football stars, recalled what an experience it was for him to see the Emil Zatopek, the Czech long distance champion of the 1952 Helsinki Games, train in the flesh.
Delhi's track and field fans of that generation will remember the visit of Zatopek, with sobriquets of "Human Locomotive" or the "Czech Express". It was in the 1950s when the cinder track of the National (now Dhyan Chand) Stadium was the centre of athletic activities in the Capital, a much smaller and more compact and manageable place in those days.
Visiting Delhi University for a session with runners there, Zatopek was asked about the secret of his training. "Simple," he said. "I run, and run and run."
"We forget our bodies to the benefit of mechanical leisure. We act continuously with our brain, but we no longer use our bodies, our limbs. It is the Africans who possess this vitality, this muscular youth, this thirst for physical action which we are lacking. We have a magnificent motor at our disposal, but we no longer know how to use it."
I somewhat enjoyed the training debate and informationi. Really enjoyed gypsy's interesting stories about martial art and decathlon.
However, as I'm sure most of the audience here feel the same way except for same old Antonio under a dozen different names supporting each other, I'm getting quite sick of Antonio's childish behavior whether his point of view is right or wrong. I'd like to see the actual training debate continue but much rather omit such disgusting behavior. To eliminate this once and for all, why don't you, gypsy, bullet-point your questions to Antonio, as rekrunner did, and let him answer them? I think it was very civil of rekrunner to clearly state what his questions are and very Antonio-like of Antonio to completely avoid answering any of them. He had previously responded by saying that he had answered them (to gypsy) but you really have to dig it out, out of all the junk he had written pages and pages, and I'd say that won't cut it. He claims he has the answer. There's no reason why he (Antonio) can't simply and clearly (instead of mumbling on and on and on) bullet-point answer them.
I'd say if Antinio can't do that, we would assume he does NOT have any answer and we'll move on, ignoring him and enjoy our debate.
Antonio Cabral wrote:
You ask me about my training.
Let´s try without discuss Lydiard.
Basically my training is nothing but Lydiard influenced.
Lydiard prescribes aerobic first and 100miles as the optimal volume for that period. Well...my training sometimes is less than 100miles really and some other times i did 180miles, because i got the 100miles and i don´t want to stop and take 2 days of rest, i keep running and running. My aerobic runs...well, often i do very fast workouts during that period, but since my target it´s to develop the aerobic system i´m still in Lydiard track.
Lydiard prescribes hill and during one fix phase. Well...i do different kind of hills, and some past seasons i skip the hills totally, however i´m still Lydiard influenced by all the rest of the training that i do. I´m not a Lydiard expert by I guess that Mr. Wetycoast is not right, iI can be consider a typical Lydiard one, the day I will sign for the LF I will be a Lydiardist.
Lydiard prescribes the regular weekly kind of long run. Well...during the winter as well as during every season i miss the long one, but i´m still on Lydiard. Don´t you remember that Lydiard runner that also misses the long one, but what really matters, every interview he says he is Lydiard influenced.
I read that Lydiard denies the interest of interval training during the aerobic block. But what really matters, i´m still Lydiard. Don´t you know that i read that Lydiard "in private" advices interval training to some people. It´s what i do precisely, interval training all the way.
I´m informed by one Lydiard expert that to be Lydiard we just got to respect 4 norms: Aerobic development, Feeling-based, Response regulated, Sequential training pattern, Peaking. As i follow all the 4 items, but well...in different style, but i follow it, then basically my training is Lydiard.
Let me confess another issue of my opinion. Out of the Lydiard training, i got one interesting conclusion. When i think about one rich coach among the thousand that aren´t Lydiard coaches, the best one as my role model ...who else rather than Deek ? Deek of course !
I know...i know, he was been with Lydiard, he is Lydiard influenced but he does the things differently, the same things that Lydiard would disagree eventually, but what really matters, he is the world best non-Lydiard coach, the world biggest success, and he is influenced by Lydiard. Besides my training is very similar to Deek.
ps – I guess did respect your ask. I avoid to discuss Lydiard training on this post as the Lydiardists they do avoid, i just relate my training to the world´s best.
And if this is the best you can do "with respect", you really are an a$$hole, you know that?
"the day by day schedule last 12 weeks (?) - i guess - from Alberto Chaiça that did 2h09m 4th marathon world champs"
From May 1st to August 29th, 2004 in the Olympics in Athens.
I happened to read it (in a thread I no longer can find), got curious and on a whim downsized the schedule to about 50% of the mileage and ran what was probably a once-in-a-lifetime race where I did nothing wrong: 2:49 on a previous PB of 3:06.