Lydiard style mileage asscention (sp?)

The guy have prtty much answered your question about the 5 days.

I just had a thought that in amongst the ideas that HRE gave you, you could do a few "Daisy" runs. That is where you just head out the door and just run,take time to look at the Daisies as you do so. You will be on track in no time at all.

Kim:

Yes, yet... I sort of always come back to what Arthur originally (may not be all the time but once in a while) did. Remember in "No Bugles, No Drums" when Peter had a stress fructure or got sick or something and had to take a month off or something? After he got an OK from the doctor, Arthur took him out for a hard 15-miler and I believe Peter said something like "It nearly killed me but it knocked me in shape..." Ray Puckett used to use that phrase a lot; "knock you in shape." Again, depending on the background of your training, and for J-run, it sounds like he certainly has a decent background; I may even prescribe him to go out and "knock himself back in shape". I know; this is probably not a textbook suggestion. John Davies used to tell me that he was much more easy on his athletes and so am I. But, he also said, "That's why we are not Arthur Lydiard." I would go conservative particularly if you can't see the guy. But, if you know enough about the guy (or yourself), go for it. It may work better. I know I have done it once in a while--when I got out of shape (and fat!) but when I tried to get back in shape, I just subjected myself to do a hard run or three 2-hour runs in a row or something like that to knock myself back in shape. Once you've developed that, and I thought here or some other thread, HRE mentioned that too, you can always draw some reserve from the well of your aerobic condition.

Okay, it was a bit different story; Peter had almost 3 months off due to stress fracture but it seems like he was able to do some runs (10 miles at 8-minute pace plus some speed training everyday) for a while before Arthur took him out for a 17-mile run.

I think, in a way, the more we know about "science", the more conservative we become. We are concerned with "over-training" and we try to figure out what's the minimum amount of training we can do in order to improve. That's exactly what Dr. Dave Martin said at the launch of the Lydiard Foundation. Peter was up next and he said what he and his gang (Arthur's Boys) did was to find out what the maximum they could do while still improving. Arthur was definitely a hardy man (as you know well, Kim). If you did a 3-mile time trial and didn't perform as well as he'd expected you to; he would drag you out again in the evening on the same day and would have you do another time trial! When Magee was feeling down, Arthur had him run Waiatarua 3 days in a row. In the same situation, Jeff Jullian did 7 days in a row! That's how they "knock themselves in shape." We don't do that. We tend to be more conservative. But I wouldn't necessarily call that a better approach... What do YOU think?

In those days we thought that doing those sorts of things made you "tough." I think toughness was the running virtue in those years. Now "scientific principles" seem to be today's running virtue. I'm not sure which is better. I know the tough thing was sometimes overdone to people's detriment. But as you say, we're so conservative now and I think that often is detrimental too.

"Arthur was definitely a hardy man (as you know well, Kim). If you did a 3-mile time trial and didn't perform as well as he'd expected you to; he would drag you out again in the evening on the same day and would have you do another time trial! When Magee was feeling down, Arthur had him run Waiatarua 3 days in a row. In the same situation, Jeff Jullian did 7 days in a row! That's how they "knock themselves in shape."

Wow!! I didn't know that side of Lydiard. Most of the babies I coach would quit.

I own Lydiard's 1978 book "Running The Lydiard Way" - Autographed by Lydiard himself in 1984. Anyway, It has a bunch of schedules for specific age groups, sexes, and events. I go by the Marathon training schedule, which includes (just as every other one) the beginning phase.

It goes like this:

____________________________________

For as long as possible:

Monday Long aerobic running, 1/2 to 3/4 hour

Tuesday Long aerobic running, 1 hour

Wednesday Repeat Monday's session

Thursday Repeat Tuesday's session

Friday Repeat Monday's session

Saturday Long aerobic running, 1 to 2 hours

Sunday Long aerobic running, 3/4 to 1 hour

_____________________________________

Now keep in mind that this is specifically for the Marathon, for beginners. All of the schedules include the "For as long as possible" part. Now if you guys would like, I could try and scan some of these schedules and post them up.

The range is huge. The schedules go from "100 and 200 Meters (Boys and Girls)" and ends in the "Marathon - Experienced Runners", also covering Cross Country.

____________________________

I do have one question for whoever can answer it. After tapering, peaking, and racing, can someone take time off and not hinder the long term training?

Also, I know you said to just start the build up phase, what is the appropriate number of miles to jump into? Does one start back up from zero and a higher increasing rate, or can you start at say 40 (when you peaked last time at 70)?

This thread is amazing, and really appreciate everyone putting time into it.

Trying Lydiard wrote:

Nobby, Thank you I appreciate you reply.

Not to sound to dim witted 1/4 60 - 70% ?

1/2 70 - 80 %

3/4 80 - 85%

I have been out for a long time and thought I would try a heart rate monitor to help me re-learn the sensory feedback for the different efforts as I build up.

I always read "3/4 effort" to mean maximum aerobic effort, or just under LT (or whatever people are calling it these days). The triathletes and cyclists who use HR monitors religiously base their aerobic efforts off HR at LT, and lower efforts are percentages of that. If you're not in shape, your LT could be as low as 83% or so. For most well-conditioned runners it's in the high 80s, and I'd guess people like Arthur's Boys could have been as high as 90%. I've seen a 5-time TdF champ's numbers listed as 97%, but he probably had EPO up to his eyeballs.

The point is, if you're going to use a HR monitor, play around with the numbers. If you're really honest with yourself you can get a pretty good estimate of HR at LT without having some expensive test done. Personally, my 1/4 effort is 65%-75%, 1/2 effort is 75%-80%, and 3/4 effort is 80%-85%. But during next winter's base training, I may have to change the numbers if I'm in significantly better shape.

HRE:

Actually, I don't think it was so much of "no pain, no gain" type toughening either. You know that Arthur would be the first to go against "no pain, no gain" training. He knew that, without any physiological back-up, a hard distance work would "knock you in shape". That's the type of workout that really draws stamina out and develop oxygen uptake level; not just simple "jogging". I pamper my girl; I go REALLY easy on her. But even then, we have had a run that she broke down in tears in the final kilometer (of this 2:30 run) or last week we did 1200m repeats and she told me the next day that she still feels adrenalin rush and her legs shaking. There's time to go easy; there's time to go tough. There's time to go fast; there's time to go slow. It's all in a good balance.

Yes, Arthur definitely had that side of him. With him, there's NO compromise. It's either you shape up, or ship out. You make a man out of a boy.

...and Arthur would tell you that it's coach's job to motivate athletes. He would say the best way to motivate athletes is to explain WHY they are doing those workouts. If they understand WHY they need to do those workouts and what benefit they gain from them, they would be better motivated. Also, as a coach, you'd need to know when to use a whip and when to use a candy. Also who to stir up some competitiveness and who to "pamper". He was definitely a master of that. We intend to cover that in the Part III powerpoint presentation...

also Arthur said coaches shouldn't waste time on slakers. He said they aren't worth your time.Thhe kids I have are slakers. They agree with the training, just not interested in running everyday.

Nobby wrote:

...and Arthur would tell you that it's coach's job to motivate athletes. He would say the best way to motivate athletes is to explain WHY they are doing those workouts. If they understand WHY they need to do those workouts and what benefit they gain from them, they would be better motivated. Also, as a coach, you'd need to know when to use a whip and when to use a candy. Also who to stir up some competitiveness and who to "pamper". He was definitely a master of that. We intend to cover that in the Part III powerpoint presentation...

Actually, to put it in a correct term; he would have NOT wasted his time on people who are NOT sincere.

I think Peter (Snell) would admit that he was a slacker. Arthur arranged things to make sure Peter would get out and run.

It's easy for me to say "You need to motiate them." It takes tremendous patience and discipline on coach's part. Some of my favorite coaches' stories are: how Arthur was running with Ray Puckett, 3 Waiataruas in a row and, on the third day, Ray complained how his legs were "raw". "So are mine," said Arthur and pressed on. Ray said that was the last time he complained. The late Nakamura (I guess I sort of avoid calling Arthur "the late Lydiard" may be my denial???) was a mess physically; he had high blood pressure, was diabetic, had irregular heart beat and removed 2/3 of his stomach from cancer. But he was always standing outside, watching his runners; rain or shine. Seko used to say that he felt compeling responsibility to train hard when this old man with so many problems standing (not sitting or driving a car) in the rain without an umbrella. I heard a story that he yelled at a manager who offered him an umbrella. "My runners are running in the rain, soaking wet," he said.

I guess I'm naive; but if the coach is sincere, that sincerity will be recognized eventually and be responded. You can't force it; you can't outwardly tell them either. It has to be recognized and it has to come from the athletes as well.

I don't know what age group you're dealing with but, particularly if they are quite young, I don't think it's quite necessary that they run everyday. I would somehow try to make sure they do SOMETHING. By pushing them too fast too much, they would sure to lose interest. You'll need to keep a thread of interest. It doesn't have to be a rope; just a string would do. Once it's cut, that's it. The trick is not to cut it; maintain it. And all along, make sure they do the point workouts. I wouldn't care too much of what they do in between as long as they are doing something. The desire to train everyday would have to come from them.

Nobby, Glad you "added to" the "knock yourself into shape" statement. In this country that has all sorts of conitations.

Usually the "No pain, No Gain" syndrome.

Ray Puckett was an amazingly "tough" athlete who could "hammer' himself into the ground anytime. I believe that was his strength as well as his weakness.

I feel in many cases when Arthur wanted to "knock an athlete into shape" it was that they had been 'slack' in training and they needed to get miles under their belt and get consistency back into their system.ie Train everyday, not 3 or 4 days a week. If you were not prepared to "Train" ie Commit yourself to the task then you would be told to "take a hike".

Another example of "Knocking oneself into shape" was 'pushing the limits' occasionally. For myself it was to get to 2 hours plus on my Sunday runs.

I can vividly remember my first 2 hour plus run. I was "shattered" and slept most of the afternoon.

One week later, although tired, I was no where near as tired as the week before. I had "knocked myself" into shape.

I have also mentioned on another thread where once I was doing a 1200m time trial with Bill Baillie. It was a disaster, both of us were 'tired' and it was not going to plan. So we bagged it and headed out for a 1 hr run. No it was not 'fast" just comfortable.

One week later we ran anothetr time trial and it went beautifully.

This could be intrepreted all sorts of ways. But I hope you can see what am getting at.

Nobby, Do you still want that copy of Run to the Top. I have some guys who are chasing me along for one !

Thanks : Kim

Not Garth: (neither am I...)

I don't think anybody answered your questin so I'll have a go...

It's probably a good idea to take a week or two of easy recovery type break after a long period of hard training and then racing (I'm assuming...). As long as you're doing something (swimming, playing tennis, basketball... Or easy jogging for 30~60 minutes daily), you won't lose much. In fact, it's probably a good idea to rejuvenate yourself, mentally as well as physically, by taking a break. Again, it all depends on what you've been doing and what sort of racing schedule you've had.

Where do you start after the break? Again, it all depends. Some people may not lose much at all and, depending on the task ahead, go straight into where they've left out. Some, depending on how much break they've had, may need to start out by, like Snell did, easy 30' jog in AM and an hour jog in PM for a few weeks and see how quickly you bounce back. It may take only a few weeks; it may take a few months... Naturally, you most likely don't have to start from the scratch of going-out-for-10-minutes-and-turn-around-and-come-back-in-10-minutes routine; but if you completely gotten out of shape, you may have to? You may have gained 20 pounds and might need to start out easily. Bu then again, if you're Henry Rono, you might be able to jump right back to doing 20X400!

My question to you would be: what event are you training or? Are you training for the marathon? Are you saying you're just doing the marathon training (for beginner) for no particular reason? When Arthur put down "For as long as possible", that does not necessarily mean you stay there for 3 years (you certanly can, if you want...). You need to lay down your plan and put all the other elements down and, for whatever the time left ("for as long as possible") should be dedicated to this type of conditioning. Hopefully you have 6 to 10 weeks. If you can afford to, do a bit longer. But if it goes beyond 6 months, which is double of what Arthur originally had in mind, you need to seriously re-think the purpose of training. Otherwise you might as well become a mileage bum. It's comfortable to stay at this phase. If your goal is to get fit and finish a marathon in 4-hours, this is perfectly fine. But I think way too many people today shy away from "moving on" to the peak performance. They stay at this comfort zone, claiming "Lydiard said for as long as possible...(20 years?)" That's not what he meant.

Schedule is available at our website or fitnesssports.com website (Arthur Lydiard Athletic Training). But bear in mind, schedule is NOTHING but a GUIDE.

What Nobby has mentioned here could be called "quietly knocking oneself into shape"

i think that all three of us are talking about the same thing. When does tough become stupid? When does intelligent become lazy or gutless?

I know in "Self Made Olympian" Ron Daws talks about Arthur's "train don't strain" advice and asks what that means in real life application. He says that it's probably easier to figure that out through hindsight. "When Frank Shorter spread eagled the Olympic Marathon field it was training. When Derek Clayton ran himself into multiple surgeries it was straining."

Nobby wrote:I guess I'm naive; but if the coach is sincere, that sincerity will be recognized eventually and be responded. You can't force it; you can't outwardly tell them either. It has to be recognized and it has to come from the athletes as well.

I could tell dozens of similar stories about my high school coach, but this one sums it up: One year his wife suddenly & unexpectedly died in the middle of the season. When he came home from the hospital, half his team was waiting on his front porch. That's the kind of loyalty we have for him.

For many of us, he was the first adult male who believed we could do something great, and we'd run through a brick wall to keep from letting him down. If you take a sincere and full interest in the well-being of others, they will respond in kind. You don't have to be super-charismatic.

HRE wrote:

i think that all three of us are talking about the same thing. When does tough become stupid? When does intelligent become lazy or gutless?

I know in "Self Made Olympian" Ron Daws talks about Arthur's "train don't strain" advice and asks what that means in real life application. He says that it's probably easier to figure that out through hindsight. "When Frank Shorter spread eagled the Olympic Marathon field it was training. When Derek Clayton ran himself into multiple surgeries it was straining."

If you've got a blue-collar job it's probably easier to figure out--if your job is in jeopardy because you're too tired to do it well, you know you're doing too much. White-collar workers have a more difficult time figuring it out.

For me, it's very simple. If I go to sleep as soon as the wife turns off the light, I'm training too hard. No race results are worth that kind of life.

HRE, Nobby, or any one else:

Thanks again for all of the help. I started doing two days a week of hills (along with my hilly daily courses) about 4 weeks ago but as I mentioned before I had a 1 week set back where I just ran some easy loops at a slower than normal pace. My question is now that I am moving into a new phase before racing what kind of workouts and things should I be more focused on? I really took your advice to heart about not paying attention to my weekly mileage number anymore and pay more attention to the kind of runs I am doing each day. I am planning on racing a 5K road race this Saturday. My main focus will be a race on the track at the end of April and then I am looking to hammer track races up until the second week in June in hopes of hitting the US Championships time of 13:52. I would like to run well this Saturday but obviously am aware that I have not worked a whole lot on speed. This Saturday's weather forecast at race time is 25 degrees and snow flurries. I did 14 miles today and felt comfortable running 6:20 avg.. Should I keep doing hills and maybe throw in a workout this week?

Thanks