Lydiard base - aerobic pace

Mr. Ray wrote:

Encouraged to continue, I have to let this out.

I've given this question some thought, and the "obsession" goes far beyond mere success.

A poor cobbler with no degree, who played rugby, with no aspirations for running, let alone training others, managed to flip the running world upside down (down under?) by turning a handful of club runners into Olympic champions. What a story!

Love him or hate him, Arthur was undeniably an interesting character, in a stubborn, ornery, no-nonsense, yet loyal and generous kind of way. Arthur discarded the mainstream methods of the time, and against all odds, was rewarded with success at the highest level, forever changing the way the world trained.

Who in Kenya, Ethiopia, and Morocco can match that? Who else since 1960 is remotely as interesting? Surely others have been more successful since, but ho-hum, wake me up when you're finished.

Mr Ray, now living in NZ and speaking to coaches here i find Lydiard is not really that respected in the main and also find not many coaches are really following his methods. All i feel like saying is - when you have matched his results then amend his methods. Until then copy as best you can.

I think the most significant part of your post is "she is so happy." What is the point of performing well in a sport if you hate what you have to do to perform well?

The real revelation for me when I started using Lydiard's approach was that I kind of enjoyed it and certainly enjoyed it more than the things I'd done before. If I'd only gotten the same sorts of results as I'd gotten before it would have been a worthwhile experience because it was a more pleasant experience.

I think that's one of the main reasons that Arthur and those of us who mimic him always tell people who would rather train some other way that they should train some other way.

After buying an original copy of Run to the Top and No Bugles, no Drums I finally understood Lydiard's method and applied it to my own running. With it, you can peak multiple times during the season with terrific results. I used a heart rate monitor frequently but decided to ditch it and just run by feel. Many individuals misinterpret Arthur by thinking to run slow. You can run quite fast actually and still be at Aerobic levels. A variety of pace and consistency is what makes the base phase work. One can even throw quick sprints in the base phase for neuromusclar work as long as the recovery is long enough to ensure lactic acid is not accumulated. Many people get into a pattern of running slow and thinking they are doing good base building, but base building is about steady runs for good distances. That makes you strong to handle hard fartlek runs/intervals. It also makes you strong enough to handle a long peaking phase to race well 3-4 times in a close time period.

9/10

Lactate (not lactic acid) accumulation is not really something to worry about, it is inevitable during hilly runs or hill sessions, this won't have any ill effects on endurance building.

The long peaking phase described in Running to the top (was it 12-14 weeks) is an example of how you can get more from your racing by not worrying about your training, and just keeping things ticking over between races.

at work now and asked for a new Lydiard anecdote. Dave Norris relayed this story from the Perth 1962 Empire Games:

he was walking along at night through the village and passed Murray Halberg coming out of Arthur's hut (Arthur was a team coach) with a glazed look in his eyes. As he noticed Dave he just turned and said 'how is it possible for one man to inspire people so much?' before he drifted off into the night. Dave remembers it pretty clearly.

I wrote a "pile" of stuff yesterday and it disappeared into cyber space !!!

Seeing flow has talked inspiration I have resurected a post I put on the Lydiard V Daniels thread.

Just thought I would add a piece as I have been asked at times how did I come to know Arthur.

I was the first Physical Educator who asked him to do a Seminar (For my Grad School Class) (1978 !!!!!!!)

Simple as that , and I got on with him very well ever since.

That Seminar (in retrospect) was amazing as I just thought I would give Arthur a call as I had no idea what I would present to my classmates and for some reason (cannot recall what) I decided that Arthur would be a good person to do the Seminar with/for me.

I was really nervous about asking him but he could not have been more obliging.

The Seminar was not advertised, just 21 PE Grads and a Tutor.

Arthur took the floor and within 15 minutes the room began to fill as the word crept out that Arthur was in the building. Figures quoted to me later said there was anything from 50 to 70 people in the room by the time he finished. I did not notice as I hung on every word.

The seminar was supposed to be 40 mins to an hour. 90 mins later Arthur finally came to a halt to a roaring applause.

Everyone just wanted to go out and Run.

However, what really got to me was Arthur then THANKED ME for allowing him to come and speak. He said I was the first Physical Educator in New Zealand that had asked hime to present his ideas.

I know my class mates had never heard or seen him previously. I had attended a clinic he had given about 6 years before.

Prior to that Seminar the Physical Education Faternity in this country did not want any part of him. He told me that himself. Petty bloody Jealousy !!!

I don't doubt that there was a jealousy aspect to

the general lack of respect Arthur received from

many of the "powers that be" in NZ at that time.

I believe it was referred to in the Garth Gilmour

biography of Arthur. I cannot recall the expression,

but it is similar to the "tall poppy syndrome".

Arthur became enormously more famous than all the other

coaches, athletic straphangers etc. in NZ that many

delighted in cutting him down to size.

One other thing I noted about Arthur is that he was no

shrinking violet and did not concern himself with

playing politics as so many others do.

Arthur rightly embarassed some of the NZ straphanger

hacks associated with athletics and they never forgave

him.

HRE wrote:

If you had two friends, one of whom was a 13:30 five km guy and the other a 17:00 five km guy and all of you were comfortable at roughly the same pace, you could all do your distance runs together.

You have to be kidding, Rich!

If they were comfortable at the same pace, they could run together. I didn't say they would be comfortable at the same pace.

Remember that Lydiard was a 2:38 marathon runner at best, a decade or so past his best, and running with sub 4:00 milers and sub 2:20 marathoners in the late 50s and early 60s.

Maybe it was the way that Rich worded that first statement. But I see where he is coming from.

On other threads (and here) I talked about running Waiatarua from Baillie's house.

When I did those most if not all of the group doing them were far better athletes than I was.

I recall doing the run one time with the group where there was 3 guys who had all done around 13:45 for 5k. My best at the time would have been around 16 mins. At no time did they "drop me" as we continued the run. In fact they commented on how strong I was going up the hill.

The pace was always "achieveable" and if you did drop off usually someone dropped with you.

The deal was as much "social" as Training.

About 6 years later another guy who was part of the group wanted to qualify to run a Commonwealth Games so I became the training Hack. We ran 20 weeks in a row of 20 milers in Auckland's Cornwall Park. Some days I was able to push him.

He went to the Games that year and finished 5th in the steeple behind 3 Kenyans and the late Euan Robertson.

The catch is of course I did not do all the training these guys did. I was not in their class. But I did all the long runs.

Asbestos is not good