Lydiardism or Coe-Martinism???

I agree that Coe was a phenomenal 800m/1500m runner. One of the best of all time.

However if you start to look at what he was like at other distances then he was relatively ordinary.

He never managed to run under 14 minutes for 5k. He had a tough task to manage 3000m in under 8 minutes. When he ran the London Marathon in the 1990's admittedly a few years after he had retired from competitive running, he barely went under 3 hrs !!! In comparison Steve Cram also retired from serious competive running at the same time managed the London Mararthon in around 2 1/2 hours while chatting on a mobile phone.

To me it seems that the training he followed was the ultimate in specialisation for the middle distances, and this may be the strength of the Coe/Martin approach. However for the longer distances, this approach does not to my knowledge have any proven success at world class level.

The big problem that I see with the Coe/Martin approach is that it is looks damn complicated at first sight. The book by Martin is ridiculous to read. By comparison the Lydiard approach as written in his books is so much simpler. I guess that because of this the Lydiard approach is much more "marketable" and hence has become much more popular.

I don't know man.

How can you do fast sprint training on unprepared legs? Would you not want to have developed some ability to run fast first before running fast as part of training consistantly?

The aerobic system development would be nesessary to run fast. So to just start by running fast, would be limited to where you are at. Should that not be developed first.

Kids running limitless miles in Kenya doesn't crippple them, why is it an issue here?

Nobby, do you think you could direct me to a place with a copy of your interview with Snell? I'm really interested in learning more about Lydiard and his training, and a source like that would be invaluable. So far, the only source I have on Lydiard's methods is a lecture from his US speaking tour before he died that I beleive you typed up and several websites now host (I got it from pinebeltpacers.com).

If the interview isn't available online anyway, would you be willing to email me a copy?

Thanks, and please, let's keep the discussion going. Very interesting!

Craig:

I'd be more than happy to send you a copy. E-mail me separately.

I actually tried to stay away especially NOT to let Skuj know that I'm reading the thread, but not responding... But I guess I failed (as did HRE). Oh, well...

There's a lot of false information here, including the part about Coe just concentrating on 400-type training until much later in life. One of the main components of multi-tier training is balance. You never get far away from speed, but you don't ignore other aspects of performance either. From "Better Training For Distance Runners," p. 223:

HHH wrote:

Now, which would you rather have: An Olympic Gold Medal or a world record...

World record.

This was not me. I was Asceticist when I started this post. I have been Skuj ever since.

Asceticist wrote:

wannabekila wrote:

Sorry if i'm repeating but ...

The pudding:

Coe - One success as a coach

Lydiard - Many, many.

You know nothing! Even if Coe did coach only one runner, he'd still have the most world records. Take your pudding and go home. Don't come back until you know your facts.

speed kills:

sorry about the mistakes. I don't have Better Training For Distance Runners, I'm just going off of what I remember from the perfect distance and winning running, neither of which i have with me.

Nobby wrote:

Unite 5:

I conducted that interview. I know exactly what I asked; I know exactly what Arthur answered and what he meant.

Nowhere in your reference did Lydiard "mocked" American doing intervals too hard although he probably would have agreed. In regards to rest period; what Alistair McMarran who went to Morroco to study their training refered to is actually "taking longer recovery" is a good thing which, in Lydiard's opinion, Americans don't do. If I remember correctly, what Peter Snell in that particular interview you're referring to was saying is exactly that; he was in fact criticising Americans cutting down recovery which in his opinion is not a good thing.

Nobby perhaps Unite 5 is referring to the final race sharpening phase where running repeats with lots of rest is not a very effective way to train to race. If I am not mistaken, Lydiard had his runners take long recovery periods during the 4-5 week track phase, where the runner would be developing their anaerobic capacity. This is contrary to the following weeks where Lydiard would have his athletes do time trials. Didn't he use time trials to train his runners to be able to cover the entire distance without rest? I believe I am correct in suggesting that Lydiard criticized Americans for continuing to do intervals with long recoveries, when they should be doing more time trials and races during the race sharpening phase.

I believe his training protocol was the following:

Start with a scheduled time trial or race at race distance and at a pace slightly slower than goal pace to ensure that the athlete does not overdo it. If he found the athlete was struggling early on with the pace but was able to continue he would schedule under distance time trial or races the following weeks. If the athlete found the pace easy early on he would schedule over distance time trials or races the following weeks.

I believe I am correct that this was his method.

4-5 mile tempo runs have become very popular now a days and these may supplement the training so that specific time trials and races are not necessarily a requirement. I believe these tempo runs are fine for races of 4 miles and up, but it is my opinion that middle distance runners as well as 5k runners would benefit by doing some of their tempo runs at the race distance and at a pace much closer to race pace than typical tempo or threshold pace.

Okay, I’m a sucker; I’m getting myself sucked into the discussion…but that’s fine. Just don’t let Skuj take credit for this! (hahaha…)

Balance:

That’s very good. I think you almost got it. As your name suggests; Lydiardism is all about “balance”. I don’t mean to say that he’s got it all; but pretty darn close. His training is not all about 100 miles a week; it’s not all about hill training; it’s not all about sharpening of 50/50; it’s not all about repetitions with short/long recovery; it’s not all about time trials either. It’s a blend of all those in a balanced way so you can peak on the day. There is a time to go long; there’s a time to go short. There’s a time to go fast; there’s a time to go slow. Question is WHEN and HOW; as well as WHY.

So within the scheme of the Lydiard program; there is a time to go fast over repetitions with long recoveries; there’s a time to go VERY fast with very little recovery; there’s a time to go time trial where there’s NO recovery. He criticized Americans for doing lots of repetitions without practicing on the actual racing condition which is more or less like time trials; but that does NOT mean he was against repetitions. He criticized Americans to cut down their recoveries for repetitions (for anaerobic development) but he also advocated time trials with NO recoveries as well as sharpeners with incomplete recovery. They are all important; but they would have to be done at the right time.

When he talked about time trials during conditioning; that’s more or less like tempo runs and, yes, even middle distance people benefit from workout like that—even up to 10 miles. But when he talked about time trials during track training phase, it’s more exacting and specific; as you suggested, for middle distance people, it would have to be much more close to the actual racing distance and racing speed.

Lastly, I think you’ve got it but just didn’t put it down right; if the athlete feels the early pace easy, there’s nothing wrong with it but if he/she starts to die in the end; then you need to give him/her over-distance time trial, or tempo run, to work on his/her stamina. Close and specific analysis of lap times should be taken during this time to determine what the athlete needs to further develop, in other words, lacks. It really is case-by-case. Lydiard gave two main situations; I classified it in three. There may even be more than that.

Sorry Nobby,

You are right; I didn't finish what I was saying. Guess I didn't proof read enough.

Thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say.

Skuj wrote:

This was not me. I was Asceticist when I started this post. I have been Skuj ever since.

Asceticist wrote:

You know nothing! Even if Coe did coach only one runner, he'd still have the most world records. Take your pudding and go home. Don't come back until you know your facts.

That's not me!

Oh boy. Someone else is being Skuj...and they registered my name....I am the real Skuj....and from now on, my name will change and change with every post. I'll not be Skuj again. Cheers.

Proof that I am Skuj: the queen says no to pot smoking FBI agents.

E, tell them!

Some Troll is cruising these boards as "Skuj", which is the name I used to use. "Skuj" has now been registered, so that the Troll can make me look bad. Anything posted by "Skuj" after 24 Feb 2006 at around noon as is not by me.

I have learned the hard way that:

a) There are Super Trolls at letsrun, and everywhere really,

and

b) I should have registered a long time ago, in order to protect myself from this abuse.

I shall return eventually, with a registered name.

It is very important for me to post this.

Thank you for reading, and understanding.

Darren Skuja

Courtenay, British Columbia.

nobby wrote "That’s very good. I think you almost got it. As your name suggests; Lydiardism is all about “balance”. I don’t mean to say that he’s got it all; but pretty darn close. His training is not all about 100 miles a week; it’s not all about hill training; it’s not all about sharpening of 50/50; it’s not all about repetitions with short/long recovery; it’s not all about time trials either. It’s a blend of all those in a balanced way so you can peak on the day. There is a time to go long; there’s a time to go short. There’s a time to go fast; there’s a time to go slow. Question is WHEN and HOW; as well as WHY."

yep. this thread is about exactly that. so why is months of base better than months of multipace? why does lydiard believe that tempos and long intervals and short intervals early in a macrocyle are a bad thing, at the expense of aerobic development? why would his classic 100mpw be better endurance development than, say, 80mpw multipacing in a week? how could he prove that his ideas were better? i know some have said "look at the results of lydiard vs coe". please name the top 5 lydiard athletes vs the top 5 coe-martin-horwill athletes, someone. personally, i don't know. i'm wondering.

I think that one item that is easily overlooked is the unique terrain found in NZ, where Arthur's stars emerged from. From what I understand, hills are abundant and are cropped closely by the sheep which outnumber humans down there. Similar terrain seems to be the norm in the highlands of morrocco, kenya and ethiopia. The functional result of high-mileage hilly running over natural terrain is tremendous strengthening of the legs and both the aerobic AND anaerobic systems (remember Shorter's "hills are speedwork in disguise"). The Coe system might systematize better in areas where multi-pace work (which includes hill repeats) can substitute for deficiencies in flatter terrain throughout the base taining phase. Just a thought, but perhaps an important one.

I Cannot Be Skuj Anymore wrote:

Oh boy. Someone else is being Skuj...and they registered my name....I am the real Skuj....and from now on, my name will change and change with every post. I'll not be Skuj again. Cheers.

Proof that I am Skuj: the queen says no to pot smoking FBI agents.

E, tell them!

You're not skuj.

You are correct that terrain makes a difference. This fact is often associated with the successes of Kenyan and other east Aftrican runners who do long runs in the mountains of their homeland. What sounds to the layman like a long aerobic run actually has a large anaerobic component. Perhaps the Coe & Martin sytem is not so different from Lydiard after all?