LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

I know you might not all agree with this but here it goes:

When you're training a group of runners, don't you think that you'd be better off using something along the lines of the training intensities from Daniels' book rather than running by "feel" for your workouts? I mean, we can go on and on about how we should run by "feel" but in a group setting is this ideal? You have a group of similar abilty runners and tell them to do a threshold run... 9 times out of 10 it's going to be too fast. A lot of times you're daily aerobic runs end up as threshold runs when you're running in groups. It's easy when you are running alone -I know exactly how a threshold feels, but when you're with a group it's always different. That's why I think it's wise and useful to have something like Daniels' VDOTs to BASE your training intensities from. Obviously you're going to vary from day to day depending on a lot of factors, but with a group I think running by "feel" is a lost cause.

It's a good point. Arthur was very careful about who trained with whom when he was coaching the original group. The idea was to have people training with others whose fitness and temperments were compatable.

They'd all do the Sunday runs together and would just sort out how that worked.

Mark (Hotlanta) --

Yes, do feel free to tell us more about your training. I noticed that we're about the same age (I'm 42), and we both have run the Portland Marathon (I did it '04, you in '05) -- and you ran it a LOT faster than I did. There are clearly some talent issues here (. . . whatever talent is, but I've heard about it second hand), but I'd be curious to hear how you approach this.

Nobby wrote:

my wife

I am surprised. In another thread you said this:

How do you get the pornographic split screen thingy going?

A joke, perhaps? Not trying to derail the thread, but wondering how the above two are reconciled considering you seem a pretty good fellow.

I don't think I could have spelled such a sophisticated word correctly... Also that sounds like a computer-related term. I would stay away from that! Perhaps someone used my name and posted some comments on behalf of me. With these threads, I would not be surprised anything could happen...

Besides, I'd better be extra-nice to my wife; otherwise she'll take my Green Card away from me?

Thanks for trying to clarify publicly though.

Someone just pointed out that there IS "another" Nobby! Too bad he doesn't seem to disclose his e-mail address so I could have gotten to know him... But he sounds way too sophisticated and politicala for me.

By the way, Nobby is a British name that I picked up when I went to Australia. They have, well, "Nobby's Nuts" down there; it's salted beernuts (I can see Skuj getting the biggest kick out of this...). I once found "Nobby Clarke" at the end-title of that freakishly long movie, "REDS". That how I used to study English; to get used to read the end-title.

So here's the END of my story that's got NOTHING to do with Lydiard or Daniels.

You crazy guys...I warned ya!

Ok, here is some info I just sent Mr. Salkowski regarding my most recent build-up, which was actually several months ago now:

My 10-week conditioning went like this in terms of weekly mileage: 68, 76, 84, 84,101, 105, 115, 110, 123, 112.

The Sunday long runs varied from 16 to 24 mi. I try to get 2 other pretty long runs during the week, but half the time, I can only get in one other run of 15+ mi. The road courses are all quite hilly.

Here is the best, or at least biggest (123) week:

Mon: AM: 8 mi on trail , then fly home from St. Louis.

PM: 8 mi + striders - road

Tues: AM: 6 mi - road

PM: 8 mi - road

Weds: AM: 7 mi - road

PM: 18 mi + striders - road

Thur: AM: 8 mi - road

PM: 8 mi - road

Fri: AM: 8 mi + 10 min hill springing - road

PM: 16 mi - road

Sat: AM: 12 mi on rugged trail

Sun: AM: 16 mi - road (I try to hit 20 - 24 mi on Sundays, but I started crashing a bit here, so called it a day. Might have been a tad depleted! I try to avoid running when totally out of gas, because I think it is a

shortcut to injury and otherwise, counterproductive).

I think Arthur would have liked to see a bigger difference between the AM run and PM run on some of those days. He liked the bulk of running to be in one of the runs, right? I just do the best I can. Most of my morning runs were

with the high school boys I coach and I put a high priority on their conditioning. Those were generally a little slower than the PM runs. The Saturday 12 miler is their long run for the week. As I recall, and my notes indicate that I felt just great for most of that week.

My body seems to thrive on high mileage. It sure takes up a lot of time, though, and asks a lot of my very-supportive family. I'm sure many people get great conditioning on one run per day. This 2-a-day business just works out better for my life, with the coaching and all. I start adding the striders about halfway through the 10 weeks. I add more and more hill exercises as I get near the end of the phase - up to 15 or 20 minutes. Arthur advised me to do this, so that it would not be as big a shock when starting the hill phase.

I am always very open to suggestions, so feel free, gents.

I'll post my hill phase soon...

Forgive my ignorance, or oversight, but what recent race results have you scored, Hotlanta Master?

Cheers

Skuj

Coldcourtenaymaster

(Yes Nobby, that story was funny!:)

That looks similar to what I was doing with B Baillie back in the late 60's. Except I only ran one long one a week back then (I was not 'strong' enough to handle 2).

I don't think it matters as to the "when" (am or pm) you have to find what suits you and you obviously have done that.

Arthur said that if the bulk of the work could be done in one run that was preferable but he understood that everyone has differing priorities and if the training could be done in 2 runs then that was fine.

I had a buddy who ran a 2:14 marathon on 2 runs a day (7miles am/7miles to 12 miles pm) and one long run (24miles)on the weekend. That suited work and family commitments.

I find it interesting you having a long run on Wednesday.

I mentioned a similar situation a few posts ago.

After the legends race it was a pity you could not have come down here to Jack Foster country and run "Direct" and "Hill" Roads in our forest.

Two of Jack's favourites !!

Cheers

All this attention is getting embarrassing...can we talk about someone else now? Thanks for the input, Kim. Usually Sunday is my longest run, but I was pretty knackered that particular Sunday.

Skuj: Trust me, you are guilty of no oversight. I'm just a regular guy, no special talent, who likes to run a lot. I'm really only competitive in the masters world, but I have a lot of fun. At this point in my life, PRs are tough to come by. I feel that I am still learning, though, and that my current training informs my coaching in many ways.

Recent bests: 5k - 15:38, 10k - 33:01, 10 mile - 54:38, Marathon: 2:34:43.

I consider the Legend race my best run of late - 2:10:22 over the brutal 22 mile Waiatarua course in NZ and I think that resulted from the conditioning described above plus a lot of hill training.

B****in!

I'm 43, getting back into a groove after injury, and waaaaaay slower than you! :)

Have you been a runner for a long time?

Cheers

Skuj

Yeah, been a runner for most of my life, but 12 years ago at age 29, I decided to actually work hard and see what I could do. I've experimented, read books, sought coaching and basically tried to learn. I wish I had met Arthur a lot sooner!

Nobby wrote:

Besides, I'd better be extra-nice to my wife; otherwise she'll take my Green Card away from me?

Thanks for trying to clarify publicly though.

Well, I appreciate reading what you wrote. I don't mean any offense. Is your last name Nomates or Hashizume?

No worries. Hashizume (guzoontie...or however you spell it!). I don't know who "the other Nobby" is but I have a 13-year-old daughter and HIS comment at other thread was offensive to me.

But since i said the previous post was my LAST one that's got nothing to do with Lydiard or Daniels, I'd like to add something else. At Skuj's thread (http://pacificathletics.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5398#5398), a guy by the name of RonB posted a great comment and I'd like to copy his post(s):

"...please note in the annals of our sport, that many of the top 800/1500 runners in the World (Ovett, Cram, Walker - to name a quick few) were well known to run much further than 70 mpw, more like 100 mpw, or more, during their buildup phase. And these were guys who could run sub 1:45, or sub 1:44, for the 800 m., without natural blazing speed, but with a huge endurance base. Therefore, if this worked for people trying to race at distances lasting

from 1 minute and 40 seconds, to 3 minutes and 30 seconds, what does this tell us about people trying race for 13 minutes, or 27 minutes or 2 hours and 10 minutes....or 15 minutes or 31 minutes or 2 hours and 30 minutes, if you're a female. (not you Skuj....I'm quite sure you're not)

Just to reinforce what I said earlier, 70 mpw is far less than optimal for virtually anyone trying to run their fastest possible time at any distance over 800 metres, IF they have the time and the energy and the will to support more running.

...I take issue, in a friendly debate, with your statement about training somewhat like a Marathoner during buildup.

How about......developing a good aerobic base during the buildup period is important for all distance runners, particularly those whose main event is between 1500 metres and the Marathon. This statement recognizes that there are a few fast (over 400 metres, for instance) runners who can gradually add enough speed-endurance and endurance to run successfully at 800 metres, and more rarely, at 1500 metres. But for most of the population, the aerobic base development is absolutely crucial for success in events 800 metres and longer."

It is as if he took these words out from Arthur's mouth.

....but nobby Arthur called it marathon conditioning. (I follow both threads). Didn't 800m guys and marathon guys train like marathoners together for months? I actually dont understand ron comments about that. why take issue.

I think it's a semantic point. I take it that ron thinks calling aerobic training "marathon training" implies getting ready for a marathon so he'd like to change the name so that people doing shorter distances will understand that it's something they also should do.

oh that sounds sensible. Thank you HRE. Trying to understand the Lydiard way and i think that his wording is important to look at.

HRE wrote:

I think it's a semantic point. I take it that ron thinks calling aerobic training "marathon training" implies getting ready for a marathon so he'd like to change the name so that people doing shorter distances will understand that it's something they also should do.

--------------------------------------------------------

Exactly. Marathon training in Arthur's terms is similar to the term "Base" training used by most people now. Indeed the word base is more accepted and understood by a wide range of runners (short distance to long distance runners) so it may be particularly useful.

I once read the Arhur Newton, the eminently successful South African distance runner of the early 1900s described his preparation as "marathon training" which was the basis of all his in-season racing success. Perhaps this is where the term Base origniated?