LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

Nobby/Ronin,

What Nobby is saying is what I call the "art" part of coaching. Anyone can put on paper a schedule that "should" produce great results. If you take two runners who seem to be equal, one will succeed on that program the other will not. That is where the application of the principles of the training approach becomes the key, and that is an art. One repeat to many and the residual in the body starts the runner toward fatigue and "less than". How many runners have you heard of that do "fabulous" training, but never demonstrate that when it counts, races. I was guilty of that as a youngster. I had a coach who did not believe in long runs. I remember running 16 x 400 in 73 with a 200 jog, but could not break 11:00 for 2 miles. I added in distance runs and my world came around. You can certainly "over do it" with a Lydiard approach as with any. But if you approach it systematically, you will have developed your core conditioning in order to at least perform well.

Glenn

Well said Nobby. I have been lurking in the background here, recovering from my arthroscopy, 'itching to go for a run' but I know I am not ready.

I am glad you mentioned that the schedules are a guide. As you know I have been pushing that all along.

How did I learn that ?

Many years ago I Coached a very pronmising young woman. I realised she could be outstanding so I used to check in with Arthur every now and then to keep him informed and ask advice.

The Kid only lost over a 6 month period and we were gearing up for Track season.

Unfortunately, Our Christmas break is when everyone goes on Holiday. The kid was going away with her parents for a month.

I meticulously wrote out a schedule for that month. Trying to get everything to suit what they were doing. She carried out that schedule to the letter and came home a mess.

Instead of reading her body and gauging the training she plowed on. Having a very ambitious father did not help as he 'stood over' her to make sure she did everything to the letter and then some.

It took another month to 'inwind' the mess and get her back on track. Unfortunately, the whole deal did not do her head any good at all and she did not really race up to her potential.

Because she felt there should of been a better "return for the investment" and that did not happen she ended up going to another Coach.

That is another story. But in retrospect I feel that she became a 'slave' to the schedule and it did not work. BTW: Arthur saw the what I put in it and I felt it was fine, But it needed 'tweaking' as she got into it as all sorts of circumstances arose which were never handled. Least of all the father who felt she needed to run various aspects "Faster".

What happened to the young woman ? . She ran reasonably well for another year and then just "faded" away. The victim of too much "faster" work and injuries started to affect her.

There was this young 800m runner in Japan in the early 60s (his 1:47 stood as Japan's national record for 30+ years). Nearing 1964 Tokyo Olympics, he went to West Germany and had a coach there. His coach wrote down meticulous training plan for him to follow when he went back to Japan. What the coach didn't realize was brutal heat and humidity of Japan's summer (Tokyo Olympics was in October). He hurt his kindey and didn't perform up to his expectation in the Games.

I always use my wife's first marathon as an example but she trained 3 or at most 4 times a week (2 or 3 miles jog during week days) because I knew her work was physically and mentally very demanding and draining. She did one core training a week that was a long run on weekend. It's always better to be slightly undertrained than overtrained.

Bump

and

Kim, that story reminds me of, oh, just about every female 14-year-old star I've ever seen. There are one or two exceptions, but that still makes up only a tiny percentage of the runners who show great talent early on. We here in the USA take competitive sport for our children a bit too seriously. In my "Principles and Ethics of Coaching" class (which people here find oxymoronic) we watched a simple film about two groups of children around 10 years of age. One group played organized little-league baseball which was heavily controlled by adults. The other played on their own with no adult supervision. Which group learned more skills? Which learned how to negotiate rules? Which group got more playing experience? Which had more FUN? We decided that in almost every way, the free-form group had a better experience. Willie Stargell used to say "The umpire says 'play ball', not 'work ball'."

Sorry about my rant. One reason I quit coaching was that parents could be overbearing and obnmoxious. An overemphasis on winning can destroy the element of play, which then destroys the love of sport necessary for doing the work that leads to winning!

Nobby-san say:

>NO ONE can train exactly the same way.< (as someone else)

I would add that no one can duplicate EXACTLY the running program that they themself have followed to prior success.

The athlete is always beginning from a different place and adjustments have to be made. Previously followed schedules become a guide only.

Hodgie-san:

HRE and I did get together with Malmo and Keith Dowling in NY this time.

Any real-life example of what you're saying (thanks for correcting and completing my sentence by the way) from GBTC days?

" It's always better to be slightly undertrained than overtrained"

Nobby, that is one of Arthur's catch phrases. It is one I have always been aware of and apply to my athletes.

I asked him once about that and he said you can go into meets that have a number of 'rounds' and the early rounds are your final preparation. He said "Look at the number of athletes who run well in early rounds and then get slower or do not place as the meet moves on, That usually means that they are overtrained and getting more fatigued as they race more"

"Someone who is undertrained. relishes the racing and gets better as the meet moves on, they are 'fresh and fast'.

I know he made that statement in the 80's (pre the HUGE Kenyan boom) but I still see it here with many athletes.

I've been using the Lydiard training methods for a couple of years now and fortunately have not been injured. Right now, I am 10 weeks out from the marathon that I am focusing on and I have developed a pain in the bottom of my foot. It doesn't seem like an injury that is going to go away with just 2 or 3 rest days. I just started the anaerobic phase of my training. My question is how do I jump back into my training when I can run again? I have a very solid base to work off of, but if I have to take, say, 10 days off, do I go back into the repetition training? Do I run a few weeks of just running? I know it will be based on how I feel, but I don't want to be underprepared for the marathon. At the same time I don't want to be stupid and just throw myself into training situations that my body is not ready for. Any info on how any other people using Lydiard training have dealt with something like this would be appreciated

A few pages back someone asked for the Lydiard system boiled down to its basics. This is probably as useless as trying to become a gourmet chef in three easy steps. I'll put down my summary anyway and others tell me what we're missing.

1. Train in such a way that you enjoy what you do and reach your best on the most important day(s). Always look at the big picture.

2. Have a plan but be ready to change it as necessary; don’t overdo it (or underdo it) just because the schedule calls for a certain workout at a certain pace. You know yourself better than any “expert” does.

3. Easy aerobic running is good for you and it’s hard to do too much. Running that produces an “oxygen debt”, even in small amounts, creates much larger stresses. Aerobic capacity is the single most important factor you can develop, but far from the only one.

4. Work on your speed every week of the year, which does not necessarily mean running top-speed sprints. You can also use hill running, plyometrics, drills, etc.

5. Running is the best training for runners. Hill training and plyometrics are the most effective ways to build leg strength and range of motion.

6. In the base phase, run a lot, keep it aerobic, and from day to day vary your distance, speed, terrain and surface.

7. Use the hill phase as a bridge from base training to track training, and use it to develop strength, speed, power, power endurance and technique but avoid building up “oxygen debts” as you do with track training.

8. Use track training to develop your anaerobic system, but you do not even have to run as fast as race pace.

9. Coordination training, time trials, and sprint/float sharpeners are useful tools which most training programs ignore.

10. You cannot simultaneously train hard and race well. You must always sacrifice one for the other.

Comments?

Injured,

Where is the pain in your foot? Is it plantar-fasciitis or something else like a neuroma or heel spur? I think getting it properly diagnosed by either a physical therapist, your doc, or a podiatrist might give you an indication of what you're up against. You probably have a pretty substantial base if you've been training the Lydiard way for a few years, and I'm sure Nobby and others have much experience coaching runners who have missed part of the anaerobic phase. Wasn't there some mention of Billy Mills getting injured or fatigued and missing most of his anaerobic training? He still ran pretty well as I recall! Best of luck and a speedy recovery.

It depends on (1) what type of shoes you wear (I'm more or less a minimallist), (2) how much background base work you have done in the past, (3) how much background anaerobic work you have done in the past (not just the most recent week or months but in the past couple of years...), etc. Oh, and of course, what injury you have!

After taking some time off, you can probably start jogging nice and easily for a couple of days and, if you've done fairly solid base work in the past, go straight into solid distance work of, say, 12~15 miles of good effort "just to shake your aerobic base back". After that, unless you drastically missed schedule (like 3.5 weeks out of 4-week-anaerobic phase), just carry on and don't worry about it. Once you move on to coordination, all the time trials would also sharpen your anaerobic capacity if not developed fully. If you try to cram all back in, that's most likely when a trouble start to happen. You might still consider fulfilling a few weeks of anaerobic training and cut a week or so of coordination depending on how much anaerobic training you've done in the past

If the shoe you wear could possibly be causing the problem, make sure you eliminate that. No point of going back to the same problem-causing shoe and get injured again.

Another point, I've discussed this with Hotlanta too, if it doesn't hurt as much going uphill (less pounding), you might consider substituting anaerobic training with uphill running. Hill training is, after all, a speed training in disguise.

Summary Man:

This is very good. I particularly like (4). For (10) I'm debating whether to use a word "sacrifice" is appropriate or not but I guess you'd have to... Great summary. Thank you.

Now anybody for Daniels' summary? Jtupper?

bump

Nobby wrote:

Summary Man:

This is very good. I particularly like (4). For (10) I'm debating whether to use a word "sacrifice" is appropriate or not but I guess you'd have to... Great summary. Thank you.

Now anybody for Daniels' summary? Jtupper?

I think a summary of Daniels' training is going to be strikingly similar to that of Lydiards. I think a lot of people take a look at the title and see "Formula" and are turned off by the concept of having to follow a set schedule. Daniels' training, I think, is anything but a "Set" schedule. More or less, I think it's just a fine-tuning of Lydiard's methods or more so, just putting terms and training intensities to what is already out there.

Here's a comparison that I think is pretty accurate. seefitzrun posted it a few pages back.

Base Phase (DRF Phase I "FQ" vs. Lydiard Aerobic Conditioning)

DRF prescribes a 6 Week Foundational Quality phase of "Easy Pace" Running with the inclusion of strides. Every three week the athlete is permitted in increase mileage as much as one mile for every workout session per week. Within the 24 Week time frame, I would assume Lydiard would prescribe a 12 Week Aerobic Conditioning phase of Aerobic Paced running with the inclusion of strides. Emphasis is placed on single session aerobic paced running with an option for a second daily session of easy jogging. To oversimply, the major difference appears to be DRF 6 Week Aerobic Base vs. Lydiard's 12 week Aerobic Base. It should be noted also that Dr. Daniels seems to suggest a longer Phase I if there is time.

Transitional Phase (DRF Phase II "EQ" vs. Lydiard's Hill Spring Phase)

DRF presribes a second 6 week Early Quality Phase with primary emphasis on "Repetions" of 200-800m with full recovery to develop economy and prepare for the stresses of Phase III, and secondary and maintence emphasis is placed on Anaerobic Threshold (T-Pace) and Vo2Max Intervals (I-Pace). Again within this 24 week time frame, Lydiard's Hill Springing Phase would last 3 Weeks with primary emphasis on Uphill Sprining, Downhill Running, and Wind-Sprints to develop economy and prepare for the stresses of the Anaerobic Phase. Both Daniels and Lydiard stress the importance of this transition to the next phase. The question boils down to which is a more effective transition Repeats or Hill Circuits.

Specialization Phase (DRF Phase III "Q" vs. Lydiard's Anaerobic Phase)

DRF prescribes a third 6 week Quality Phase with primary emphasis on Vo2Max Intervals (I-Pace) of approximately 600-1200m with recovery jogs of equal or slightly less duration, secondary and maintenance emphasis is placed on T-Pace Runs and Repetitions. Lydiard prescribes a 4 week Anaerobic phase with 3 workouts a week of 400-1600 intervals with recovery jogging of equal distance. DRF Interval workouts and Lydiard's Anaerobic workouts seem to be very similar, down to the recovery jogging between intervals. The differences appear to be DRF's single interval workout a week, with a different focus for the secondary and maintence workout compared with Lydiard's 3 anaerobic workouts a week. To a lesser degree the difference between DRF recovery jogs of equal duration vs. Lydiard's recovery jogs of equal distance is also a consideration.

Race Conditioning (DRF Phase IV FQ vs. Lydiard's RaceCoordination Phase)

DRF prescribes a final 6 Week Tapering Phase with primary emphasis on T-Pace runs to allow recovery for important late season races, secondary and maintence emphasis is placed on Intervals and Reps with reduced volume. Within the confines of the 24 Week plan, I assume Lydiard would use a 3 Week Race Coordination phase with primary emphasis on Time Trial Races and a single sharpening workout of 50m-100m Sprint/50m-100m Float once a week. The difference seems to be that DRF allows for recovery with lower intensity T-Pace Runs while Lydiard "sharpens" using short bouts of high intensity pick-ups. DRF completes the 24 Week plan with this phase with a peak race at the end of the final 6 week phase.

Lydiard Peaking Phase

Lydiard finally prescribes approximately 10-14 days of final freshening up before the peak race. Unlike the prior phase, the peaking phase focuses on a single peak race, rather than time trials, and the sharpening workouts are reduces in volume rather than intensity.

bump

Nobby-san,

Glad to hear that you and HRE were in NY & able to meet up with malmo-san & Keith Dowling.

I meant to call malmo when the leaders hit First Ave. but I did not get to do that this year.

The point that I was trying to make is regarding my approach to each marathon buildup. Though I would always refer to past marathon preparations I could never and would never attempt to do EXACTLY as I had done before.

The athlete is always moving to a different physical/mental state of being. This requires a new analysis and ultimately a new plan though the PATTERN is much the same.

Hodgie-san:

It would have been interesting if you called Malmo-san; when we got to Colombus Circle and called him (to see if we could get together), he said he's still walking around (I can't remember where). He said he thought the start was an hour later!

In Lydiard's hidden message (you'd have to cook his book in the oven to see it); he says how much aerobic training or anaerobic training one needs to do depends on the background of your training. In other words, the younger and/or less experienced you are, the more time should be spent on aerobic development; the older or more experienced you are, you may be able to get away with less. As you develop your aerobic base further and further, you need some "tweek" to get the best out of yourself. It's like how Koide started to include some intervals during Takahashi's build-up later; or (this is about anaerobic training) how Harry Wilson "tweeked" interval training session for Ovett as he got stronger.

One of the things I thought about including a couple of pages back (I think it's when I was talking about accommodating the individual's needs) is continuous evaluation of the program. From one cycle to another, you need to evaluate how you react to the program and how you, if any, need to change it for the next cycle. Even day-to-day training. Someone (Daniels? Wetmore?) once said that your training schedule should be written in pencil. It is so true.

By the way, speaking of Takahashi (Naoko), there was a picture of her in the Japanese newspaper site. She looks VERY skinny. I wouldn't be surprised if she slows down again in the end of the marathon (Tokyo women's on 11/20).

Bumping this thread up because I don't want to see it die.

Keep up the great advice and stories.

bump