I met Seb Coe today ... and I was wrong

I have never once thought that Coe ran 65 miles all year long. Peter Coe had a keen understanding of training theory. A few facts, first off Coe peaked! And at the right times. If your doing track workouts all year long, good luck trying to control your peak form. There has likely been no runner who was stronger in mind, then Emil Z. He did huge amounts of anaerobic work. And he had no control over his peak form, best races came at off times. Ron Clark, who trained very hard each day, also was a great runner who was tuff as nails. And the one thing he could not control was his peak form.

Next spend and VO2 work will produce gains in fitness for 2-3 years then things level off. You can look that up in just about any current book on exercise phys, this fact.

Coe kept progressing for amounts of time that where much longer then basing his training on this type of training would have made possible.

Second everyone of the other runners who have come close to Coe, Ovette who was faster and had huge amounts of talent ran over 100 miles a week. N Morcile, El G, and D Koman, all ran over 100 miles a week. Most a good deal more! Coe did not have near the speed of, N Morcillie. The I had magic super human speed, is bullshit. If N Morcillie needed to run 100 mile weeks. And was a sub 11 100m guy, also with being a 45 400m guy then speed is not all there is two it. If that where a fact then Coe Sub would not have run faster then Morcile over the 800. And near as fast over the mile. Ovette was also a much more talented runner then Coe, and he ran 100mile weeks.

Now via the rule of Parsimony. Mabry Coe did have some insight into training the allowed hem to progress to a level higher then everyone else who has gotten to near his level. Or maybe he was training according to basic principles that have worked for the rest of the world’s great runners. I am apt to think that he was more likely then not training in a in a manor similar to what worked for the other greats.

Arthur never said run high miles slow all year long. No he talked of a very hard anaerobic phase, and then had the idea that in your race phase you should only run the amount of miles needed to keep your fitness. I think he stated that when racing one must understand that training is done. Also he stated that Snell needed to run about 60 min in the Am very easy, to keep his peak form for as long as needed. I also know the Ethiopians use a system of training that works out to lots of running must of the year and then just as much as need when racing.

For what it is worth I don’t think Coe was doing anything that was not just being wise. If your someone who has got to the top not upon talent but hard work. Then you would be a fool to revel to your commotion that they likely had more ability. I also never have heard Coe or his Father ever say just what he did in the off-season. Last if you go to the British Milers Web page. And look in the archives there is an interview form a while ago, in which Peter Coe is asked why. He wrote that the basis for all performance was aerobic fitness. Now he went back on that statement and tried to offer a rational that he might have been wrong at that point. But clearly he felt that at one point, as it is right in the interview.

Actually, it is not well known that Seb Coe suffered from learning difficulties as a child and could not do simple arithmetic. Even now he still can't count to 100.

I stopped reading at the part where yo said that Emil Zatopek had no control over his peaking ability.

I've never added my voice to this debate before, but I have always thought of Coe as a medium mileage guy. I've read both his biographies, both the original and updated versions of Training Distance Runners, and attended a talk with Peter Coe. Peter mentioned in his talk that he was never interested in counting mileage. Rather, he and Seb were only concerned with counting the number of quality sessions. This is consistant with the idea that the Coe's were not interested in counting warm up and cool downs and recovery sessions in their weekly totals. Further support of this is the fact that in the original Martin/Coe book warm ups and cool downs were not counted in the weekly mileage totals. This was revised in the updated version. I think it is actually written in the intro to this version that they did this because of the criticism that they had received after the first book (I don't have these books with me right now since I am in the habit of lending all my running books out after reading them ... and never getting them back). From my recollection I still don't remember these totals being as high as 100 miles/week (more like 60-70), but at the same time I don't think a sample of Coe's base training is ever given. However, I do remember that in one of his biographies he mentions that 6-10 mile steady runs were a staple of his winter training. He mentions "theaputic runs" in which he and Peter would head out to scenic areas and perform these runs on a slight downhill in order to add some freshness to training. I also remember Seb mentioning in one of these books a particular 10 miler which he ran in some ridiculously fast time. I remember thinking that it must have been a typo since, at the time I read it, it would have been a world record. Typo or not though, the point is that "quality" aerobic running (on top of warm ups, cool downs, and recovery runs) was a major part of his base training.

Kroger wrote:

It wouldnt surprise me if he was lying back in the day,do you really believe Steve Jones just ran 40 min on his easy days in marathon training. Thats what it shows in Running With The Legends.

During his taper, not his easy days.

Jones didn't run any easy days.

Sebastian: "Hey I told that Martin guy that I used to run 100 mile weeks!"

Peter: "Ahhahaha we've got them going again!"

Sebastian: "We sure do."

Peter: "I'll slip another email to Bakken and remind him you never went over 50!"

Sebastian: "Ahhhahahaha... stop!!... my sides are hurting from laughing so much!!"

SolRichards wrote:

Second everyone of the other runners who have come close to Coe, Ovette who was faster.

You meant to say "Ovett, who was slower".

The following should add more fuel to the fire that this thread has generated . What is unique is that the quotes are from an Athletics Weekly interview conducted in Feb.1978, before Coe became world famous or set any WRs. So maybe he is more forthcoming here I don't know. The interview is in the book "The Coe & Ovett File" , pub.1982. This was a compilation of articles, interviews and photos of Coe and Ovett from their youth through the end of the 1981 season as they appeared in Athletics Weekly. There are two interviews with Ovett and two with Coe from the late seventies that to my knowledge have not appeared elsewhere. There are many photos of them from now obscure races in the mid 1970s that never appeared in any of the books about the two.

Here are some quotes of Coe's from the Feb. 1978 interview:

"I really had been trying out a new approach to the winter( he's referring to the winter of 76-77 here) in that I was wanting to work on the leg speed during the winter for the outdoor races the following season. I was doing alot of sprint work under George Gandy with some of the Loughborough sprinters...We just wanted to see what kind of effect this sort of speed work has. I was doing lots of repetition work-150's, 200's, things like this, plus weights training and circuit training-I'd started that seriously for the first time.....

"..We have a hill in the back of the house of about 110m. I don't know what the gradient is but it's fairly steep and I do repetitions up that. I usually do 20 or 30 and the recovery is just a jog back down.....I think hill running is one of the most important parts of training at the right time of year.

(Talking about his training leading up to his 4th place in the European Cup Final in 1977)..."Mainly 300's and short sprint work tith George Gandy at NOttingham. Certainly not time trials as was reported and not 400m-I very rarely did 400m in training at that stage anyway. A typical session was 10 x 120 and rolling off the next 180m from the bend, just jogging back down the straight for recovery(not sure what he really means here!)....The majority of the sessions were geared to speed. Even the steady distance was a bit faster. The runs were not as long but the mile pace was faster. I was doing only one session a day. Tuesday and Thursday were I was doing track work and the rest of the week was doing 5-6 mile runs plus weight training and circuit training. I was trying to get one run a week of ten miles....

(On his future potential at 1500m)..."I'm sure when it's time to move up again having a good grounding in 800m running can only be to my benefit. I don't think you can make a great separation between 800m and 1500m....it's speed, speed,speed. Obviously when I go back to it(1500m) I'll be that much faster and stronger with the psychological advantage of knowing tht I can run sub 1:45....I do basically 5000m track training in the summer. The only link that's missing for a decent 5000m is the distance work, the necessary amount of solid distance work. I know where I'm going and for me it's going to matter in 2 1/2 -3 years time"

Interview on Dec. 22 1979:

What was your maximum weekly training last winter?

"It averaged out at 51 miles a week throughout the winter. Sometimes it was considerably less than 51, other weeks it got up to about 60....I think possibly I don't need so many miles. The other thing is having a light frame, I'm not so willing to smash my feet and knees out on the road."

(On the winter of 79-80) "I will perhaps step up the distance work just slightly and ain for a higher average, but distance work has never worried me....I've always been able to get away with minimal distance work and my father/coach has never believed in distance for the sake of distance-the idea of that when you are growing and developing why put undue stress and pressure on joints...

I have something.

Seb was a 'natural'. Posturally, mechanically, psychologically he was extremely balanced. I would love to see footage as a teenager to compare. I'm trying to think of other supremely balanced runners and Kipketer comes to mind instantly. Vasala was more balanced than Keino i believe. Snell looked incredibly balanced, Prefontaine also and so did the pics of Jim Ryun i've seen. Out of all of them i'd say Coe was the most athletic and Kipketer the most efficient, would have loved to see them head-to-head.

Because i see Seb as a natural i don't see the need to develop in him the deeper aerobic levels that Lydiard saw as necessary in himself and his athletes. I believe Seb had retained this natural aerobic level that all children possess but usually lose through teenage-hood (have to exclude Kenyans and other relevant natural cultures in this generalisation).

In Australia we play football, called here AFL. It is a game with 4 quarters running about 30 mins each. It is played on an oval field possibly 180m in length and 120 wide. The ball could move from one end to the other in maybe 5 seconds. The running in this game is immense for some positions. One center ran 20-25kms per game whilst playing the game and possibly sprint at 90% or higher for distances of 20m - 80mm at least 100 times per game.

The upshot of this is a nicely balanced situation. AFL players are often noted for two athletic events in high school, High Jump and the 800m.

Coming back to the 800m and Seb, i can see a reason why he may not have done Lydiardian Mileage. He did not need to cover this area so he could focus on other areas as well.

In a Lydiard sense i could see the same thing happening to an athlete who has followed the schedule honestly for a decade. They would reach a point where the aerobic base is so well developed that enormous amounts of faster work may be underetaken. Such an athlete in my present mind would become Coe-like.

If you read "Winning running" you will see pictures of a young Seb with several flaws in his running form and pictures of Seb as a world class runner with those flaws corrected.

100 miles per week! Suck on that low mileagers!

I think you've just broken the record, you just bumped a 10 year thread.

mileage is such old hat; its kilometerage these days. Get with it you dinosaurs.

This