In what ways did Lydiard get it wrong?

Absolutely. You are preaching to the choir now. BTW, (IMO) this response was far superior than your "flat earth" response.

rekrunner wrote:

Absolutely. You are preaching to the choir now. BTW, (IMO) this response was far superior than your "flat earth" response.

If I was a college student seeking a grade I suppose I should be grateful. The "flat earth" response was only making the point that it is possible to argue anything - including a fallacy - by simply claiming to be "rational" or "scientific", without anything more to back it up. It also shows that a minority opinion is just as likely to be the product of ignorance - as flat-earthers are - than superior knowledge, as a few like Einstein had.

In relation to Lydiard, it was a dumb claim for the poster to say there was nothing "rational" or "scientific" about his method - as I explained above. If something works, there's a good chance that there's a rational or scientific basis for it.

Armstronglivs wrote:

If something works, there's a good chance that there's a rational or scientific basis for it.

Is there a rational and scientific basis for believing that injecting EPO can circumvent the laws of thermodynamics?

No

Is there a rational basis for not believing that?

Yes

Just saying, that's a flat earth belief that seems obvious to people who don't question things rationally.

rational and scientific? wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

If something works, there's a good chance that there's a rational or scientific basis for it.

Is there a rational and scientific basis for believing that injecting EPO can circumvent the laws of thermodynamics?

No

Is there a rational basis for not believing that?

Yes

Just saying, that's a flat earth belief that seems obvious to people who don't question things rationally.

I don't think most people are thinking about the laws of thermodynamics when they inject EPO.

Pappy wrote:

Serious question ` wrote:

When did girls begin to exist?

I'm not sure of the history of women's running but for a very long time they were not allowed to do the longer races. I'd guess late 70s early 80s was when they were allowed to race. Even then there was a big fear their uterus would fall out. Somethings just can't be made up.

Given recent events maybe they weren't completely wrong.

Armstronglivs wrote:

rational and scientific? wrote:

Is there a rational and scientific basis for believing that injecting EPO can circumvent the laws of thermodynamics?

No

Is there a rational basis for not believing that?

Yes

Just saying, that's a flat earth belief that seems obvious to people who don't question things rationally.

I don't think most people are thinking about the laws of thermodynamics when they inject EPO.

No, they are thinking that they can achieve superhuman status.

rekrunner wrote:

Woldmar Gerschler, Dr. Hans Reindell & Rudoplh Harbig (1940s~1950s) - Anaerobic interval training.

Gerschler and associates developed most of their programs in the 1930s. Harbig's last world records were in 1939. Their programs were no more anaerobic than were the ones that Lydiard used.

Armstronglivs wrote:

How is Lydiard "not being the first at anything" related to the OP's question of whether he got it wrong? A typically spurious point. Whether or not he was the first at anything he transformed running in a way none of those you cite before him did. Academic waffle.

Lydiard copied most of what he did from Percy Cerutty, who was a much better coach.

Misattributations wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Woldmar Gerschler, Dr. Hans Reindell & Rudoplh Harbig (1940s~1950s) - Anaerobic interval training.

Gerschler and associates developed most of their programs in the 1930s. Harbig's last world records were in 1939. Their programs were no more anaerobic than were the ones that Lydiard used.

Armstronglivs wrote:

How is Lydiard "not being the first at anything" related to the OP's question of whether he got it wrong? A typically spurious point. Whether or not he was the first at anything he transformed running in a way none of those you cite before him did. Academic waffle.

Lydiard copied most of what he did from Percy Cerutty, who was a much better coach.

This is incorrect, Lydiard worked out most of his conditioning theories in the early 1950s as a marathoner. Long before Herb Elliot was on the scene. There is a long history of humanity having two separate figures discovering the same revelation at the same time, Newton and Leibniz or Darwin and Wallace. If anything Lydiard was influenced by swimming coaches doing a lot aerobic work.

Misattributations wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Woldmar Gerschler, Dr. Hans Reindell & Rudoplh Harbig (1940s~1950s) - Anaerobic interval training.

Gerschler and associates developed most of their programs in the 1930s. Harbig's last world records were in 1939. Their programs were no more anaerobic than were the ones that Lydiard used.

Armstronglivs wrote:

How is Lydiard "not being the first at anything" related to the OP's question of whether he got it wrong? A typically spurious point. Whether or not he was the first at anything he transformed running in a way none of those you cite before him did. Academic waffle.

Lydiard copied most of what he did from Percy Cerutty, who was a much better coach.

No one even knew who Cerutty was when Lydiard began coaching, and vice versa. Arthur's main influences were a runner from his club whose name I am no longer sure of, Jack Dolan maybe, a physiologist called F.A.M. Webster, Zatopek, and the experimenting he did on himself and some of his early, largely unknown,runners. The common influence between he and Cerutty was Zatopek and they independently developed systems that were fairly similar.

rational and scientific? wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I don't think most people are thinking about the laws of thermodynamics when they inject EPO.

No, they are thinking that they can achieve superhuman status.

How about they think they can run faster? Like Kiprop? Not exactly fantasy.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Misattributations wrote:

Gerschler and associates developed most of their programs in the 1930s. Harbig's last world records were in 1939. Their programs were no more anaerobic than were the ones that Lydiard used.

Lydiard copied most of what he did from Percy Cerutty, who was a much better coach.

This is incorrect, Lydiard worked out most of his conditioning theories in the early 1950s as a marathoner. Long before Herb Elliot was on the scene. There is a long history of humanity having two separate figures discovering the same revelation at the same time, Newton and Leibniz or Darwin and Wallace. If anything Lydiard was influenced by swimming coaches doing a lot aerobic work.

Cerutty produced one great athlete. Lydiard produced 4 world record holders as well as multi-Olympic medallists from one small running club and later was a key influence in the rise of the Finns. He also helped popularise running for health amongst the general population - the rise of the jogger, however derided that is here by "serious" runners.

Lydiard was essentially his own "guinea pig" as a nationally competitive marathon runner in the early '50's. He devised his 100 mpw formula after experimenting with different distances, including 200mpw at times. But the key to it all was maximising an athlete's aerobic capacity - whether they were an 800 runner or a marathon runner. This was a significant departure from the methods prevalent at the time.

Based on what information Lydiard had available, he took things about as far as anyone could. He also was very good at the art of coaching individuals. In that respect, he was pretty much right about everything.

Wow, talk about misinformation! The fact is that Lydiard had NO good runners, until he sent Murray Halberg and a few others to train in Portsea with Percy Cerutty. Then they went back and told Lydiard what they did, who then incorporated Cerutty's teachings into his own previously failed system. Snell, Halburg and Magee were the first of Lydiard runners who made a breakthrough, but only after they'd learned what they could from Persy Cerutty in Portsea. As usual, Lydiard took personal credit for everything that he learned, or in his case stole, from everyone else, in particular Percy Cerutty.

No one even knew who Peter Snell was prior to 1960, when he upset Moens in the 800 meters, but he was far from being a star at that point.

The bright shining star was Herb Elliott, who ran away with the 1500 meters on a chewed up track in a new world record time of 3:35.6 - a time that Peter Snell NEVER approached.

HRE wrote:

No one even knew who Cerutty was when Lydiard began coaching, and vice versa. Arthur's main influences were a runner from his club whose name I am no longer sure of, Jack Dolan maybe, a physiologist called F.A.M. Webster, Zatopek, and the experimenting he did on himself and some of his early, largely unknown,runners. The common influence between he and Cerutty was Zatopek and they independently developed systems that were fairly similar.

As usual, you're making stuff up non consequential events that have no relevance to the truth.

Zatopek had ZERO influence on Cerutty, who was the only one of the two who developed his own unique program.

By the way, I met and spoke with Lydiard several times, and he was consistently full of it.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Cerutty produced one great athlete. Lydiard produced 4 world record holders as well as multi-Olympic medallists from one small running club and later was a key influence in the rise of the Finns. He also helped popularise running for health amongst the general population - the rise of the jogger, however derided that is here by "serious" runners.

Lydiard was full of lies, falsehoods and hot air. So are you.

How ironic it is, that no one who's any good uses any of his programs.

Zatopek had no influence on Cerutty? Then why did Cerutty make a point of finding Zatopek in the Olypmic Village in Rome and staying in his room so late that Zatopek gave Cerutty his bed and went to sleep outside? Read "Why Die."

It's easy wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Cerutty produced one great athlete. Lydiard produced 4 world record holders as well as multi-Olympic medallists from one small running club and later was a key influence in the rise of the Finns. He also helped popularise running for health amongst the general population - the rise of the jogger, however derided that is here by "serious" runners.

Lydiard was full of lies, falsehoods and hot air. So are you.

How ironic it is, that no one who's any good uses any of his programs.

Personality disorders manifest in all sorts of ways. Possibly your only claim to distinction.

HRE did any Lydiard-coached athletes do 1000m or longer repeats on the track with kinda short rests? It seems like nowadays every top runner 5000m to marathon does something like 6 x 1000m at 5000m pace or Kipchoge's 13 or more x 1000m in 2:50 or something in between. Or they might do repeat 1200m, repeat miles, etc. Was there anything like that in Lydiard's programs or would something like that have been done as fartlek on another surface under Lydiard?

It seems to me that the use of long repeats with not so long rests are one of the main reasons why 13:40 is no longer a world class time for 5000m. It also seems like most athletes today are doing them almost year-round.

SlowFatMaster wrote:

HRE did any Lydiard-coached athletes do 1000m or longer repeats on the track with kinda short rests? It seems like nowadays every top runner 5000m to marathon does something like 6 x 1000m at 5000m pace or Kipchoge's 13 or more x 1000m in 2:50 or something in between. Or they might do repeat 1200m, repeat miles, etc. Was there anything like that in Lydiard's programs or would something like that have been done as fartlek on another surface under Lydiard?

It seems to me that the use of long repeats with not so long rests are one of the main reasons why 13:40 is no longer a world class time for 5000m. It also seems like most athletes today are doing them almost year-round.

I have never seen 1000 repeats in any schedules in Arthur's books and he never suggested doing them to me. Nor did Barry Magee. But as you may know, he was very unspecific about kinds of reps to do. Basically he'd tell you to do some. What he'd talk about was pretty standard stuff for the times, 220s, 440s, miles, maybe some 660s. You've got me thinking now and I kind of suspect that 1 km repeats were rarely done in countries that used Imperial measurements. When guys from my club would get together in the '70s for interval sessions we usually did mile reps, maybe some 440s now and again but as marathoners we leaned toward longer reps. Also, when I think of the reps Bill Squires had his guys doing I do not recall reps of 1 km. Maybe I'll have a good look at Hodgie sans' logs and see if any show up. I've never seen a Frank Shorter schedule with 1 km reps.

On the other hand, I really only began to understand Lydiard's system when I was in Finland in '75 from an older Finn who had trained with Arthur when he'd been in Finland. Basically he pushed me to get on the track and had two sessions he recommended. One was 10 x 400 and the other was 6 x 1000. I think being in a "metric" country was why he recommended that second session and I would not be surprised if people training with Arthur in Mexico, Denmark etc.,, even New Zealand when he went back in the late '70s etc. did sessions of km repeats but don't know for sure. And it's certainly possible that some fartlek sessions would have covered the distance. Interesting question.