Lydiard Imitations

rekrunner wrote:

You mention slow twitch and fast twitch fibers requiring different training, but this was not a distinction lost on Lydiard. He recognized that there were speed types and endurance types. But an important part of training is observing the athletes response to training, and adapting the plan. In this way, there is little risk under Lydiard of giving athletes the same training, especially in the later "less generic" phases, even if the plans are initially the same.

This is not true. This is just your demagogy.

Lydiard did train excatly the same Peter Snell and John Davies in 1964. Exactly the sme workouts on the very same day.

1974, 10 years later he did train Pekka Vasala the same way he did train Peter Snell and Johh Davies. What a coincidence !

He doesn´t repect individuality.

Distinct Lydiard trainig is a your fantasy. He says that everybody shall do the same marathon basic training independently of each individual talent and independently of the distance event specialism.

If ther´s little risk under Lydiard, ther´s no risk at all under every other coach that respects individual training that Lydiard don´t.

As far as i can understand, HRE simply state that he is not 100% SURE that there has been "clean" athletes running 2.05 or faster. Are you 100% sure? Im not sure at all. I dont even know what i would guess.

Other than that i very much like the suggestion by Rekrunner.

"I suggested one way to help eliminate many of these variables, short of proving anything with a complete battery of large scale long term controlled studies, is for Renato to train an Italian (or Antonio to train a Portuguese) to hang with Moses, or alternative, have Nobby or Lorraine Mollar, or HRE, or Ken Livingstone train a Kenyan (or Japanese or American) to hang with Moses, or maybe we will have to wait for gypsy to Soviet train 56 Juniors to a long term career that rivals Carlos Lopes or Haile Gebresselassie."

Correct. I have only said I'm not sure it's possible to run that fast without "help." I've repeatedly said that I could well be wrong. I also have said that PEDs are only ONE of many variables that need consideration when attempting to explain why times are so much faster now.

Your suggestion about having Renato coach an Italian and someone like me coach a Kenyan has merit but a sample size of one is much too small to allow for any sort of valid conclusions.

Thanks Antonio! ... that is very interesting.

I can fully understand why you do not post schedules as you "individualize" training to a high degree.

I can also see that you do not allow an athlete's Aerobic condition to deteriorate.

This matches my own experience ....

I find that the state of an athletes "aerobic" shape condition is the main determinant of success from 800m onwards.

Over the years I have communicated with Antonio on running, personal and otherwise, and I appreciate his calm wisdom. YOU on the other hand....(want to explain those 2 "incidents" anytime?)

gypsy wrote:

Antonio Cabral wrote:yadda yadda yadda

you want to keep talking about yourself again do you? Good luck with that. As for what you just said, well it's more drivel isn't it. More words to describe exactly what you are not. You have not retained a childlike innocence to the world, not by a long shot. What you have retained is childishness, the negative aspects of being a child.

Anyway, lets get back on track with a discussion about training shall we. I am still very interested about the athlete you claim to have coached. You know the one, 2:09 marathoner. You got anything at all?

Antonio Cabral wrote:

I´m still very interested about the athletes you coach.

When will you schedule the runners you coach ?

I can't believe you can show your face still. It, along with every embarrassment you have faced in this thread so far, would surely drive any normal person into embarrassment, but not you. I guess i know have to agree with certain other people that you are certifiable.

Since i'm not a complete pu$$y like you who gains strength of character behind a keyboard i will gladly tell you anything you want to know ... AFTER you answer some of my questions first.

You're diversionary tactics are going to be allowed to work.

Now your 2.09 marathoner. What relationship did you have?

Reddy wrote:Stronger cultures are constantly eclipsing weaker cultures. If you really believe it is shameful, are you willing to abandon your land and house and possesions and give them back to aboriginees and move back to England? Of do you like saying it is terrible what your forefathers did but you will enjoy the benefits of it and enjoy the far superior culture that exists in Australia today? Like many Western Civilization decendants you are very confused and weak compared to your forefathers which is why Western Civilization is in a Global state of decline and will itself be soon eclipsed. You won't like what you get but you will get what you deserve.

I'm not confused and you could only call me weak compared to my ancient forefathers the neanderthals and their descendants the monkeys. However, this is besides the point as you seem to be painting yourself as someone not of western civilisation. Where are you from?

Aside from your aggressive overtones, i agree with you. Western Civilisation is about to go boom and it entirely it's own fault. It is the fault of those who lead that have led things so far astray and it is the fault of all of those people who knew better all along and did nothing about it. When the British arrived they were imagining Zulu too much and decided to 'pre-emptive strike' on the aboriginals as so the many massacres occurred, many officially documented according to western bureaucracy standards, and just as many recorded in story format within the Aboriginal Culture. In our recent drought, which was a little extreme, land became dry that had been covered for a long time. This meant river beds dried up and at the bottom of one river was evidence of a mass burial gravesite. And there are aboriginal stories that relate to this particular site. I'm definitely investigating further.

As for stronger cultures eclipsing weaker ones - i am all for this of course. It is the natural way. What i am against are certain forms of this eclipsing, such as conquering through force ie genocide of the indigenous population. It seems the way Canada did it is about as good an example as we can get.

gypsy wrote:What i am against are certain forms of this eclipsing, such as conquering through force ie genocide of the indigenous population. It seems the way Canada did it is about as good an example as we can get.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

So you realize that i´m juvenile. Yes i do. Most individuals of my age or still younger than my age, they are intellectual crystallized long before my age, jealous persons , arrogant, and their mind can´t be dynamic, and they are just opportunists...

...I don´t accept hypocrisy or intellectual dishonesty and i judge what is right or what is wrong independently of my personal interest.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

This has GOT to be the comment of the century!!

Mr. Antonio wouldn't accept hypocrisy but he sure as hell spread it himself.

So which one are you saying is better? You telling gypsy to grow up because he's acting like a child. With the same breath, you're saying you are honoured because gypsy called you juvenile and you are so great because you are "forever young"? What do we call that? Hypocrit or double standard?

Antonio Cabral wrote:

This is not true. This is just your demagogy.

Lydiard did train excatly the same Peter Snell and John Davies in 1964. Exactly the sme workouts on the very same day.

1974, 10 years later he did train Pekka Vasala the same way he did train Peter Snell and Johh Davies. What a coincidence !

He doesn´t repect individuality.

Distinct Lydiard trainig is a your fantasy. He says that everybody shall do the same marathon basic training independently of each individual talent and independently of the distance event specialism.

Have you really read any of Lydiard book? I can't recall Lydiard ever saying "everybody shall do exactly the same training."

You always criticize HRE or Kim Stevenson that none of their private conversation that they had with Arthur Lydiard himself won't count. Yet you always bring up the example of Peter Snell and John Davies did exactly the same training, which you claim you have a proof of, and Pekka Vasala did exactly the same training as above mentioned in 1974, directly given by Arthur Lydiard, which, once again, none of us had ever seen yet you claim you have a copy of. How would THAT count and yet HRE or Kim actually INTERACTING the man himself won't count?

It is a double-standard in my opinion.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

So let me get this straight....you are the famous, bombbay the greatest. I´ve read all your books, i know all the olympics you coach and i know very well your training method. Congrats, you are my major coach influence. It´s an honor that the great bommbay does post on LRC. !

Thank you.

gypsy, you aren't fooling anyone.

kimmi wrote:

Antonio Cabral wrote:

So you realize that i´m juvenile. Yes i do. Most individuals of my age or still younger than my age, they are intellectual crystallized long before my age, jealous persons , arrogant, and their mind can´t be dynamic, and they are just opportunists...

...I don´t accept hypocrisy or intellectual dishonesty and i judge what is right or what is wrong independently of my personal interest.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

This has GOT to be the comment of the century!!

Mr. Antonio wouldn't accept hypocrisy but he sure as hell spread it himself.

Milerman wrote:

gypsy, you aren't fooling anyone.

Yup, gypsy would lose his sleep, staying up all night down in New Zealand or Australia or wherever he is, posting at letsrun. Do you really think gypsy is the ONLY one in the entire world who gets annoyed by Antinio's sh!t? Well, here's a news for you Milerman, he ain't.

See, this is why I think all these guys, unless they are all Antinio minions, are actually him. Reading through all his posts, unfortunately however he does seem to have some interesting things to say about, he comes out as such a jerk. Sure, HRE sometimes comes out a bit strong, gypsy has been a bit of an a$$ toward Canova lately, but Antonio? What he says and what he does (well, it's actually what he says too....) are complete opposite. I mean, he don't accept hypocracy?? He's the biggest hypocrit on internet! You seriously don't see that? You seriously think he's a legit coach? I sure as hell don't see any sign of it.

Of course, I guess I'm gypsy minion or gypsy ghost now...

kimmi wrote:

Of course, I guess I'm gypsy minion or gypsy ghost now...

Thanks Jackanory,

I already know who HRE is, and I think I'm pretty clear on where he stands with Lydiard.

I didn't quite share his skepticism about all sub-2:05 performances being "aided" (his word), unless we speak about things like pacemaking, or the wind, or gatorade. I also gave a couple reasons why I thought it was credible. But then I was told (not by HRE) that we can never really know if any athlete is clean, and that Geb is a smiling assassin.

But I also have similar problems when some claims that one method is superior (Antonio makes the claim often), precisely because of all these other variables confounding the issue. But then I'm not interested in a final determination of which method is best. I'm more interested in why coaches make certain changes that resulted in certain improvements.

Open minded reader wrote:

As far as i can understand, HRE simply state that he is not 100% SURE that there has been "clean" athletes running 2.05 or faster. Are you 100% sure? Im not sure at all. I dont even know what i would guess.

Other than that i very much like the suggestion by Rekrunner.

"I suggested one way to help eliminate many of these variables, short of proving anything with a complete battery of large scale long term controlled studies, is for Renato to train an Italian (or Antonio to train a Portuguese) to hang with Moses, or alternative, have Nobby or Lorraine Mollar, or HRE, or Ken Livingstone train a Kenyan (or Japanese or American) to hang with Moses, or maybe we will have to wait for gypsy to Soviet train 56 Juniors to a long term career that rivals Carlos Lopes or Haile Gebresselassie."

hang on a second

Surely we have evidence of Renato coaching an Italian and Antonio coaching a Portuguese already.

Kimmi, can you post with your email to shutup all the Antonio fakes in this thread.

Of course, I guess I'm gypsy minion or gypsy ghost now...[/quote]

Antonio,We've already been through this before. I don't really want to repeat it if you weren't listening before, but I'll try it again one more time.My statements come from what Lydiard told the general public in books, not what he told to 3 specific athletes about their specific training situation. And once again, my original interpretation of Lydiard training, from a first reading of these books, do not suffer from these flaws of your own fantastic mythical idea of what Lydiard training must be.I base my conclusions from material I found in two books that Lydiard wrote, in 1962 and 1978, giving a detailed description of his philosophies and training guidelines to the general public. This is not my demagogy. It's not mine, and it's not demagogy. Fast twitch or slow twitch athletes presented no special obstacle for Lydiard and his methods, and he explains how each type of runner responds to his training. The books also give sample schedules which are distinct for many different events. After the aerobic base building and hill phase, each athlete trains distinctly for his event.You draw global conclusions from 3 anecdotal schedules you received in private correspondence. I cannot base any of my conclusions on schedules I have not seen, for athletes I have not trained, nor even your representation of what you think you have based on what you were told it was, nor your conclusions based on evidence I have not evaluated.I also have no idea if Snell, Davies, and Vasala have significantly different muscle fiber types. They were all middle distance runners. I find it quite credible that they all were given the same schedules, and that there was no reason to modify the schedules (no weakness identified which needed corrective measures). Or maybe they were modified on the day, but not documented. I can only speculate about things I have not seen or do not know. Don't expect me to draw your conclusions.The "distinct training" is not my fantasy, but comes from these terms you admitted you didn't even understand on page 1: "response regulated", and "feeling based". The guidelines to customize your training based on identified weaknesses are explained in more words in the books.I know my own running type. From the books, I know how to determine if a runner is an endurance type or a speed type runner. From the books, I know how to formulate schedules for any athlete, for any distance. From the books, I know how to define interval training, and when to stop (distinct for each runner, how he feels on that day). From the books, I know how to identify weaknesses in training, using time trials. This will determine, distinctly for each individual, what kind of training he needs to do in following weeks.So yes in fact, it is true; it is not my demagogy, nor my fantasy. The fantasy interpretation of Lydiard is all yours.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

This is not true. This is just your demagogy.

Lydiard did train excatly the same Peter Snell and John Davies in 1964. Exactly the sme workouts on the very same day.

1974, 10 years later he did train Pekka Vasala the same way he did train Peter Snell and Johh Davies. What a coincidence !

He doesn´t repect individuality.

Distinct Lydiard trainig is a your fantasy. He says that everybody shall do the same marathon basic training independently of each individual talent and independently of the distance event specialism.

If ther´s little risk under Lydiard, ther´s no risk at all under every other coach that respects individual training that Lydiard don´t.