LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

Never could have done it without you Nobby, you have my eternal gratitude. Lorraine was kind enough to send me an email too, which was very kind. Project Lydiard 21 is a very noble cause, and Lydiard fans can rest assured that it's in very good hands.

Nice work Salko...

I see your splits were positive. Did you plan to go out fast?

Do you feel you could have run EVEN faster by running a 38 10km start?

Just wondering, not poking holes in the performance in any way...nice job!

First mile was 5:44, I definitely went out too fast. I soon settled into a groove at 5:55-6:03 just behind (then ahead of) the lead women, but those first 3 miles cost me later. 1:18 at the half was 30-1:00 faster than I planned, but by that point the damage was done. I hit 20 miles at 6:01 pace at 2:00:21, and finished with a 6:06 pace. Not pretty, but worlds faster than I'd gone before. As Nobby would say, I should have "used what's between my ears" more. It just might be easier to train the body than the mind. I'm very happy, but from a "salt in the wounds" perspective, 1 minute faster would have won me $500 and two minutes would have meant $1000. Ouch.

You are 34, improving, lesson learned...next time, you will lay down some smack on the course and win some cash.

I am in my very first attempt at Lydiard cycle...so far in first race (8km) with NO SPEED work whatsoever and a cold AND spraining my ankle the day before, I ran what I would typically run anyway and under control.

This is getting interesting....

Any one on this thread have any info about the Boston '79 thread idea of a panel with BRPatti

ThanksTom

Mr. Sal:

Way to go! You nabbed that sub-2:40 you've been dreaming of. Savor that! As you already know, your fitness was even better than that. The marathon is all about experience. It is SO tricky to get it just right. Learn a few lessons for next time and you will go faster still.

-Mark

Mark, I was just about to email you! Thanks man, your advice definitely helped, and you're right, there is better in me. A good start though. How's the Boston run-up coming?

Let's do this up right and say, "Good on ya."

HRE:

Sorry, mate. I can't believe I said it wrong!

I will chime in with another congrats to Mike on a more public forum than his blog. Great effort, great preparation. I thought that you would be able to surprise yourself even more- my guess was sub 2:35, computing from your half PR. Anyway, enjoy the great feeling, you deserved it!

Congrats Mike. Great run. I echo Nobby's words.

I am sitting on a Beach at present so am not getting on line as much as usual.

Back home by the weekend.

Thanks Kim and Rich and all, wish I was on the beach! I had a question emailed to me from Hunter, a runner in China with his own Lydiard blog (in Chinese). He asked me why Arthur says that "Once you start with the anaerobic training you can't stop". Any thoughts on this?

Mike:

Let me know the site for the Chinese guy's blog--let's see how I can understand it... (just kidding!)

It is because anaerobic training feels so good that you just can't stop it. Another silly joke. I'm at the point where I'm not running as much or as hard. But if I choose to, I can probably get up and get to the point where I can run for 2-hours and feel good within 2 or 3 weeks. This is what Lydiard meant by saying "once you'd developed your aerobic capacity, you don't lose it." In other words, in your case for example, you have built such a good solid aerobic base that you can always fall back on to if you choose to. In a large part, it is the development of capillaries. Once developed, even though they might shut down for a while, it would be relatively easy to open up again. Anaerobic capacity is different. It is more a chemical matter. It is to develop buffer against large lactic acid build-up in your blood stream. In other words, you take something like 3 to 5 weeks to develop this chemical buffer and, if you don't continue, you lose that ability. As has been debated here as well as other threads (or other message board???), performing anaerobic training can affect your aerobic capacity adversely so you don't want to keep doing it; yet, if you stop doing it completely too early (before main competitions begin), you'll lose that ability. This is why Lydiard prescribed what he called "sharpeners" or, unlike some people think (of Lydiard being so arregant), "Igloi training". This way, you are still stimulating this chemical reaction in your body but not in the same valume as earlier.

Perhaps to phrase it differently, "once you start doing anaerobic training, you need to keep doing it in order to maintain the same level of anaerobic developmen." You CAN stop doing it, but then what's the point of coordinating all the schedule? This is the problem with some program; they start doing anerobic training way too early in the season; but neglect it when the competitions near. This is the advantage of the Lydiard program--you know what to do when.

Kim was kind enough to sell me a copy of Running with Lydiard and mail it to me. I just got it.

I loved the first story, where he describes being at the track with an athlete. Some young guys approach AL asking how fast the runner is going and he replies that he doesn't know. "How long", - "don't know"....

Then the kids ask the runner, same answers...beauty!

Proving that setting, set speeds, distances etc., is limiting or unesessarily extending an appropriate and healthy speed effort.

I love it.

Dr. E:

Of that Richard Tayler story; Dick Brown said "the most beautiful lesson any athlete/coach can lean..." I still remember when and where I first heard it.

I dont have that book and I got nuthin against Lydiard - hey, if it worked for so many then wonderful wonderful. BUT -

Dr. E wrote:

Kim was kind enough to sell me a copy of Running with Lydiard and mail it to me. I just got it.

I loved the first story, where he describes being at the track with an athlete. Some young guys approach AL asking how fast the runner is going and he replies that he doesn't know. "How long", - "don't know"....

Then the kids ask the runner, same answers...beauty!

Proving that setting, set speeds, distances etc., is limiting or unesessarily extending an appropriate and healthy speed effort.

I love it.

This proves nothing. Set speeds and distance WORKS for many who DO actually feel this is important - it is not necessarily limiting or whatever you choose to call it in any way whatsoever. Lydiard fans DO get carried away with this notion I think. C'mon - it MATTERS wether I do 6x200 at the track or 6x1200 on any given track day. It matters wether I do 200s in 33 or 27 in any given month. It matters wether I do 6x200 or 20x200 given the month. So please stop praising anarchy when this approach clearly is not realistic in the grand scheme for many top runners and other runners alike. If my goal is 2minutes 800m and 2 weeks before I am having problems with some 30second 200s, THAT MATTERS.

There IS a time to carefully consider what time(s) you're running; there IS a time when you just forget about time/numbers and go by how you feel. The fact you're having problems performing certain predetermined set of repeats at certain predetermined speed clearly shows that you don't quite understand the meaning of this story. And that should matter.

Mucus,

I have become evangelical about Lydiard before due course. But it speaks to me.

>>Please stop praising anarchy<<

No. But thanks for asking.

I also am endeared to the fact that Lydiard didn't nesessarily test other's theories, when he would run 80km in a week or 500km a week, to see what happened. But blazed the trail of knowledge, discovered it and shared it.

I am thinking perhaps some of these fascinating stat mongers hadn't done anything to do with discovery, rather had moderate success themselves, plus a University degree...

Read Nobby's response to your comment. It says it all.

So, at the track, the coach and runner not knowing or caring a. how fast they are going b. what volume they are going c. what distance they are going d. what recovery they are taking does not matter at all. Then I ask WHAT EXACTLY IS THE PURPOSE OF THE WORKOUT? It is MEANINGLESS if all of those things don't matter.