LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

Oh I was thinking that yer answer to that question might reveal your suspected identity, Dogma! Good questions and good discussion here. (I did that session in mostly hi 2:30s, and 2:30 at the end, feeling sluggish due to shocking 75min the previous day.)

Is "stamina" the same as "speed endurance"?

Now, I think you've opened up a can of worms. Some really great long distance people may have been "weak" at 800/1500? De Castella comes to mind.

Personally, I prefer not to be too technical but if I may say so...

Relationship between stride length and stride frequency is, just as you have pointed out with other topic, not that simple as it has been presented; if you're not long-strider, then you're "choppy" strider. Everybody has the correct combination of two that best suit to him/her. I don't think it's something you can "perfect" long-stride running then quick-strude running. Besides, if you "perfect" one and to the "perfection", why move on to "perfect" the other end of spectrum? Curiousity? Research?

I used to think, like you said, stride length is better/easier way to improve. Thus hill bounding exercise, etc. But, as you know, it's not that simple at all. Bounding or springing exercise Lydiard advocates WILL enhance stride length which is most likely underdeveloped among distance runners who run a lot. However, this should not be attained with the expense of stride frequency; otherwise, all you're doing is to waste extra energy by moving the center of gravity up and down. Besides, long-stride approach actually has more obvious limitations.

Also another consideration is that, as the distance goes longer and the conservation of energy becomes more critical, "long-stride running" could potentially become disadvantage--particularly if you have a tendency of "bounding", you are more likely to use your calf muscles instead of thigh muscle groups, which are much bigger and endure better. In general, in the marathon, long-stride runners tend to run very fast if he/she hits a good one but more likely to hit the wall--not because he/she runs out of gas but because their "kicking" muscles get tired. Choppier stride runners tend to run more consistantly though may not run as fast or respond to the surges better.

Sprinters DO have difinate differences among them whether they are long-stride type of short-stride type. Long stride type, like Carl Lewis, can accelerate a lot but have difficulty starting quickly.

Definition of "Speed Endurance", as much as I understand, is pretty much close to Lactate Threshold...or something like that. The speed at which you consider "speed endurance" training would have to be the speed at which your body start to create lactic acid or slightly above or blow and develop tolerence to continue running at that speed for a long time; which, as you have described, is probably close to one's 800m pace. However, according to your definition, which was "how long you can maintain a given speed", no specifics of the "given speed" is stated. In such case, the man who runs ultra marathon, because he is maintaining the "given speed" for a loooooooooooong time; thus has the best "speed endurance" which I'm sure you'd say is wrong (sorry, I'm being too technical and smart-Alec here).

My understanding of "speed endurance" is somewhere between "speed" and "stamina". Whether it has to be above "lactic acid formation" or below that, I don't know and there are quite a few who lurk this thread more qualified to explain terminology better than I can. Of course, if you want to compete in 800m, you probably need to work on "tolerence" to lactate...whatever you want to call it. If you are training for the marathon, you probably want to develop (make it higher) the pace at which you can maintain without creating lactic acid in your working muscles.

I'm not quite sure if I understood your comment about 800m correctly. Speed does play a big part in running 800m and, if your "basic speed" is slow, all the anaerobic ability or lactate threshold or "speed endurance" or whatever will get you to the finish line ahead of the faster guy. To me, 800m is different from "speed", and doesn't have much value or indication to good performance for running 5000, 10000 or marathon. It would help if you have better time. But why stay there and try to improve when your best suited distance is somewhere else?

In the last sentence, I meant to say "all the ...... will NOT get you to the finish line ahead of the faster guys." I used a lot of long sentensed which I'm not used to (let alone, in a foreign language!) and I got confused...

By the way, my previous post was dedicated to Skuj.

Skuj,

I forgot to reply to your why not Cedar question.

I wanted speed work in that week, which would leave me not recovered after both the race, the speed workout and the desire to run long, which I needed to.

The thread at PacAth is now taking off, thanks to a Trucker with an atlas and HRE.

"Symbiotic/Patriotic/slamdunk/slampunk

It's the end of the world as we know it"

....And I Feel Fine!

Yep, HRE, well done! Sleeping masses, awake! "I don't really have much time" say some really talented people. OUCH!!! Do you have time to eat and sleep? Well, what's the problem then? Hahahahahaha.

You doing any other Series Events in prep for Vancouver, Ker...er....E? My sched got all bunged up. Military Things. Perhaps no Bazan now.

Bummer - too bad about Bazan, but do it in the spring when it is the Sidney Days 5km, same route.

I'll do Bazan, perhaps Sooke, Perhaps Sun RUn, TC....I don't know about Vancouver. Are you talkign about the marathon or Sun RUN?

Yer killing me, yer frogness. Good thread at pacath now. I'm off for 3 sets of 4x200m, several minutes between sets, but starting each "on 1 minute" within the set. "Personal training log this thread sucks now blah blah...." Whatever.

Cabral revealed disdain for workouts like that, but I cannot understand his reasoning. Do Lydiard or Daniels believe in such sessions?

Thanks Skuj,

That is a otentially interesting thread shaing up.

Yer a good man HRE. Some really good people there, but, oh god if they see this they'll crucify me....I detect a lack of passion!!!

OMG did I just say that?

Why would anyone do reps and sets. Im sure daniels and lydiars were against that for the simple reason that recovery should be stable ie it is meaningless to mix it all up.

Skuj wrote:

Oh I was thinking that yer answer to that question might reveal your suspected identity, Dogma! Good questions and good discussion here. (I did that session in mostly hi 2:30s, and 2:30 at the end, feeling sluggish due to shocking 75min the previous day.)

Is "stamina" the same as "speed endurance"?

Now, I think you've opened up a can of worms. Some really great long distance people may have been "weak" at 800/1500? De Castella comes to mind.

ummm, I think stamina is the same as endurance, not speed endurance.

Can of worms Skuj? I hope so.

Why did I/do I do both long and choppy strides, curiosity, research?

Yes Nobby, both. A lot of runners use a choppy stride until the end of the race, and then sprint with a long stride.

As for my definition of Speed Endurance as being how long we can maintain a given pace, that is essentially saying that Speed Endurance = Race Pace.

As for my claim that good 800m pace is essential for all long distance runners, I am sure there must be many fast Marathon runners who have never raced 800m.

For Japanese runners doing 30k tempo runs in 90 minutes, that is phenomenal Speed Endurance. Where did they get that pace from if some of them don't have awesome times over short distances?

They must at some point in their life, have been running very fast over short distances, since that is how we all develop most of our talent for running. What we do when we start "training properly" is only half the story.

when you say:

"To me, 800m is different from "speed", and doesn't have much value or indication to good performance for running 5000, 10000 or marathon. It would help if you have better time. But why stay there and try to improve when your best suited distance is somewhere else?"

I would have to say that just as Peter Snell with Arthur Lydiard's help, revloutionised Middle distance running from 1960 onwards, African runners did the same for the 5000 and 10000M in recent years.

Gebreselassie running 1.46 and 3.31 indoors before going on to run 12.39 and 26.22 doesn't just show his great range, it shows that middle distance pace is absolutely essential for fast times over 5000m and 10000m.

Now Haile is going on to do the same for the longer distances. 44.24 for 10 miles and 58.55 for Half Marathon.

He is sure that he can do the same for the Marathon, and who would doubt him?

Marathon running now, is no longer dominated by Marathon specialists, but by fast runners who know that they can earn a good living at the longer distances.

Yer a good man/woman Dogma!

30k tempo in 90min??? Sheesh....that's a 30k world class race, no?

Isn't stamina the ability to maintain a sustained higher effort for a longer period than just a few sec? E has my Coe/Martin book, dammit. Haha.

I like the worms: I appreciate that Geb and others have done wonderful middle distance times. Aouita. (Oh, bad example today!) I appreciate that many Marathoner types never cared to race 800/1500. BUT, there are some 2:06 types that must be quite "weak" at those distances. Kanouchi? I don't think DeCastella ever broke 8min for 3k? Wasn't a sub 60sec 400 quite hard for him, and others? I really do not believe that all great Marathoners will come from the camp that you have described. Many / most will, but a fair percentage will always suck at 3000m and down, no matter what they do in training. I think. Good discussion.

Now, Trollstoy, hahahaha.....very funny....what is wrong with reps and sets? Why must the effort between a recovery period be a single sustained effort, rather than an intervalled exercise? 4 sets of 4x400m, 45sec between reps, a few minutes between sets....why is this such a bad idea compared to 16x400 with say 1-2min rest? Keeping to the thread topic, I ask again, did Lydiard or daniels see a use for this kind of thing?

The west coast today is crisp, clear and beautiful. I'm off for a therapeutic jogabout. Damn!

I should add that for 5k/10k, yes, the game has changed, and the rulers will be people that can run a very fast 1500, and maybe even 800? But for the marathon.....see above! :)

All due respect, Dogma, you are wrong. This is EXACTLY the kind of thinking Lydiard had fought for the last 50 years. Human physiological principles and fundamentals don't differ from black to white (or yellow?). And human physiological principles and fundamentals don't change over 100 years (may in 5 million years...). What was applicable and correct in 1950 still stands today. Most people get blinded with faster times of today that also leads to inferior complex against African runners. A huge part of today's records were supported by many factors such as fast track, better equipment, medical advancement, rabits, condition, competition, and money. You put someone like Dick Quax or Rod Dixon in the exactly the same situation, full-time training, medical treatment, fast track and equipment, and dangle money in front of their faces, they'll run 12:30 and up agaisnt Ethiopians and Kenyans--I have no doubt of that.

Also running fast over shorter distance, be it 800 or 5/10k, before you move up the longer distance has hampered so many young potentially great long(er) distance runners from becoming champions. 800m time has got NOTHING to do with running fast over 5/10k or marathon. Well, it helps. But it is your ability to maintain necessary speed over the racing distance (you may call it Speed Endurance) that enables you to perform well; namely your aerobic capacity; not your 800m time. You take 20 sub 2:10 marathon runners from Kenya and 20 sub 2:10 marathon runners from Japan; have them run a marathon (seprately would be better for research purpose) and have them run 800m. Just for the heck of it, have them run 10000m as well--you'll see the graph separate much further over the results for 800m. And all the training in the world will NOT make Japs run fast 800m. If this doesn't convince you that 800m time is irrelevant, I don't know what will.

Just because one or two athletes did really well over wider range of distances and they happened to be some of the best and most talked about runners; that does NOT mean that's the trend that should be. This kind of thinking is so dangerous for so many young asipring athletes who may not excell in shorter distances.

Since you asked twice; here's my opinion...

There's nothing wrong with doing reps in sets. It'll most likely affect your body slightly different from straight forward reps. I would ask you two questions: Why do you do them this way and why are you doing them now. Plus, I'll ask again, can you summarize your 73-page thesis on how YOU peak on the specific day doing multi-pace training or whatever else you're employing? I'll accept 5 page, double-speced, but nothing longer! Hahahaha...

One more thing on "choppy" strides... Man, I just don't give up, do I? While your comment on "increasing stride length" at the final stage of the competition is correct (your stride length will naturally increase when you try to speed up), I was talking about, in a general term, more frequent strides would generate more power because the time you spend on the ground is actually more when your strides are "choppier". Since you seem to like to talk about Geb, watch the final 100m of Sydney 10000m where Geb barely nipped Tergat. Leggy Tergat's strides were actually longer, thus slower, than Geb's. Remember the movie Matrix? When Mr. Anderson (what was his first name?) first joined that whatever the name of the group and started getting bunch of stuff loaded in his neck and he woke up and said, "I know Kun-Fu" and that big black guy said, "Then show me" and they started to spar. Anderson climbed up the wall and jumped way up high over the other guy's head. The other guy (Morphius?) just stood there and watched him land then kicked the $h|t out of him. While you're in the air, you can't do anything--like kicking the ground to propel yourself forward.

No physiology here, although, I could!4 sets of 4x200m, 30sec between reps, lotsa time between sets. 800 pace!!! Yes, 800 pace. 4x200m with minimal recovery AT 800 pace is an intense thing, a race simulation, damn good training. Do 4 of em!! But rest a whole lot between these things. I don't know if I'm making sense, but I find reps and sets to be very expansive in the things that you can do. 16x200 with even a minute rest at the same pace would drive me nuts, I think. It would have to be slower paced.Peaking: 73 words: Multipacing year round. Each zone is addressed in different ways depending upon the time of year. Aerobic conditioners are 30min jogs when you start, and 2hr strong aerobic at peak volume. Anaerobic conditioners are marathon pace when you start, and faster than half marathon pace later. Aerobic capacity is tempoish when you start, and 3k race pace later. 6x1000m at 15k pace in Oct and 3x1000m at 3k pace in june. Anaerobic capacitors gradually build from something like 15x200m at 3k pace in October to 4x400m at 800m pace in june. The general level of intensity increases right up to peak. The general level of volume peaks a few weeks away from the biggest race, then decay curves towards the race. There! :)

Nobby wrote:

Since you asked twice; here's my opinion...

There's nothing wrong with doing reps in sets. It'll most likely affect your body slightly different from straight forward reps. I would ask you two questions: Why do you do them this way and why are you doing them now. Plus, I'll ask again, can you summarize your 73-page thesis on how YOU peak on the specific day doing multi-pace training or whatever else you're employing? I'll accept 5 page, double-speced, but nothing longer! Hahahaha...