LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

Hi Nobby,

The old kiss principle is alive and well in Henry Rono's posts.

I enjoy the discussion -- that's really how to make some progress in this business. Sorry I don't get involved more, but most enjoyable would be to get together and really talk things over. I don't recal a clinic or year that I haven't learned something new. I tend to think we sometimes try to apply the same thinking to all levels of athletic ability and performance. I often get emails and calls asking how intensely to do various types of training. For experienced runners it is much easier to say 'go by feel' than it is for not so experienced and many times the lesser runners over-do the effort with the idea that they must always go as hard as they can. They can benefit a good deal by knowing that many runs are not so hard and that the desired benefit can be attained by a particular intensity of effort (that they may not be very good at judging). To me the most important job of a coach is to provide an environment in which each individual runner's ability can be realized, and I think Lydiard was great at that. His runners seemed to really appreciate the environment they were in (maybe not always enjoy, but certainly appreciate). No-one has all the answers and hopefully no-one ever will or there won't be a need for any coaches. Progress is most likely to be made through questioning, evaluating and discussion.

Dr Daniels : It is great to see you post and I for one value your input and insight. Keep it coming please !.

On Friday I was cleaning out a Store room at school looking for some Nutrition notes that Arthur had given me around 1982-83. I found them but in the back of the folder I found a training schedule I gave to my young runners (13- 14 years old).

I was teaching at Mt Albert Grammar at the time (Peter Snell and Arthur are Alumni). The school had a tradition of alway lining up at the Auckland Secondary Schools Cross Country Champs (along with MANY others)with as strong a Teams as possible.

The races were held over 3 age groups ; Under 14 years old. Under 16 years old and under 19.

About 3 months out I would try and get kids to start training. (Very hard when they are involved in things like Soccer or Rugby !!!)

Here is what I gave the "beginners" . Most of these kids would have a 'reasonable' state of Aerobic fitness from their other sports and the fact that we had them running 10 to 15 minutes each PE period before we did anything (sometimes more !)

In the beginning every second day I would have a run that would involve them running 'slightly' faster than the run we were doing. I controlled that as the group would have a big variance in ability and of course would want to RACE.

Example : if we were running along at 8 minute miles I may lift the pace to 7:30's. However, I usually had no idea how fast or slow we were going so I would lift the pace "just a tad" and continue with this as long as necessary. As soon as a kid was breathing more heavily so he could not hold a conversation we backed off.

So here it is:

Beginners : Stay on this for 3 weeks;

Sunday : 20 to 30 minute easy run

Monday: 15 minute run with the middle 5 minutes being run 'slightly' harder or faster NOT RACED,

Tuesday : 20 to 30 minute easy run

Wednesday: As for Monday

Thursday: 20 to 30 minute easy run

Friday: off

Saturday: As for Monday and Wednesday

Stage 2 : 2 to 3 weeks

Sunday : 30 to 45 minute easy run

Monday : 20 minute run with the middle 7 minutes 'slightly' faster.

Tuesday: 30 minute easy run

WEdnesday : As for Monday

Thursday: 30 to 40 minute easy run

Friday : off

Saturday ; As for Monday/Wednesday

Stage 3 : 2 weeks or more

Sunday : 1 hour easy run

Monday : 20 to 30 minute easy run

Tuesday ; 30 minute run with the middle 10 minutes

slightly faster

Wednesday : 30 to 40 minute easy run

Thursday : As for Tuesday

Friday : 20 minute easy run or day off

Saturday : 40 minute easy run

I cannot remember if I discussed this idea of training with Arthur or not.

However, 2 years later (1985)I had a bunch of young kids who could really fly and we won quite a few regional titles and only lost the NZ Scondary Schools title by one point.

Most of the kids stayed with the Sport for years after they left the school. I still have regular contact with some.

Best of them Glen le Gros ended up at TCU and won a SW Conference Cross Country title.

Bump

Kim,Thanks for the post. Good information! I think you are a good coach and a good human being. Keep up the good work! Tinman

lydiard said many many things that confuse and contradict didn't he nobby. i have some of his books. many many things written in this great thread contradict the books too. its all so confusing. nobby you often dismiss fancy things and embrace kiss when it supports something you argue for but you also delve into science and numbers when explaining how and why lydiard works.

anyway i just want to say that in spite of all the love in this thread, the lydiard methods have not worked for every great runner on the planet. lets have some greater perspective. i just think it is important to say this. hope i dont spoil the party, rather, that i contribute well.

But you see, the thread is mostly about Lydiard's method. It started as a sort of compare and contrast kind of thing but really has become about using the Lydiard method. What perspective are you looking for?

Point taken. However, I really don't understand what's so confusing about the Lydiard method. It is so simple and it is very well explained (by Lydiard). Sure, I admit that I didn't see it at first. But once it start to make sense, it has become very clear how it works and why. Science is very important. If Lydiard's approach of "go by how you feel" and then turn around and say "calculate meticulously for time trials" contradict your way of defining training method, I don't know what to tell you. It's both important.

Lydiard was not the first one to "invent" correct training method. Many others before him had done very similar ways and succeeded. But as far as I'm concerned, Lydiard was pretty much the first one to explain to all of us how it works and, to an extent, why. If you think runners like Coe not running 100 miles a week for 10 weeks or Henry Marsh not doing his 22-miler "not Lydiard", again, I don't know what to tell ya. They still need high oxygen uptake level and they still need power and flexibility and develop anaerobic capacity as well as speed to sharpen up and then peak on the day. In a sense of correct physiological and mechanical fundamentals, Lydiard had it all right and everyone has covered all the elements Lydiard explained if only in a different fashion. Human physiology is not different from black to white to oriental; men or women; middle distances to the marathon.

If you expected Lydiard to know everything, he didn't. He made mistakes; he had made incorrect statements. He's only human too. You cannot expect one man to know everything. If you find a few runners who did great doing nothing but intervals and you want to follow that path, all the power to you. I'm totally with you on "having greater perspective." Don't look at what kind of training some Kenyan runner did 4 weeks before he set the world record; but look at what he was doing 7 years before he reached that level. We all want to see a quick results; we all want to be faster today. Let's look at some example of some athletes setting the records by running 20 miles a week, all quality. Sure, you will improve some initially. But that's how this country destroys young potentials.

Hi guys,

more than 80 pages are too much to read them all, but I flipped through them every now and then and found it pretty exciting.

The only thing I'd like to say, is, that for me there is no "Daniels OR Lydiard" but a "Daniels AND Lydiard".

I'm a 40-year-old distance runner from Germany and since I've read both I have got a fair good idea of what to do. Maybe that's just because I don't follow straight plans, but try to feel the need of special sessions, when I'm lacking this or that.

I've read a lot of books about running, but Lydiard and Daniels are the best.

Cheers

Jens

Jens, We did not start this thread, however what it is called does'nt really matter. I for one am delighted that Dr Daniels has jumped on and contributed.

If I learnt nothing else from Arthur it was to really think about what I was trying to achieve with an athlete and then think about what suited that athlete, all along drawing on a basic blue print.

So bottom line for me would be athletes improving,reaching goals and enjoying their work. I am sure Dr Daniels would agree.

Too good of a thread to be buried back on page 6 or wherever it was.

Hyenas drink?

Ahem? wrote:

Hyenas drink?

This one does.

Nobby,

Benefits from speed training is well known to provide immediate feedback and quick improvement.

What about marathon conditioning or base phase?

So if one runs a lot of mileage, typically how long before you see results ie; 20 milers become easier at same pace etc.

I've personally never really kept track of when things start to feel easier when marathon conditioning....

After three weeks of base training, you should see some incremental improvement. After three months of base training, you will likely undergo a sudden and dramatic improvement. That's because your capillary network will have achieved a critical density allowing your body to move more blood and oxygen than when you were developing the critical density.

3 months...hmmm? Alright sounds good thanks.

I was hoping after the first run, but I will take the three months.

As with almost everything else, it really depends on the individual. Some may improve very quickly, some slowly...some may not much at all.

I'm coaching this young lady now and, in the past 3 month, we've gone over the same course once. I've laid out various courses, some may be very similar but some extra is added, etc. Basically simply because I don't want her to start comparing if she's running faster this week than last week. Then you start putting pressure on yourself.

Naturally if you never done anything like conditioning, your improvement would be great; probably pretty much every week. If you're experienced runner, it would be less apparent; but then again, do you need to see "improvement" every week? Just today, it was very very hot (about 90F) when I started my run. I ran the second half about 5 minutes faster but the weather changed and got cooler. Is it because I was strong or because of the weather? Does it really matter? I felt good. That's pretty much all that mattered as far as I was concerned.

Nobby:

What do you think about Henry Rono's jumping right into training with 2-3 hours runs right at the start?

Note the thread related to his chasing the Master's Mile WR.