Lydiard Imitations

It's an interesting idea but I'm not sure how it could happen. It seems as if the really elite Kenyans already have coaches and the "B" level ones that come here and make their living at road races are self-coached and mostly focused on frequent racing. They don't seem to come here looking for coaching.

Of course Kenyans that go to our universities do get coaching but I don't know which of our college coaches use Lydiard's approach aside from Wetmore who seems to limit how much recruiting he does and seems to go after Americans for the most part.

On top of that, as Chris says, Lydiard's explanation as to why they're so easy to coach is that they've already done most of what his base phase does so even the ones coached in other ways are already loosely Lydiard trained. You might make some adjustements to their interval schedules but while Arthur thought intervals were important he really did not think the specifics mattered all that much so I'm not sure a Lydiard coach would feel the need to adjust a Kenyan's intervals all that much.

well. wrote:

Renato: if the training methods have evolved so much, why is it that Lasse Viren would have had a good chance to win last year´s Euro Champ (if you had removed African born Farah)?

Running long and fast in training is nothing new. I personally know both Anders Gärderud and Kjell-Eriik Ståhl, and they both did this long before the Kenyans and the 1980s Italians.

This is a bit off topic but I saw something about Ståhl maybe 2-3 years ago(?) that asid he was coming back and hoping to break the over 60 record for the marathon. I believe he ran in one marathon then and came out with a bit of an injury. Do you know if he's still interested in coming back or doing any running?

And as you likely already know, Lydiard made a trip to Kenya and said that he didn't have anything to teach them, they were already doing all the right things.

I bet even in 2004 when he passed away, he didn't realize just how accurate that statement is. I mean the Kenyan domination is just off the hook, over these last two years.

Maybe there is a point in there, about too much intensity compressed in this brief time frame, but I understood during the Lydiard "anaerobic training" period, you are supposed to take 48 hours to recover from a tough session. So such session were not done "almost daily", but likely 2-3 times per week, with an easier session in between, and the long run on the 7th day.

Yes I'm full of interesting ideas. I'm just trying to figure out how to eliminate some variables, so we are comparing apples to apples, in the same era, with comparable people. But why target elites? Didn't Lydiard turn club runners into champions?

Except we've already identified a few important differences in the two approaches. Having a Lydiard group in East Africa (and/or training Western athletes to be competitive) would help us quantify the impact of these differences, and eliminate genetic/ethnic variables from the equation. Humans share 98% of the genes as monkeys, yet you cannot claim one is the other, except in the broadest sense.

And Renato has shared a lots of information about his methods over the course of Letsrun.

Wetcoast wrote:

In the interview that you and I conducted, I found that your training method does have very strong similarities to Lydiard and other Lydiard-like programs. I said so, so that the reader can read the interview and decide for themselves where the similarities are.

I am not sure what you discussed in the interview, but apart from the fact that both programs involve running, Antonio's approach is completely different from that of Lydiard. Going by what has been written on these boards (threads such as summer fo Antonio etc ..) here are just a few of the major differences:

1. Antonio does not believe that the long run is of major importance.

2. The focus of Antonio's program is two interval workouts each week, short repetitions and long repetitions and this starts at the begining or very early on in the training program. The rest of the running in between these workouts is orientated towards being able to do these two workouts well.

3. The Lydiard approach to controling intensity in most of the training phases is through the athletes monitoring their feeling while doing the running. Antonio's approach is to use the stop watch to control the workout paces, which are adjusted to the athlete's race goals/condition.

This is not to say that one approach is better than the other (that is up to individual athletes and coaches to decide) but they have some very deep differences.

He did turn club runners into champions. But the basis for doing that was always developing the club runner's aerobic capacity to a higher level than that of his/her competitors before adding the hills, intervals, and harder distance runs.

As it seems like tha Africans have already done the first thing, developed the aerobic fitness, there wouldn't be that much that a Lydiard coach would do with them that's different from what others who coach them are doing, at least in regard to the Africans we know of.

We do however, always hear that the Africans we know of are simply the tip of the iceberg and that for each of them there are dozens of others back in Kenya who are not fast enough to hook up with an agent or coach who will get them out of Kenya and into the world of high level running.

It might be interesting to see what happened if someone put those athletes onto a Lydiard program. Practically, that's not going to happen given the money it would take to get something like that functioning. Honestly, as Chris points out, Arthur himself didn't think there was much he could do for African runners.

The essence of Lydiard's ideas make an appearance in fragments of this discussion, but really, this discussion is bloated. If Canova, Cabral, et al think Lydiard did not propose "long and fast" as a training stimulus, they are incorrect. A careful reading of Lydiard shows he wanted runners to a) increase volume b) keep the intensity conversational c) increase the speed at which they conducted (a) with the caveat that it be kept near the conditions of (b). There is some fuzzy anaerobic/aerobic boundary with a rate attached to it for each athlete and AL wanted to push out that rate for each athlete.

SmithStn wrote:

There is some fuzzy anaerobic/aerobic boundary with a rate attached to it for each athlete and AL wanted to push out that rate for each athlete.

Can you elaborate on this at all?

Ok then, I will bring some of the interview to you, rather than you bothering to source it yourself at athletics illustrated dot com:

Antonio wrote:

>>The Aerobic Foundation

Finally, two important aspects of my training periodization approach:

The aerobics is the important one of the basic training variables, and it´s why it can never be neglected and shall be trained in every phase of the training periodization.>On the other side of the training need, the specific training is at the top of the interest as a training variable, and can be included when seems effective.>CK: Sounds very familiar. Two things I see an absence of (perhaps I am just missing it) 1.) Alactic strides or any fine, neuro-muscular stimulation that is still aerobic in nature, so very short with light sprints and I also see fartlek training missing. Where do your athletes stay in touch with their neuro-muscular speed when they are doing aerobic intervals in the “general” period of training?

AC: My training does every kind of training stimulus. From anaerobic to aerobic to anaerobic, from alactic to lactic, from all flat-out pace to easy regeneration pace, every workout format, short-strides, hill training, fartlek, in-out, etc. I don´t exclude any kind of training zone or effort, or training format. I might include some flexibility as well. I just miss plyometrics and weight training.>However, most of the training that you ask me about is in the second level of interest related to my essential training. As I stated, since the middle and long distance training is mostly aerobic and the important one factor is resistance, then richest training approach is done by aerobic mileage volume quantity and specific workout quality. When I describe my training I try to figure out the main structure, not the details. If I figure out the intricate details, something important is lost from the message.>Despite the distance training approach it shall be multi-lateral zone of efforts and not fragmented, but also needs to be minimalist, selective and discriminatory. Despite what you wanted, it´s quite impossible to train all training zones during one short period, therefore we need to select among all training variants in what´s most crucial to the training improvements.>CK: What is your opinion on the Igloi method?

AC: I´m very surprised how people don´t understand Igloi training. I don´t want to be arrogant, or say that I know everything about the training method, but Igloi is very easy to understand.>The problem is that to understand Igloi, you need to go back (somehow) and learn about 2 types of training that are similar and one is influenced by the other: one is Zatopec training, the other is Freiburg Gersheler and Reindell training. Freiburg is the German city where Waldemar Gersheler and Carl Reindell did most of his interval training method. Aactually it´s named Freiburg Interval Training.<<

Wetcoast's notes: That's funny, Lydiard mentions Zatopec many times as an influence.

But hang on just a minute. Didn't Renato Canova write: "don't talk about Lydiard training, because it is outdated?"

Igloi is older than Lydiard!!!!

Does this mean that Renato is going to have to hate Antonio?? Sorry Antonio.

Come clean, you guys.

HRE wrote:

All of that aside, how can you do an interview and not remember? Do you do that many?

Only 2 days ago when you did site address this my interview I realise and I knew that the Kelsall that interview me it´s the same individual that posts on LRC under the nickname of Wetcoast. Do you understand now ?

I didn´t relate Wetcoast to one else or to Christopher Kelsall, the other identification.

Of course that by instance I know who is Renato, who is Malmo, who is Nobby, who was John Hadd by their nicknames and a few others, but not Wetcoast.

Trust me if you want. I don´t know who is HRE precisely despite we did share some emails a few years ago. But the time goes by, I did forget who you are precisely, but of course I know what you think about training and that you are is a Lydiard defender. Don´t take that as a offense, bceause its true. I know that Mr. Christtopher is from Canada, but sometimes i ask to myself if you are from US or Canada. But this my my doubt about your citizenship doesn´t nothing to our debate, i realay don´t care to find the answer.

Trust me if you want. I´m not here to posts about individual, temperament or personality, i´m here to debate training ideas.

Yes. That makes sense. But it seemed odd to me that someone could be interviewed and not remember it even if they do not connect the name of the interviewer to someone's screen name. And not that it matters but I'm in the US.

Mr. Christopher Kelsall (or shall i name you Wetcoast ?)

I hope your name is correct this time. As you might understand I I wrote your name but it´s my involuntary type match mistake, not an attempt to offend you or your family name whatsoever. By the way my name it´s not “Antonio” as you write and I also do. My name it´s António” with an accent on the “ó”, something that I give up to write correct either, because American sites are made just to English alphabet.

It´s not miss of consideration, but let me say that I know thousands of people all over the world that I write their names, I share some 20 emails with hundreds different people all over the world on everyday basis. Some of them are hard to memorize the name letters – it´s your case - since that doesn´t exist in my mother language. I´ can´t fix and memorize more than a dozen to what to me are strange names, and who they are by post nicknames whatsoever.

That is the reason I said to you as Wetcoast that I didn´t remember to be interviewed by him. Actually I relate Wetcoast with Kelsall I I hope that from now on I don´t forget s I wil try to write your name correctly.

About the interview. Do you know what I think just straight and direct ?

What you did transcript about my sentence “I don´t know all about Lydiard” it´s not on the interview. This is part of emails that we share and that´s we both agree that the email contain should be out of the interview. Since the interview was about my training basically and I did accept and I did respect to not talk about Lydiard or Lydiard training and I did it, ther´s no reason to come with want I said out of the interview, questions that you ask me by email share.

I want remember you that you email me and that you ask me to answer your questions by the software “Google Docs” and all my answers are write in one file that you did open for that effect. You also did ask me that you were interested on the interview only with the condition that I didn´t mention nothing about Lydiard, what I did agree.Right ? You did write all the questions on ““Google Docs” and I did answer all your questions on that same file ““Google Docs”. Right ? Then what you say it is one comment out of the interview context. Do you want that I post the email that I said that all the questions that you did ask by email shouldn´t be part of the interview but just what is written on google docs file document and then later you did decide to edit include on the interview something that I email you out of the interview context.

However all this discrimination it´s inadequate to what you think about my training and to what I think about Lydiard training. The fact that I said “I don´t know all about Lydiard raining” or the fact that I did my opinion about Igloi training, I don´t see how you relate that that my training is similar to Lydiard. This is quite demagogic. Might be I don´t know ALL about Lydiard, who really does ? However Kelsall you are magician you know more about my training than myself ! You are able to relate my training to other one than myself ! What a talent !

Let me put once sentence to clarify.

I don´t know everything about Lydiard but I know everything about my training.

What i know about my about my training it´s enough to know that my training is very different than the Lydiard one be the Lydiard essentials or Lydiard custom training. Almost everything that i do thw way that i do it´s different than the Lydiard one.

Well…if you consider the runner movement, my training in that aspect is similar to Lydiard. If you consider that I think that aerobic condition is an important part of my training i´m similar to Lydiard. However the timing, the frequency, the pace, the total volume over the season periodisation, the format of the training unities iof that aerobic need, the way I prescribe it´s very different than h the aerobic training, My periodisation…yes I do periodisation, it´s this that you say that is similar to Lydiard ? However I do total different periodisation than Lydiard, I don´t agree with linear periodisation, I don´t agree with long runs, I don´t agree with “aerobic first”, I do hills, it´s that what you say it´s similar to Lydiard ? yes I do hills, but I do hills on every phase of the year periodisatiom ,y hill workouts do different format than Lydiard, it´s this that you say that´s similar to Lydiard. I prescribe more training individualization than Lydiard, I use specific and interval training on every phase of the process, it´s this that you say that is similar to main Lydiard training ? I use peak and tapper, but very soft and different than Lydiard training, I use fast all-out anaerobic training, it´s this that you think that my training it´s similar to Lydiard ? Yes I do anaerobic training like Lydiard, but I use year round, on every training phase. I use very controlled training on every aspect, I use track training all season long. It´s this that you think that´s similar to the Lydiard training. My training goes from quality to quantity and from quality to quantity, as to say I expand and high up the mileage volume training from the early season to the week before the season goal competition. It´s this that you think that it´s similar to Lydiard. I I see training as from generic to specific as a crescendo in intensity but volume as well right to the end of the season , Does Lydiard is similar than me ?

If you want to clarify all about my training and Lydiard, instead of post tricky selected sentences that you take out of my training context, I challenge to post my emails to you that we discuss about what you think that´s my training similarities with Lydiard and my disagreement with you that I did express on my our email share. Ok ?

Finnaly one more point. The individual that you are, after that you read what i did write on this board since 10 years ago in disagreement about Lydiard training mostly, what I write recently on my first post of this same "Lydiard Imitations therad", however you still got the audacity to dismiss me and say that my training is similar to the Lydiard one, you shalln´t be serious about your comment on my training or is you are ignorant, or you just want to take me and the LRC readers on a trap.

I guess that might be the three conditions: a bit of training ignorance about my training, a bit of unfair judgment and a bit of tricky.

The reason, the motive ? Always the same, Lydiard is fantastic, and whio is against me or i destroy him or when i see can´t challenge their disagrement i try to conquer him to my territory, the Lydiard one.

Man, relate to Lydiard i´m on the other side of the barricade, don´t you see...

Mr HRE

You need to know that I reply to many email questions about training and training advice on a daily basis, people from everywhere. Sometimes they refer to my answers as they did nterview me! I can´t control everything I write, to who I write..

It´s not the case that I did many interviews, but to be sincere when he said “you gave me an interview, you said that on a intreview” I didn´t report to that Mr. Christopher interview, since I didn´t relate Wetcoast to him.

About you, I remember you and relate you on this board as HRE.

I still remember that some years ago we share a few emails about training and van Aaken training precisely.

I also remember that you talk me about your son and that on then past you did travel and did stay in Europe once in a while. But I really didn´t remember what´s your citizenship US or Canadian, mainly by the reason that I imagine that if you are US citizen (as you are) I don´t imagine you as one typical american, the way you think, and please considers this my comment one my compliment !

This is with all respect because i respect you as an individual not about our different training ideas eventually.

I know that sometimes to ask to an US individual if he is as from Canada, can be considered insulting.

I just take each one as individual not relate or independent what´s the citizenship/nationality.

Really, I didn't mean very much by the question. It did seem odd to me that you wouldn't remember the interview but your explanation is plausible. And yes, I recall enjoying our discussion of van Aaken, another coach who has always intrigued me.

Let me repeat once again, one more time. the intreview wasn´t about Lydiard, and BY your suggest, you did define that i willn´t mention Lydiard. I taugh it was a good idea.

In no one of your questions is said or asked about Lydiard.

Then after that you did decide to finish the interview and you did edit the interview, when i first read it, you did add a your introduction and you did add/include some comments that i didn´t read before the interview is edit. On that comments that everybody can read you did name Lydiard, Igloi, McMillan, (right ?) to sustain your opinion and yoir comment. THAT YOUR COMMENTS WEREN´T MY KNOWLEDGE AND I KNEW ABOUT TO RELATE MY TRAINING WITH THE LYDIARD, I KNEW AND I READ IT THE FIRST TIME JUST AFTER THE INTERVIEW IS FINISH AND AFTER THAT I WRITE ALL MY ANSWERS. Don´t you see this is tricky, to push and relate my training with Lydiard when we both decide not talk about Lydiard !

You ask to one person to not mention Lydiard, but you don´t reveal that YOUR AFTER comments on my answers will be relate to the Lydiard training.

Correct. During the interview we didn´t talk about Lydiard" not me or you, then how i could have told you that "I don´t know everything about Lydiard". Impossible don´t you think ?

On the interview we didn´t say nothing about Lydiard, but later, after that the uintreview was done, i realise that you did include YOUR COMMENTS AND INTRO relate to Lydiard training

Once again. You can think or imagine or comment what what you want, you can say to everyone else that my traning is similar to Lydiard EXCEPT SAY IT TO ME. I´m the only one on the earth that you can´t say TO ME "IF MY TRAINING IS SIMILAR OR DIFFERENT" BEFORE TO ASK ME. But you did it twice.

I got no attorney to answer to want Renato says. I respect the man and his training, but i have the vanity to understand quite perfect everything he says. Other diffrent thing is that i do as he does, i don´t. In the case of the pace of aerobic runs i understand what he says, and i guess you don´t understand by the ssme reason you don´t understand some other training aspects.

To understand one person, you need to place on the position of that one person. But i guess that you are limited/confined to think from the training principles and the mind of Lydiard training. For example, Mr. Nobby did the ssme mistake. As Lydiard is quite undefined in many training aspects, without control, no one could define what´s the accurate aerobioc Lydiard pace.

For instance when you wrote that Lydiard aerobic pace it´s not LSD or slow pace, i did remember the Petyer Snell documentary. This one.

Peter Snell memorabilia

L'athlète du demi-fond (1962 French documentary)

Don´t you see he runs very slow related to his talent quite LSD ! Might be he did the documentary on a bad and easy day pace !

I´ve seen John Walker, Rod Dixon and Lasse Viren, Pekka Paivarinta, and some others they did train very easy during the aerobic runs and relate to their individual training despite they relate tehir training to Lydiard. I´ve seen japanese runners that claim to be Lydiardand they did train at a pace that is slower than 8min/mile most of the time, i talk about very fast marathon runners.

Do You know who is Abebe Bikila. Marathon famous runner he used Lydiard training, by a Swedish coach with success. Ok, actually he almost losts for teh best female. he did train at altitude most of the time. But the pace was so slow. he was a Lydiard runner of success but his pace was very slow related to the other runners, and he sdefines himself as a Lydiard runner.

The problem is that you say that Lydiard pace it´s not LSD. I agree. But what is something that most of the time isn´t controlled ? What is ? Besides from LSD to the "best aerobic pace" (defined by Lydiard teh faster you should run aerobically, you have a multitude of possible aerobic paces and they dodn´t result in teh same aerobic training condition. We could go on and on on that discuss. But Renato got no time or intrest to take his time to debate an inconclusive and marginal training aspect eventually, the he did admitt that ok, Lydiard did run fast paces.

The day someone representative will define what´s the Lydiard aerobic pace by pace intensity, maigt be we will go to deep analysis of Lydiard training out of what´s the aerobic pace. However Mr. Nobby said that after a long search he did find just 4 aspects that define Lydiard training precisely, and he adds that might be that the 4 aspects it´s vague. Oh yes, it´s vague indeed !

Yes. And you don´t ? You communicate as Wetcoast on this board as you do as Christopher ? I don´t think so

Why do you think that he did refuse your interview proposal and not accepts your proposal that you just just accepts to run the intreviewe if he doesn´t talk about Lydiard as you did with me ?

He told me why. Because he wanted to profit on that intreview to express his disagrement with some aspects of the Lydiard training and you willn´t publish/edit.

2 persons might train differently and both got good training principles however different ones. It´s not incompatible, but you think it is. For example i agree with the Renato training principles, but i don´t train as he does, for some kind of reasons.

I don´t agree with the Lydiard training principles, but i might accept what his training is not so bad as some others that i know. It´s not incompatible.

Sometimes the site forums as TV debates are out of any deep debate and any valid conclusion. I confess that to some people. might be you as Wetcoast either, i do post quite ironic.

I guess that part of the problem of misunderstand is that we don´t focus on one defined subject.

Might be i´m like you said, i don´t now too much of Lydiard. But everything i say i did prove by diocuments from Lydiard or i did ask to where is the prove from public Lydiard statements. But no one really reply me. When i said that no one could define what´s 7/8 pace 3/4 pace, no one coould show or post nothing that defines that paces. When i said that the main principle of disagrement with me and with Lydiarxd training (or wehat i think that´s Lydiard training) it´s that i see training as go from generic to specific and Lydiard sees the trainibg as go from aerobic to anaerobic. No one could show me that Lydiard sees the training from generic to specific, but i can prove that he sess training from aerobic to anerobic. But you still insist that i don´t know too much about Lydiard. Prove me, not witn my opinion, or someoen else, but Lydiard public, not Lydiard what he said in private. I want to know more about Lydiard. I want to know if i´m wrong. But with Lydiard public words, not from other people.

You say that we both got the same principles (you from Lydiard). Out of every my Lydiard disagrement, i place the qustion of how i see the training. I see tha training from generic to specific and this is a total contrary principle to everything that Lydiard did ! This question you didn´t ask me or did you ?

I guess that the best way to let you know my opinion relate to Lydaird training would be, someone say how Lydiard does - but only one voice - and then i will tell you from that Lydiard principle what i agree and what i don´t. that we didn´t on the interview, but we can do whe you want. Igot all time of the world.

I have some interesting information to add to your understanding of anaerobic energy supply. Not many people know that anaerobic respiration is the fuel supply for cell growth and repair, so it is essential for sustaining life. Even when you are in deepest sleep, anaerobic respiration is doing much good work repairing your body from the stresses of the day.

I was being slightly facetious. I've especially enjoyed the basic comments by Canova and Cabral. I don't think that Lydiard and Lydiardism should be so polarizing. What makes EVERY SINGLE LYDIARD THREAD this way at LR is this forcing of square pegs into round holes, by those few who want to ascribe every single success in running since 1950 to Lydiard. That infuriates me and others, and I can see that it still flourishes. My 2 cents, because really I just don't give a **** anymore.