Adapting Lydiard into one weekly / 2 week training cycle repeated year round

Alfie wrote:

The scientific/physiological knowledge was different back then. However, what do you think Lydiard's view would have been on the amount of time to spend in the threshold zone (i.e. above AeT but under AnT) intensity? Given that running hills was such a big part of the training, would a considerable amount of time be spent at this intensity? Or would the hills be run under AeT?

This query applies to the base phase only.

Alfie wrote:

The scientific/physiological knowledge was different back then. However, what do you think Lydiard's view would have been on the amount of time to spend in the threshold zone (i.e. above AeT but under AnT) intensity? Given that running hills was such a big part of the training, would a considerable amount of time be spent at this intensity? Or would the hills be run under AeT?

I think those 10 mile runs at 3/4 effort would sort of fit into that range for his elite athletes with some hand waving about exactly what pace there were and how tough they really were. I think there is a bit of nuance that gets lost with the avoid anaerobic stuff since energy system usage isn't really binary. Not doing 8x400 @1500m pace with 60s rest during your base phase or every week? I think most people will agree with that. Running 20-30m at HM pace? Pretty sure that is going to go down as a great way to boost the aerobic system. Things like 5x1600 at 10k pace or 6x1000 @ 5k pace? It gets a bit more debateable if they are just too hard to do year round or if they are a great way to keep working on aerobic ability.

Lydiard DID condone racing during the base phase for runners who want to be the best they can be as long as the races did not interfere with the training base. If he hadn't they wouldn't have done it. All of his guys were loyal members of their running clubs and as such would have been expected to turn out for "club races" year round and they did. Ron Daws, who was as much a Lydiard guy as Lydiard himself says in "Self Made Olympian" that the schedule (and he means the classic Lydiard one) allows for year round racing in "fun" events.

For some people, as the sport changed, fulfilling themselves and getting enjoyment meant regularly winning or placing well in races throughout the year and not just for 3-4 week stretches half a year apart. John Davies was as pure a Lydiard guy as Daws was and used Arthur's principals when he coached Anne Audain and Jon Sinclair but adapted the principals to allow for year round racing because that was primarily what these runners needed to do. Clohessey did the same when he developed his system. All these adaptions were very successful though none, if you're counting championship games placings, as successful as Arthur's original approach, again, which did not forbid casual racing.

In this thread, the OP is asking if there are ways to use Arthur's ideas that will allow a young runner to race frequently and there are. You are correct when you say that Arthur's answer to such a question might be to try talking the OP out of racing frequently and that's a good thing to present here. But very few young runners would be interested in using Holmer's idea of training but not racing for two years.

Alfie wrote:

Alfie wrote:

The scientific/physiological knowledge was different back then. However, what do you think Lydiard's view would have been on the amount of time to spend in the threshold zone (i.e. above AeT but under AnT) intensity? Given that running hills was such a big part of the training, would a considerable amount of time be spent at this intensity? Or would the hills be run under AeT?

This query applies to the base phase only.

Arthur would have had no idea what these terms meant. If you get Keith Livingstone's "Healthy, Intelligent, Training" where he explains Lydiard training in current physiological terms you probably can find and answer. I think Keith also has a website but I'm not absolutely certain of that. But you could check for it.

The fact that guys like Snell, Halberg, Baillie, etc.. may have run in club races year-round is besides the point. First, those men were very well conditioned. Second, Lydiard did not have complete control over their racing schedule. There were were many things about athletics governance (and not just in New Zealand) that he didn't approve of. Third, running a race at less than max effort, or "time trials" as Lydiard called them, is not what most people do when they go out and race. I'm sure the OP wants the best for this young athlete and if he's asking a question about Lydiard it's important to answer the way Lydiard would answer (not Ron Daws, John Davies, or Clohessey).

Alfie wrote:

The scientific/physiological knowledge was different back then. However, what do you think Lydiard's view would have been on the amount of time to spend in the threshold zone (i.e. above AeT but under AnT) intensity? Given that running hills was such a big part of the training, would a considerable amount of time be spent at this intensity? Or would the hills be run under AeT?

Lydiard talks about running at 70-100% of your maximum steady state which is fast but under control. It should not feel uncomfortable and you should not surpass your anaerobic threshold. Translating to paces, think of it as anything slower than 60 min race pace but not "jogging."

We're just going round and round. You are correct that Arthur thought his system with the phases and peaks was going to get you to your maximum fitness for short periods. As the running world changed he and many who'd trained with him learned to adapt the system so they could race well for lengthy periods. It seems like this is what the OP is looking for and it does exist. You don't think it's a good idea. I get that but it doesn't change the fact that there are ways to do what he's asking.

Around the 24 minute mark Anne Audain talks about the time when John Davies talked her into going for the gold medal at the '82 Commonwealth Games. She had been running road races in the US for money and was committed to doing that initially wanting no part of going for a track championship. Davies was insistent about going for the CG win and finally she agreed providing, and this is my point, Davies convinced her she would be able to keep on running and winning road races. She won the CG gold, qualified for five NZ Olympic teams, ran on three of them, while specializing in and frequently running road races. So adapting Lydiard for people wanting to do well while racing frequently is far from something done to placate joggers. There is only a very brief mention of this so it may not be worth watching if you only want to hear that one comment but it's a very good video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_CznekTORE&fbclid=IwAR0yvZGBF6_m3XIZWA3fB8rU9tNclUFwmQK8Q_zcAnFYWhcaiYwInjIjFQM&ab_channel=Hitsystem

HRE wrote:

So adapting Lydiard for people wanting to do well while racing frequently is far from something done to placate joggers. There is only a very brief mention of this so it may not be worth watching if you only want to hear that one comment but it's a very good video:

Sure but at a certain point when does the training cease to be Lydiard? He has been such a huge influence on just about every post 1960 training that if you squint hard enough you can call pretty much any modern plan Lydiard. Pretty much everyone has their foundation as 45-90min runs on a at an aerobic pace for most of their training. The debate tends to be what you do on those workout days.

Well, if you're following a version of training that Lydiard created it's likely going to be Lydiard training. John Davies and Barry Magee always tell you, or told you in Davies' case, that they were using Lydiard's principals. When DeCastella won the BCG Marathon Clohessey sent a message to Arthur saying that Deek's gold was another triumph for the Lydiard method. I would say that the reason they'd acknowledge it as Lydiard training is because they learned Arthur's method, and more importantly the principles behind it, and then adapted those principles to whatever they were trying to do. And yes, those adaptions can look an awful lot like what most people today do which is probably because Lydiard's influence was so widespread.

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

Sure but at a certain point when does the training cease to be Lydiard? He has been such a huge influence on just about every post 1960 training that if you squint hard enough you can call pretty much any modern plan Lydiard. Pretty much everyone has their foundation as 45-90min runs on a at an aerobic pace for most of their training. The debate tends to be what you do on those workout days.

Agreed. Association does not make two things equal.

HRE, as always, thanks for your insight and contributions. Let's move this discussion forward.

As a high school coach on the East Coast, one of our ongoing and key dilemmas and decisions is how to prioritize and balance the schedules and needs of three seasons for mid-distance and distance runners. How do you approach cross country, indoor track, and outdoor track all over the span of nine months, without completely sacrificing either racing opportunities or continued development and progress in training?

What would you do or recommend?

If Arthur was alive today and coaching or advising a quality high school program, what would his approach likely be?

Thanks!

HRE wrote:

Well, if you're following a version of training that Lydiard created it's likely going to be Lydiard training. John Davies and Barry Magee always tell you, or told you in Davies' case, that they were using Lydiard's principals. When DeCastella won the BCG Marathon Clohessey sent a message to Arthur saying that Deek's gold was another triumph for the Lydiard method. I would say that the reason they'd acknowledge it as Lydiard training is because they learned Arthur's method, and more importantly the principles behind it, and then adapted those principles to whatever they were trying to do. And yes, those adaptions can look an awful lot like what most people today do which is probably because Lydiard's influence was so widespread.

Great so should our poster do Tinman, Ingebrigtsen, or Daniels training since they are all close enough to lydiard to count and they do enough fast paced work so that you can race pretty much year round.:) And there are dozens of other programs to choose from because again pretty much every modern training program is based around Lydiards core principle of lots of aerobic work.

At a high level, aerobic development focus is the way to go. Something like 1 tempo (HM/MP paced) and 1 10k/5k paced workout tends to be pretty tolerable. Throw in some easy 300/400s at 1500m pace at the end with decent rest in between to keep in touch with that race pace and maybe some short hill sprints and you will be fine racing. On weeks where you are racing, they can replace a workout. Or be the 3rd workout of the week. Over time keep upping the training volume (45 min runs become 60 and then 70) and let intensity follow race results. Your anaerobic capacity for things like the 800/1500m will not be maxed out but you should still be competitive. At some point do 4-6 weeks of harder anaerobic work (i.e. 8x400 with 60s rest) and have a peak.

If you want to call something like that Lydiard is up to you.

Seems like A LOT of fast running in here.

Do people have any success with this kind of a plan? Seems like a way to get fit fast but looks like a recipe for injury.

The proposed schedule looks good, however could you make the 400s/300s a separate ( additional( session instead of doing them at the end, because I have found that doing a tempo/ workout and then doing some faster stuff has caused injury in the past and it also takes a long time to fit it all in.

I think it would hard to find current examples of distance training that don't look a lot like Lydiard. He was that influential, kind of like Newton was to physics. I'm not calling anything Lydiard other than the models he created. If you want to call Anne Audain's training "John Davies Training" that's fine with me but I know what that training is based on. I only got onto this thread to give the OP an example of a way to use Lydiard that might suit his needs.

NERunner53 wrote:

Seems like A LOT of fast running in here.

Do people have any success with this kind of a plan? Seems like a way to get fit fast but looks like a recipe for injury.

Arthur did not always cover all of his bases in his books. From talking about this plan with Barry Magee, you would do well even with the race week-non race week thing you'd still do well to have a couple months at least where you do base training. Even if you were dying to do a race or two at that part of the year you'd do well to do it off of just distance work and skipping the time trials, reps, etc. And in the Lydiard system the more aerobic work you do the more and faster rep work you'll be able to do and the faster you'll race.

Whether there's a lot of fast running in the rwnrw plan, or too much, kind of depends on how you do it. Arthur ALWAYS told people that his schedules were not The Tablets From Sinai. They were templates and you'd adjust them as needed based on the response you're getting. If a time trial and interval session is too much fast running in one week you'd reduce or eliminate a session or run it somewhat easily. Barry certainly has had people run very well, no world class one that I know of, ob some adaption of this schedule. Arthur used to say that bad training and good training can look very much alike and I believe you could use a schedule like this and have it be either one.

I would give the OP the same advice that Lydiard would give. You can follow the race week / non-race week schedule if you have no other choice but you will not get the best results.

parkerjohn wrote:

I would give the OP the same advice that Lydiard would give. You can follow the race week / non-race week schedule if you have no other choice but you will not get the best results.

Could you give an example of a typical week in each phase that’s applicable and also enjoyable ( a variety of workouts) for a high school runner ( sophomore)