RON HILLS DIET???

loads of people tried it in the 70s and 80s but it has gone out of fashion - carbo loading remains popular but without the prior carbo-depletion

Tim Noakes in TLOR sheds a lot of doubt on that aspect of Hill's regimen, while also making a good arguement that Hill subsequently overtrained himself into the ground after his incredible 2:09:28 Commonwealth Games marathon in July 1970. Noakes notes that Hill never ran faster than in that and the Boston Marathon 3 months before (2:10:30 CR) and his times progressively deteriorated, culminating in his disappointing 6th place finish in the 1972 Olympic Marathon in 2:16:30.

Hill's 2:09:28 was especially noteworthy because he managed to maintain a fast pace, despite hitting the 10k in 29:24 (2:04 pace!!!). There is little doubt he would have set a World record in that race with better pacing.

Interestingly, the chap who got bronze in 1970 was 21-year old Don Faircloth. He never ran as quick again (2.12.19)- and he went through half way in 63.30!!!!!!!!!!

I always find it amusing that Tim Noakes has decided to categorise the training of a runner who ran 2-09 for a marahothon in 1970 as a failure.

It was the training AFTER 1970 that Noakes slams, and even Hill admits that he was always "stale", and never had "it" after Edinburgh.

What's amusing is that the evidence is right there in Hill's results, and yet some would ignore it.

CARBMUNCHER wrote:Has anyone tried it?

Or any research carried out on the diet?

I've tried it (depletion before loading), and know many other people who've done it (for the marathon only). I couldn't say whether it affected me one way or the other, but others swear by it, and it certainly didn't hurt any of them so far as I could tell from their results.

Hill was an example of how stale someone can get by overracing..wasn't it like two weeks after his 2:09, that he went for a 20K world record on the track in thunderstorm?

And probably a week later a cross country mountain climb...then a relay a week after that...that's the way it went..

And it was fascinating to read about.

As someone pointed out, many of us did that diet in the 70s and 80s. The protein phase is absolutely miserable and when some research came out showing that it wasn't necessary it seemed to spell the end of the diet's general popularity. I know that I was ALWAYS looking for an excuse not to do it.

scy wrote:

Hill was an example of how stale someone can get by overracing..wasn't it like two weeks after his 2:09, that he went for a 20K world record on the track in thunderstorm?

And probably a week later a cross country mountain climb...then a relay a week after that...that's the way it went..

And it was fascinating to read about.

I've read both volumes of Hill. Ron always raced prolifically. What killed him was the long road racing that he gravitated to after winning the Polytechnic Marathon in 1962. Ron was an "international level" 5000 and 10000 runner at this point, as well. However he was "world class" at the 10 mile + distances.

Starting in the late 1950's Ron raced 12 months per year.

He usually raced 3 or more times per month. Most of the races were from 5000 to 12000 meters, cross country, road and track racing. Ron developed a schedule where he rested very little prior to a race. He ran twice per day, 5 on the way to work and 5 to 10 mi of fartlek or fast running on the way home (one interval workout per week as well). Before "big" races Ron did reduce training more.

This system allowed Ron to improve rapidly for 5 years or so. Then he "discovered" that he was most talented at the marathon. After increasing his racing distances and marathon racing significantly Ron started having "staleness" problems and other problems. Ron basically was unaware that the marathon took so much out of him.

Part of his problem was the "depletion phase" of the carbo loading diet. It has since been proven that this phase is worthless. In Ron's case it sped up his increasing staleness and inability to produce consistent performances in the marathon races he ran....

Braavo Furgi wrote:Part of his problem was the "depletion phase" of the carbo loading diet. It has since been proven that this phase is worthless. In Ron's case it sped up his increasing staleness and inability to produce consistent performances in the marathon races he ran....

Pete wrote:

Braavo Furgi wrote:part of his problem was the "depletion phase" of the carbo loading diet. It has since been proven that this phase is worthless. In Ron's case it sped up his increasing staleness and inability to produce consistent performances in the marathon races he ran....

Do you have a source for this conclusion, or is it just speculation on your part?

Which conclusion do you mean? That the diet is worthless or that it helped contribute to Hills staleness? The former is pretty much dispensed with by Noakes. That latter is obviously speculation, as it obviously would be even if Hill himself had said it.

Ron basically was unaware that the marathon took so much out of him.

Yep. This was Hill's biggest mistake, but at the same time was a tribute to his incredible fitness. He ran and trained for the marathon as if it were just a longer track event, and simply didn't allow for enough recovery. This was no doubt because he was tremendously successful on the track, setting records for 25k (1:15:22.6) and the 10 mile (47:02.2 and later 46:44.0).

This reminds me of another great track runner turned marathoner who had a great beginning to his marathon career and later ran himself into the ground: Salazar.

the best explanation of carbo loading i've read is in "optimum sports nurtition" by michael colgan. it isn't the "hard core" approach that people took in the 70s where they basically didn't eat any carbs for a few days. but it also isn't the runners world approach of "just eat more carbs in the days before the marathon." you can probably find the book used on amazon, since it's out of print.

HRE wrote:

As someone pointed out, many of us did that diet in the 70s and 80s. The protein phase is absolutely miserable and when some research came out showing that it wasn't necessary it seemed to spell the end of the diet's general popularity. I know that I was ALWAYS looking for an excuse not to do it.

I'll tell you a story that illustrates one reason why I disliked the "depletion" (protein) phase. In 1977 I was training for the NAIA Nationals Marathon. I had a decent (for me) training build up. Did the 3 days = low carbos. On the 3rd day I was so exhausted (due to low body fat and low carbs intake) that I feel asleep in a class. The instructor was the football coach. He told me after class that my grade would be lowered by 1 letter grade... I explained that I was on a special diet for the Nationals... He could care less... He was a jerk about it... I even spoke to the AD about it. I did fine in the race 4 or 5 days later, but after doing the depletion thing for 2 or 3 marathon races I stopped that phase and just carbo loaded and felt that led to equal or better results. Carbo loading only works for marathon or longer races.

What do Radcliffe, Tergat, Rutto, etc. do before marathons? If they don't do a depletion phase, then I wouldn't either.

Does Ron Hill still run? His consecutive streak ended, didn't it?

consecutive wrote:

Does Ron Hill still run? His consecutive streak ended, didn't it?

Last November I read a newspaper article about him. He had just run a 10K in in Malysia (he wants to have run a race in 100 countries, or something like that)... Not only was his streak (1964 to present) still intact, but he has not missed running twice a day 6 days a week, once on Sunday since then... The man LIVES TO RUN.

That is friggin unbelievable. But don't some of those days include "running" on crutches or something like that?

Ron Hill is a sprinter/long jumper from the University of Texas...

he just gets drunk and eats beef jerky...