Lydiard Anaerobic Phase

I think it was Bill Baillie whose formula was "shorter reps/longer recovery, longer reps/shorter recovery." So if you were doing 200s, 400s, etc. you'd probably want an equal length for recoveries but with miles you might want to go with a 400 recoverie.

The idea is that if you're goal in running reps is to run fast then you want to run as fast as possible to acclimate your muscles to that specific kind of movement. Shorter recoveries mean you aren't as recovered and won't be able to run as fast.

Longer reps are more for building strength so you're less tired at the end of each and need less recovery.

I don't know of any of his guys who did walking or standing recoveries but someone else may.

Thanks HRE,

This was my gut but I was realizing that everything I have ever read from Lydiard said the anaerobic phase was "run one, jog one" without exception so I figured I'd clarify.

The reason it is run one jog one is because it is anaerobic every other day for 3 days total of hard anaerobic effort per week. Every following week you drop a step in the distance of the interval and increase the speed at which it is run, so each week the intensity of the effort increases as the distance/recovery interval decreases. If you run 3xmile at hurting pace every other day, with 3 recovery runs and a long run each week then you need that four lap jog. After that first week you could drop down to say 5-6 by 800 for the 3 workouts for the next week. These obviously would be run at a faster pace than what you ran the mile repeats the week before, and with shorter rest, so the anaerobic effort per interval actually increases as you drop down in he distance of the interval. The next you might drop down to 10-12x400 fast, then 20-24x200 for the final week. From experience, the last week of anaerobic track work HURTS, and if you do it all correctly you should be very TIRED at the end of the four weeks. During the last week for the 200's if you aren't trotting from rep to rep, gasping for oxygen during the running of the interval, and employing various mental tricks to get through the workout without bombing an interval then you aren't doing it correctly.

This doesn't sound like Lydiard training at all.

Think of what 'anaerobic' means and what 'aerobic' means.

When you run 400m repeat with little rest, which energy system are you taxing/ When you run 400m, or shorter, reps with long rest which system are you taxing?

Most endurance athletes misuse the term anaerobic

Alan

I have a feeling the only guy who knew anything about Lydiard was HRE as this response and the other one have nothing to do with Lydiard. Moreover, nothing is truly "anaerobic" in running as there is always oxygen involved.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Think of what 'anaerobic' means and what 'aerobic' means.

When you run 400m repeat with little rest, which energy system are you taxing/ When you run 400m, or shorter, reps with long rest which system are you taxing?

Most endurance athletes misuse the term anaerobic

Alan

True...the words "aerobic" and "anaerobic" are misleading...but it's the NATURE of the terms that people refer too.

Workouts like 200s/400s with the standard rest (same time or less) work on improving "endurance"...your ability to maintain a pace while fatigued.

Near all-out 200s/400s with longer rest are more 'anaerobic' as they rely more on the 'anaerobic' energy production pathways.

I think there is a problem in that most people think a workout needs to be run as hard as possible. Well, with Lydiard's 'anaerobic' phase it is a little misleading as you are running these reps at race pace, for example 6 x 800 at 3mi race pace with same distance jog. At least that is what it says in his book.

Alan

Runningart2004 wrote:

Think of what 'anaerobic' means and what 'aerobic' means.

When you run 400m repeat with little rest, which energy system are you taxing/ When you run 400m, or shorter, reps with long rest which system are you taxing?

Most endurance athletes misuse the term anaerobic

Alan

Thank your dbag. It is anerobic for a distance orientated athlete. The accumaltion of lactate over the result of many relative "intense" reps.

Yes there are different levels of anerobic activity that you so pointed out but the discusion is not about how an anerobic athlete prepares but how an endurance athlete develops during a season. A 5k/10k athlete will not get the same benefit for HIS EVENT by doing 2 x 350 @ 400m pace with 10 min rest that a 400m sprinter needs.

So when moving into the anerobic phase it is a development process just as the base building phase is. You don't jump into 100 mpw the first week back. So inital rest is run one jog one ex 8x400m. To gain greater fitness intensity, volume, and recovery need to be altered. So the next step may be 8x400m with 300m rest or 10x400m with 400m rest or 8x600m with 600m rest or 8x400m with 400m rest with both run, jog at a faster pace.

The alteration of the variable is why lyd is so confusing because he doesn't give specific examples in the reading that I have done.

In my own expericene after the inital shock. Gradualy increase volume in the form of more reps. Then decrease rest and or increase volume in the form of length of the repitions (400m to 600m).

Only after fitness is demonstrated to be an impovement in the form of a time trial or race, should intensity be increased.

Runningart2004 wrote:

...Well, with Lydiard's 'anaerobic' phase it is a little misleading as you are running these reps at race pace, for example 6 x 800 at 3mi race pace with same distance jog. At least that is what it says in his book.

Alan

Alan:

Where did he say that?

Battle of the Gurus coming up...

Sorry, kid, if you're looking for a "battle". If he really said it, I wanted to know. He might have; but it just didn't sound like something he would say.

Runningart2004 wrote:

True...the words "aerobic" and "anaerobic" are misleading...but it's the NATURE of the terms that people refer too.

Workouts like 200s/400s with the standard rest (same time or less) work on improving "endurance"...your ability to maintain a pace while fatigued.

Near all-out 200s/400s with longer rest are more 'anaerobic' as they rely more on the 'anaerobic' energy production pathways.

I think there is a problem in that most people think a workout needs to be run as hard as possible. Well, with Lydiard's 'anaerobic' phase it is a little misleading as you are running these reps at race pace, for example 6 x 800 at 3mi race pace with same distance jog. At least that is what it says in his book.

Alan

From what I have read, Lydiard wasn't overly concerned with the distance, pace, or time for intervals. He provided some suggestsions, but also suggested that running repeats of any distance and any pace is beneficial, as long as you're tired at the end. He told a story about one of his runners who was doing intervals on an unmeasured loop, without a watch, and without counting. He simply ran them until he got tired, then stopped.

And as for aerobic/anaerobic--yes, technically workouts like 4x200m with 8-10min recovery are "anaerobic," but I would really refer to them as "sprint" or even 'phosphocreatine" workouts. In distance running, "anaerobic" usually refers to something that requires a significant contribution from the lactate energy system.

I think you're getting away from "Train, don't strain" here but maybe I'm reading your emphasis wrong. Arthur always acknowledged that there would be a measure of discomfort during the anaerobic phase but you were always supposed to be in control, the effort was supposed to be about the same on the late reps as it had been on the early ones, and when you began to struggle you'd stop rather than push on to hit an arbitrary number of reps.

Nobby,

Would you agree with HRE? I am trying to put together a season that goes along with the Lydiard philosophy from beginning to end and think I have it down for all phases with the exception of this sticking point. As I said earlier, it's very clear what he says in all his literature and lecturenotes, but as HRE said, maybe not miles with mile jogs.

Not Garfunkel:

Yes, HRE knows what he's talking about (well, mostly...). Particularly his second post, I would tend to agree.

The idea of "anaerobic training", or whatever else you may want to term it, is to make yourself tired with volume of speed workout. If you run, say, 200m too fast with too short of recovery, you may bomb out after 4 or 5 of them. That's not enough volume. You want to go at it for, say, 40 minutes or so TOTAL (including recovery jog whatever the distance or time may be). You can run them as fast as you want with as little of recovery as you want but most likely you won't get that volume. So you want to pace yourself. You CAN use longer distance like 800 or a mile but, naturally, the speed won't be as fast if you're, say, training for 1500m or 5k. You CAN do it but you may want to consider doing something shorter and faster.

The best success I had with this kind of workout was with this young lady last year; all I gave her was something like "run 1:30 fast down the trail and jog back... I want you to do it somewhere around 12~15 times until you hit the wall and you start to lose form and get into heavy breathing..." It worked well with her and she came back and told me; "I think I did 14 but I sort of lost count..." That's the way to go about. Then every week, I would shuffle things around like; okay, this week, let's run 1 minute fast...or next week, let's do 2 minutes..., etc. She did this type of workout, I think, 6 times throughout the season (I think Snell did "intervals" 9 times before Tokyo) and went out and PRed her 10k by 3 minutes, over a minute for 5k.

The part I'm curious about Alan's post is "3 mile race pace". He might have said it, though I highly doubt it. But if he did say that, I'm curious when he said it and under what circumstances. And it would show that I didn't know about Lydiard as much as I thought I did but I learnt something more today. Nevertheless, if he did in fact say it, I'd say that's one other thing I wouldn't follow what he had said because I believe "race pace" changes all the time (though "race effort" probably won't) and, by instructing one to run at race pace would put too much pressure. And, then it would become "number-oriented", not "feeling-based".

I stand corrected, I thought I read somewhere of him giving pace reccomendations, but I'm wrong. His suggestions are far more individualized: Do what you need to do to create an oxygen debt:

---------------------------------------------------------

The first four weeks should be used for the further development of the anaerobic capacity to exercise and speed. When developing the capacity to exercise anaerobically, it is important to realize what you are trying to do and what physiological development you are trying to achieve It is possible to develop an ability to incur about 15-liter oxygen debt and this is done by exercising anaerobically. Developing big oxygen debts in training stimulates the body's metabolism to create buffers against fatigue. If this is understood, it will be realized that it does not really matter what form of running it takes, as long as you are making yourself tired with the volume of anaerobic exercise: and finish the training session knowing that you could not do much more nor any better. Therefore, it doesn't matter whether you use repetitions or interval training, over different distances with different intervals, you don't even need to time them: as long as you come off the track or from your training quite fatigued. However, as a practical guide, it is advisable to get fast running into a total of about 3 miles, or 5000 meters, or thereabouts; i.e. 12 X 400 meters, 6 X 600 meters, 5 X 1000 meters or 3 X 1 mile, etc.: with a recovery jog of a equal distance in between. If one athlete takes longer intervals or more volume of fast repetitions than another to gain the same reaction physiologically, then he will just need to train for a longer time.

--------------------------------------------------------

That being said, I say try different things out. Do a regular interval session that we are all used to, then do something different. Try 200-400m repeats, all-out, then jog the same distance, repeat for desired effect. You'll be buzzing for hours.

Runningart2004 wrote:

http://www.fitnesssports.com/lyd_clinic_guide/Arthur_Lydiard.htm

I stand corrected...

Alan:

You got me worried when you posted that link first--yeah, I put that one together! ;o)

I think the thing is; there's a need to develop tolerance to oxygen debt, even for a marathon to some degree. But you also need to consider your actual competition. Snell did 20X400 in somewhere around 60 seconds. He took 400m for recovery. He basically said to me that it's total of 10-mile run, which is good; and by taking 400m recovery, he was able to run the fast section faster than otherwise which is probably necessary when you're trying to run 3:55 for the mile. He COULD do 3 or 4 X 1 mile but they sure as hell won't be close to 4-minute-mile pace. On the othr hand, I know Baillie liked to do 800s and miles but he did lots of road races and XC races as well. Dixon told me that when he switched to the marathon, he lengthened the reps, up to even 2-mile repeats to compensate. There isn't, and shouldn't, be any set formula like "you should do 3 mile total of fast runs (although this is what Lydiard said but it was "recommendation" more than anything else) at 3 mile race pace..." This would greatly restrict the chance to run, say, your mile pace or the marathon pace.

Speaking of Baillie, what he told me about the recovery for the mile repeats was that, if you try to do a mile recovery, you'll get cold! So you just simply compensate and take shorter recovery... Just because Lydiard said; "Run one, jog one," don't take it literally. Would that mean Dixon would have to take a 2-mile recovery jog!?

Oh, and you know that this is the better one. ;o)

http://www.lydiardfoundation.org/pdfs/al_training_eng.pdf

Nobby, your views on this please,

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=3196105&thread=3195868