Well, I think I understand your points about specificity, and the "issue" with a classic periodization spending too much time with general development, neglecting specific support and training.
I think I understand HRE and Nobby and Kim and Lydiard, and it's not my mission to change their opinions. I think I understand your opinion of Lydiard adepts and Lydiard lacing, and it's not my mission to change your opinion. Like you said, Lydiard, even if it's no longer the best, is a good choice among many poorer choices. History has shown we can do worse than Lydiard.
I think I understand what you wanted to say with your strength endurance ratio, as long as we're careful how to interpret it.
I think I understand what training individualization can mean, and maybe that's why you bring up Davies and Snell training together.
I think I already understood a lot of what Renato says, from a few of his previous posts, and the ideas of finding an athletes event before defining his training, and the basic goal of working on extending your speed. I don't know if I can ever achieve the kind of MAX LASS he's used to observing. I know what he means about convincing athletes to train for their best event. My best event was surely the 800m, but I never ever liked it. My coach forced me to run it. These days, 10Ks are my highest aspiration (strong legs, weak mind), even if I might still be better at shorter events.
If you have something new to say about resistance and specific strength endurance, and training individualization, I'm still happy to read it. If you want to finally give me the name of some good books (you said you had a dozen or so), I'll be happy to read one or two of those.