Que grande resposta ! Fartei-me de rir com a da camisola do Alberto....
Temos de falar porque;
O seu telemovel não dá sinal de vida
Eu só consigo fazer pista na .... Charneca e não no EUL
não sei bem o que ei de fazer como Log que me enviou
Um abraço forte do Rodrigo
"The prevailing training philosophy in 1977 was 'more is better', and weekly mileage was the stuff of competition. If Derek Clayton was quoted as running 160 miles per week, then someone else would try 175 miles per week... This approach to training may sound harsh - and it was - but it reaped rewards. Distance running in the U.S. improved markedly, and although there were a few casualties along the way, pure hard work generally paid dividends." - Pete Pfitzinger, two-time Olympian and exercise physiologist
please let the real Cabral speak,not you fake-jokers
this is what Antonio wrote:
"...Second, the time when i said Lopes taked EPO it wasn´t a doping substance (as Jerome confirm it). Third, Lopes didn´t use it with direct connection with progressing performance, but with kidney treatment.
It´s nowdays, the case of many runners that take substances for wealth treatment and desase treatment."
"..What banned list? Excuse me, with al respect but you are a ignorant at this respect. Lopes used EPO it when it was dicovered a decade (or so) before his best performances, 2 decades of first mention at scientific community begins to talk about this new type of drug, and almost 3 decades of beeing a benned substance. So, don´t how you undestand that he use it exclusively for treatment targets and he stop it sooner, that can´t have eny effect on his training capacity or his performances."
so in what period of time did he use it?
How "modern life civilisation" made us idiots. You are 1 mile distant from me, we can´t get contact, and we need to go to America to enter in contact and you write in portuguese. That´s first time that i see the portuguese language present here.
I think i go to translate what your comments to english.
Antonio. Great answer ! I did laugh a lot about that one Alberto´s shirt.... We need to talk. Your mobil phone don´t work at all and because i can´t train in EUL but just in the Charneca track. I don´t know what to do with the Log that you did send me.
Rodrigo. My answer and your comments this is the prove that besides we work hard we try to live the life easy and joke a lot, not like most of the foreigns that they think that they are able to offend me asking rubish questions !
I took a few hollydays, i did a flu, but i´m coming back !
I didn´t imagine that you are asking something seriously. Besides i really don´t know what in the context of "Mr. Renato Canova: Could You Please Answer a Question About Effective Ways to Improve the Lactate Threshold?" that suddently you did ask those questions and now you quote me from another site.
The only thing i know is that Lopes he did took that for a very short period for kidney treatment really, and i don´t belive that this have no effect in their future performances. Mamede i never heard that he did take nothing similar. Only the ones that did say close to them both in that period and did saw his daily training are the ones that doubt that they did that with drug help. I don´t doubt for a single second that they did all their runs and performances clean, totally clean. But i don´t live to think about that.
This thread needs a sponsor.....take VAAM!
can this thread be deleted already? Or at least get it to 100 0 posts.
Antonio who are the coaches you most admire that our coaching Now?
Why do you keep speaking about deleting the thread?
Why do you want to delete this thread? There is fantastic information from Antonio and Renato to help us all train better and run faster. Why delete this?
Renato, about John Korir's "ramps":
Today I used 10 30m ramps up the steepest hill I could find, so steep it is hard to run up it.
IS this sufficient volume? 30m took me 5+ seconds, not very long, so I wonder does this have a training effect using just 300m (10 x 30m)?
Renato, do you know John HadD?
It's quality training for the CNS and the fast fibers.
If the aim is to improve speed the duration should not exceed 10 sec. Actually 5-6 secs are optimal.
This is what a sprinter do when he is training for speed.
They quoted the same two studies over the course of many hundreds of posts (and, I'd wager, hundreds of thousands of words), and therefore they're the same person? Seems like a weak link to me.
Antonio Cabral wrote:IT SEEMS THAT KELLOG AND THAT HADD THEY READ THE SAME ARTICLES AND QUOTE THE SAME EXPERIENCES. WHAT A COINCIDENCE ? !
I do not know you, but have read many of your posts. Several of these are informative, but many more appear to be aggressively critical of people or their ideas. You claim that some very good coaches out there fail to understand the details and reasoning behind your training methods and you then use aggressive language to criticize their misunderstanding (For example, JK's comments on your training of Rui Silva). In fact, from your numerous posts, I gather that the only one who has a full understanding of your coaching methods is you. As an exercise physiologist, a runner and a part-time coach who's married to a full-time coach, I find it extremely surprising that you do not recognize the articles by Holloszy and Dudley, that both Hadd and JK cite, as hallmarks of the scientific understanding of training and Billat's research presents data that is directly applicable to training (Holloszy & Booth, Annual Review of Physiology, 1976; Dudley, Abraham and Terjung, Journal of Applied Physiology, 1982; Billet et al, European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2000) . These two articles are commonly cited, and anyone who has ever taken an exercise physiology course (at least in the US) would have come across them in their studies. As a high level coach, I would expect you to at least recognize the principles presented in these articles, if not cite them from memory. Since you seem to have a very well thought out and scientific approach to training, you would recognize the positive aspects of looking to the research in order to gain a better understanding of how training works.
A similar google on Antonio Cabral yields only his article at marius' site from 2001. Is google the final authority on who's real and who's not?
told ya wrote:google on John Hadd and you will find nothing about a running coach or something like that, except for the info provided at letsrun.com copied into html.
I accept you critic and in part i´m happy that you said that i feel aggressive, because my attitude here is not do be kind or not kind, to be gentle or not gently, but just to say what and how i see the running questions - no matter what aggressive may that seems to you or to anyone else. In some aspects you may agree with me that i don´t catch myself in anonymity, or like a coward i run away from the discussion. Then if my ideas that seems to you aggressive, or you disagree find, if that seems correct find, if you hate that, find, my only single judge is my own conscience. But I accept what you say, my expression is very crude and emotional for non-latins, and also crude for some latins.
Now what i don´t understand is that when people ask me a question about a my own idea that are similar quotes like “No examples, Antonio?” or “Show me just one example that both Hadd and JK quote the same, I read that I don´t see nothing” and when later as an act of generosity I bring to the forum that examples and ask the questions (that are their doubts not mine), then people replies with more questions “This doesn´t mean nothing” or as you say now “These two articles are commonly cited, and anyone who has ever taken an exercise physiology course (at least in the US) would have come across them in their studies. As a high level coach, I would expect you to at least recognize the principles presented in these articles, if not cite them from memory”. I know that, I agree with you, but the doubt that´s not that the articles are commonly cited, the original question is that aren´t the same quotes in both articles.
Then what. This will never end. First the forum participants they doubt of that existence, and they say that they never saw that, and when I show them 2 examples, they argue that this means nothing. Wait, this would mean anything just until they (or you) doubt that there are any similar quote, when I prove that they are, now the same argument that you did ask for me when I show the argument that you are asking for it turns against me ? This will never end. This is a fair discussion. When I say an argument asking that the eventual solution will be the prove, and when I prove, you come out with a new argument. Even in a court (when we judge arguments) in theory I have the same means and the same time to use as defence or accusation. This is nothing, this is what turns me on aggressive, i´m alone against all LetsRunCom Forum. This is not fair. I need to use the method that some coaches they use here, when they feel that they have said enough they stop to post about that issue and soon people will forget.
One more detail that you miss the point. Why do you imagine that my interest to post here is that people understand my training ideas ? No that´s not. My interest as a coach that´s simply that my runners they do their best performances.
Happily, some of the coaches from USA and all over the world – a few ones are even top coaches – not them all they don´t share your opinion that you don´t understand my training, because if they ask me questions, and I answer to everybody because according my limitations “I always try my best”, and if they keep asking me more questions, more data, more information, more share of e-mails that´s not by my aggressively or my blue eyes, and if I coach some runners all over the world for friendship with them – some are good, some not so good, but i coach all with my “best” love and passion as long as they wish, that´s the reasons why doubt that only aggressivity and acknowledge comes from me, or they had quit out.
Thanks for the quick response. Just so you know, this is my second, and last post on this particular forum.
I had two points with my last post:
1) That proof you provide for your argument that Hadd and JK are the same person is weakened because you base it on the fact that they both cite very well recognized science in separate discussions. I wasn't sure if other readers of this forum recognized the popularity of this science.
If JK/Hadd cited rare literature or some obscure coaching pamphlet, then your argument would have much more strength.
2) I just wanted to point out to you that much of your difficulties seem to be because you protest too much. This seems to then attract even more criticism, especially on this forum. Perhaps this is why you suggest that there is a conspiracy of the Letsrun forum against you.
It is a shame that you don't care if others understand your training ideas - why participate in a public forum that discuss running and training? Frankly I am very disappointed that you said this, because I felt I had understood your training methods and learned from you.
Finally, I really don't understand what you were trying to say at the end of your post, sorry.
Antonio, why don't you explain how your articles were misinterpreted?
That is what a running forum is for--to discuss running.
So, can you say what did you mean in your articles? Rather than only saying we missed your point.
this is going to be...
post number 900!
darn it, i messed it up. that last was 901, but i also had 900.
that should get some props.