Physiology questions about Lydiard training.

Paradigm-shift evaluator wrote:

Also, given that your training approach will theoretically give him more lactate transporters in his muscle cells than a "conventional" aerobic-first approach, how much faster do you think he will run than if he followed a classic Lydiard approach?

I guess that you question is better solved by the text quote that I insert on this post. It´s possible to progress with every kind of training.

The problem is that the one million dollar question is not your question either, what it might be enhance with Lydiard training.

Do you want to know why ?

If Joe Binks in 1902 did 4:16.8 in the mile run, and John Paul Jones did 4:14.4 mile world record in 1913 with the kind of training that follows, and relate that to peter Snell or whatever mile WR, it´s not surprise that everyone can see performance enhance with volume training.

The question is another question. The question is “what is the rich manipulation of intensity, duration, and frequency of training sessions ?” not what someone will run than if he followed a classic Lydiard approach.

FAST SCIENCE:

A HISTORY OF TRAINING THEORY

AND METHODS FOR ELITE RUNNERS THROUGH 1975

Nicholas David Bourne

(…) In 1902, the Englishman Joe Binks established a world record time of 4:16.8 for the mile, which remained the British record for twenty years. Reflecting on his training during this period, the self-coached Binks observed, “I never did any warm up, just a couple of leg stretches (short runs) across the arena…I trained only one evening per week, winter and summer, spending about thirty minutes on each workout. My training would not be understood today. It was always light.”136 In training for sprint races Binks ran five 60-to 110-yard sprints and then finished with a fast 220 or 300 yards. He trained the same for the mile as he did for an 880-yard race, doing several sprints, and then either 440 yards or 600 yards at varying paces—first part slow, middle part medium, and then finishing fast. Time trials or timed runs over a measured distance—used to simulate a race or provide feedback regarding progress—were never performed. When interviewed in the late 1950s, Binks expressed puzzlement at the intense training methods and competitive schedules then in vogue. “You will laugh at my ‘slap dash’ method of training,” he wrote,

“but I got a lot of fun out of it, which today’s champions do not.”

John Paul Jones, born on 15 October 1890 attended Cornell University, where on 13 May 1913 he set the world record in the mile at Cambridge, Massachusetts, with a

time of 4:14.4. (*) Jones’s preparation for track included summer participation in games such as baseball and tennis. Fall and winter training consisted of cross country running

where he won three IC4A titles from 1910 to 1912. He did not start training for track until the season opened, and he never performed any form of resistance training apart

from one hundred or more push-ups each night. (…)

(*) - John Paul Jones’s mile time in 1913 was recognized as the first official one-mile world record by the

International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF)—newly formed in 1912. For further information on

Jones’s world record see: Lawson, World Record Breakers in Track and Field Athletics, 86.

Skip wrote:

Antonio,

Do you have your athletes use heart rate monitors for easy runs, workouts, etc...

Some do some don´t. However if you want to follow daily runs and LT runs by heart rate mionitor i advixce you to follow John Hadd prescription on the heart rate monitor matter that i guess it´s all right.

But you need to know that HR control can be effective just up to 10k pace. Faster from 10k it´s useless.

I agree in general, hills and plyos are, if done properly, are anaorobic and FTb stimulators, though maybe not enough duration for some coaches. Unfortunately for me hills/plyos always result in injuries such as PF or AT, probably due to being over agressive. For others, heavy weights cause injury. If i could remain injury free i would prefer to focus on hills/plyos rather than weights because they are more sport specific. Still, I would miss the feeling of blasting out some heavy reps, which as others have noted is purported to increase GH.

We know many of the East Africans train on very hilly (and soft) terrain, and i've seen videos of them doing quick foot drills (hopping forward, laterally, diagonally etc) as a form of plyos. One Kenyan remarked after winning Boston "Where were the hills?", so their training is effective!

My only complaint with the Kenyans/Ethopians don't do heavy weights argument, is the same complaint against any statement: RunnerA did X and RunnerA was the winner, therefore X is the best training methodology.

Until such time that RunnerA exhausts all other training methologies, we will never know if training X elicited the absolute best. Sure they won a medal/set WR, but maybe Y and Z training would have produced faster times, or a longer career. That being said, if i was raised in poverty and started making good money with training method X, i probably wouldn't try Y/Z until i starting losing or missing races due to injury.

fizzyology detector wrote:

The way to avoid excess aciodis is to get a good warm up so that when you race you are more fuel/oxygen economic.

And you forget a good cooldown/warmdown after the run. How i miss that one. I should implement that one. (smile and kidding)

I think i can see your point. Yes, pyruvate is produced during aerobic metabolosm (glycolysis), and so if one runs anaerobically then it seems like pyruvate will start to "accumulate", but Moran never defines what the accumulation amounts to, maybe it's just a few molecules? Enough to trigger the anaerobic metabolism which as you say converts pyruvate to lactate, which does not cause acidosis. I also like your point about proper warmup, my car runs pretty ineffeciently if i gun the engine seconds after starting it in sub freezing weather!

Still, those 400/800 winners who can do an interview post race with little huffing/puffing (Amos would disagree, if he could talk from his stretcher), have done something right in training to keep things under control. I can't help think it's more than just pace judgement.

I would prefer a scientific understanding/measurements of the body to help with training methodology, but even if we ignore terms/processes like acidosis, pyruvate or some other un-named mechanism, and do black box training where we only look at results after specific techniques (which is what Lydiard did) we should still be able to get an idea of what's best. I think one of those techniques is year round anaerobic work, the exact details I defer to the experts, or one's own individual runner-type/response.

Mr Amused wrote:

My only complaint with the Kenyans/Ethopians don't do heavy weights argument, is the same complaint against any statement: RunnerA did X and RunnerA was the winner, therefore X is the best training methodology.

Until such time that RunnerA exhausts all other training methologies, we will never know if training X elicited the absolute best. Sure they won a medal/set WR, but maybe Y and Z training would have produced faster times, or a longer career. That being said, if i was raised in poverty and started making good money with training method X, i probably wouldn't try Y/Z until i starting losing or missing races due to injury.

As we might read it´s possible to run 4:14/mile with one week evening run, as i know some runners that did Lydiard that did 100miles and that did my training and they didn´t a sub 4.15. I guess that HRE, Nobby and some others that did train "a la Lydiard" despite they try it by the book they didn´t sub 4.15

The performance, the win, the great result it´s not a trustful indicator that to extrapolate that same training someone did or someone prescribes, we will progress, that we will enhance our run results.

Therefore you are right, the only guide should be the training principles and training application.

The solution for rich training approach is to decide from the several OPTIONS the several training ALTERNATIVRES that are at our disposal, what´s the best for each individual. But at the level of the training debate the only right position is to debate the training methodology, not be sententious, or based our training in what someone else does or did or what someone else prescribes.

SlowFatMaster wrote:

Plenty of excellent 400 and 800 meter runners are gasping after a good race and have extreme acidosis. Nijel Amos was taken off in a stretcher after his 1:41 at the Olympics.

Here is a thread with some Bungei lactate values during a workout and after an all-out 400:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=220022&page=6

Values of 19 and 20 seem pretty high to me.

Yes 20 mmols is high but expected after a 400 for a guy like Bungei, but look at the fastest 400/800 guys, they aren't gasping like the slower guys. Going way past ventilatory thresshold is just an inneficient way to run. Rudisha wasn't gasping and neither was Amos, he was just very tired, but he was running the last 100 better than anyone, even Rudisha.

What do you mean by the term anaerobic? Lactate is always produced anaerobically even when you sleep. Then it is transported to sites of oxidation for aerobic respiration or to the liver for reconversion to glycogen.

Without a microphone on these guys, I don't know how you know for sure who is gasping for breath and who isn't. Quincy Watts puked so bad after the heats of the 1991 world championship 4 x 4 that he dislocated his jaw! I'd be very surprised if he wasn't gasping for breath at the same time.

Here's Butch Reynolds running a world record 400:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y30DFZ6cSg

How do you know if he's gasping for breath or not?

Here is McQuay vs Wariner:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djE87NeO27E

The post-race interview starts at 1:57 or so. Tell me these guys are not significantly out of breath!

fizzyology detector wrote, in part:

Rudisha wasn't gasping and neither was Amos, he was just very tired, but he was running the last 100 better than anyone, even Rudisha.

Well, Track and Field News gives the last 100 split for Rudisha as 13.7, same as Amos, and 13.2 for Symmonds.

Hello Antonio,Thanks again -- I really appreciate your detailed answer, and real life example, and I won't debate you about lactate transporters. I have no doubt there is a benefit to flooding the muscles with pyruvate/lactate, to provoke important adaptations.But another question popped in my head. I know you had some detailed exchanges with Hadd, and that despite public representations, you both mostly shared common ideas about training.Getting back to Hadd's famous 6 part article with Joe, why did Hadd take so long (more than 6 months) to introduce anything resembling your "puke/vomit" training, while you start AFAP training in the first few weeks?I know Joe was training for a marathon, and maybe he's even an ST guy. Are the differences in approach linked to differences in the athletes, and their targets, or are there some basic methodological differences in your training approach now, versus Hadd's approach with Joe then?

António Cabral wrote:

I can say something more.

...

You need to put things in perspective.

First of all my training it´s not Hadd training, and his training is not my training. Point !

Might be that people do expect that because we debate and we share the same opinions about training principles I got any commitment to take the same distance approach application he did.

Besides, we did a good sharing debate, that it was fruitful for me and I guess also for him either. Mostly we did agree that training individualization is something crucial as distance training approach.

“2 Kinds/types of runners is just a scratch that I guess that is a starting point and not the final conclusion.

Secondly, I don´t know how you see John training, but he was able to use AFAP since the early season. He said something similar to what I say “if the runner that I start to training did just aerobics from the first moment I use intervals in his training program”

Thirdly, I did refer John Hadd in this thread subject just because someone asks/comments about John relate to Lydiard training.

I repeat, you need to put things in perspective. My main target priority about training specifics is RPTD – workouts at Race Pace Target Distance, with the relief of aerobic training. Don´t forget it. However in the context that anaerobic training recruits FT it will cause them to adapt "more aerobically" than were before, sometimes I use AFAP to get that goal. But wait…with a minim frequency. Might be that by instance in a one month period I use it 4-6 session of AFAP, but then the next month might be do that once I a or I wil miss that kind of training absolutely. I don´t trust in cycles where training is repeated, every week, every microcycle, every month, every meso cycle or every year. I don´t train no one ever the same in 2 seasons. I don´t train the same training program for the same runner twice (or more) for one marathon.

I just think simple, I think individually. I don´t train 2 runners the same way, the same program

What the runner did way back, in the recent past, what he did yesterday, what is the best today´s training session relate to his shape condition and what is the goal to enhance his goal condition to maximize his potential the right moment, and after what he did today, I ask myself what he will do tomorrow, what he will do the next week, the next month etc. All that is related to the goal competitions schedule, his actual shape condition and training individualization need.

What is strange to you that what I do is different to what Hadd would do ? One thing are the principles, other thing is practical application based in that principles. I don´t disagree with some Lydiard principles, how I shall disagree with that aerobic is very important in the distance run approach. However I disagree absolutely with aerobic first. I don´t disagree with hill training, but I disagree the way Lydiard prescribes hill training – the way he does it, the period of the season it´s done , the reserve of one phase mostly consecrate to hill training. I do agree with anaerobic training, but to reserve one anaerobic pre-competitive phase right before the competitive season, with 3-4-5 days a week of intervals and get down dramatically the level of aerobic volume training, what is Lydiard anaerobic training. I disagree. I guess that anaerobic training if it´s used it might be sparsely along the season.

Link what I said to Hadd training. I agree with Hadd about the principles, but don´t try to accept that my training and his training is similar in the level of application.

I guess that once I wrote in this board that I would coach Joe totally different, or someone that comes to me as Joe did. The first think I would do to Joe was before any marathon training would be to train for short distances 5k-10k-10 miles probably and then after a determined period and some short distance competitions, only when Joe´s shape condition will enhance on that distances is when I will decide when and how to introduce Joe´s marathon program.

My training is individual “persona to persona” and different for each different distance event.

Did you even watch those vidoes or do you just want to argue?

I missed this thread while still was going on. It's funny that, at the same time, I was asking you about Livingstone's book by email, and that you mentioned Paul Simon's "50 ways to leave your lover", as I listened it last week for the first time in many years ("still crazy after all these years", BTW).

I don't understand why it stopped just when things were getting so interesting: you were describing your own training methodology in detail, which I find much more interesting than your critic view on Lydiard; not because of you, but because of the topic: you already know that for me it's like saying that Béla Guttman's methods are still the best, and arguing that Mourinho, Guardiola or Del Bosque are all "Guttmanists".

So, back to your training methodology, you mentioned Lydiard's hill training is wrong, ang I guess why. But, could you elaborate on the correct way hill training should be done (when and how)?

Thank you.

very well said: Béla Guttman from Hungary, as well as Helenio Herrera a French-Argentine and Fernando Riera a Chilean all 3 football/soccer coach giants from the past did an huge influence on young ones José Mourinho from Portugal Guardiola or Del Bosque as in many others. However influence is not to be clown, or do copies. Each one got his own training idiosyncrasy.

Your question about hills and why i disagree with Lydiard hills got to do with season periodisation. If you do weight training - something that i don´t you - or you do other kind of strength training that is more anaerobic than the aerobic training, buy in the same training session you also wants to do aerobic run, the right order you shall organize that training session is to go for weights (or strength training) early and aerobic run later.

Or the hill training that is considered to be more anaerobic than the aerobic run, and don´t forget that hill training is cardio-vascular but also neuro-muscular. There along the season periodisation the hill training shall be placed early in the season AND/OR included in the aerobic basic phase. This is the way the FInns . that is a quite flat country, they do place hill training. If you take a look in the original the Finn Haikolla training, the coach of Viren, Paivarinta, or the trainjg of Tapio Kantanen, they all did the kind of training Lydird influenced but they did hills during his winter season and not put in between the winter aerobic season and the spring pre-competitive sand competitive season as Lydiard did,

If you take a look in the Pekka Vasala training - that his coach was another Lydiard influenced - not a Lydiardist clown - the training that Vasala did and that lead him to 1500m olympic champ in the 72 olympics, he did hill training spread along the winter and spring sesons. I might say that Vasala did hill sessions rom October to April.

If you take a look on Coe an Martin training of Sebastian Coe he did hill intervals but since the start of the season of training up to the competitive season.

Also the portuguese Rui Silva did 300 hill intervals but during the winter build-up season.

You need to know the source of hill training, to come to the conclusion who did invent the hill training.

The hill training was done first by the Finns, the Swede runners since the 20s. The first coach to take the hill training intoto the rn methodology and into the season periodisation was Costa Holander from Sweden, the same that did formulate the fartlek training in Volodalen.

However they way they formulate that kind of hill training, that is difference in the way to do hill up and down than Lydiard, and they he sees the hill training as a kind of fartlek up hill, and they did chrono the hill up, while the runners did recover with jog back.

You can see how they did it in this video documentary from the 60s. Pay special attention from 4:00mkn to 5:00 of the documentary

Voladalen

http://www.ina.fr/sport/athletisme/video/CPF04007162/volodalen.fr.html

What we see there ? We see one disciple of Olander, Costa Holmer, on the top of the hill take chrono results from the runners that do hill fartlek. In the case this is one Volodalen documentary from the french top runners from the 60s - MIchele Jazy, Jean Wadoux and some others.

Then, Lydiard that the documentary says that was in also in Volodalen, he did learn the hill training way and was influenced by that kind of training and take it to NZ that is also hilly and good to run hills, However Lydiard instead of place the hill training during the aerobic season - where he should be placed by the reason of methodology that i mean ahead - place that training in the middle fo the aerobic phase and the anaerobic phase and consecrates one ecial phase to that kind of training.

I could go on and on, with more information and more examples how to place it the right way into the season, that is during the aerobic season right from the start of the aerobic season and spread it during that season and e not start the hill training sessions just in the mid point of the season.

Besides some runners need hill training more than others. Some runners by his special ability they don´t need hills at all. Some others need to do hills instead of anaerobic training and instead of aerobic intervals.

Finally, actually there are several different kind of hill training, all depends of he speed pace up and speed pace down, all depends of the number of sets and the kind of recovery. Also al depends of the percent of gradient.

Thank You Antonio for taking the time to write such lengthy and detailed replies. It is very useful information for many of us here.

Nice documentary. And there are some more about Ladoumegue and Jazy also.

You mentioned some examples of great runners doing hill training from the beginning of the training season, to near the competitive phase in some cases. All of them were middle distance runners. What about long distance runners, and specially marathoners? Should they use hills from the begining of training for 10 Kms first, and once in 10 Kms shape start the specific marathon training without hills?

If you look at this Lydiard documentary and the geography of the countryside, it seems as though Lydiard's runners were running over hills on a lot of their daily runs. Look at the footage of Jack Foster and John Walker:

http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/on-the-run-1979

In contrast Jazy did a lot of his daily runs in the Paris region in the Bois de Vincennes. This park is good for training but it is relatively flat. At the weekends he travelled to the forrest of Marly (20km west of Paris) which has a hilly terrain and where he would be doing some form of hill workout during a longer run or something more formalized. So despite what is written down in the books, I would think that Lydiard's runners living in New Zealand were running over much more hills daily and throughout the season compared to someone like Jazy, just because of their geographical location.

Usually Jazy went to Sweden in the springtime as part of his final preparations for the track season. One of the main reasons he and the other French runners went to Voladalen was not so much because of the hills but because there are a lot of moss paths at that location which are very soft and comfortable to run on, even bare foot, allowing for a good means of strengthening the feet/ankles with low risk of injury.