Physiology questions about Lydiard training.

rekrunner wrote:

I don't want to escape what Noakes said. But if we could plug that quote back into context, we can find out what he really meant to say, rather than having to take your words.

Distinguishing facts from fantasy and determining what is the main idea. These are the very reasons why it's important to read Noakes' quotes in context. Luckily, I found it right here in letsrun, in a thread that's already been linked a few times -- we might as well just continue that discussion where it left off:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2412208&page=37

Now that we are all able to read the quote in context, we see that Noakes thought the "main idea" was, just a few lines above:

"... I find it especially quaint that some runners and coaches of the 1950’s and 1960’s are now being held up as the examples of how athletes should train, 60 years later. Is it not possible that the sport has moved on in the past 60 years and that were those coaches to be active today they might not be quite as successful as they once were?"

I also "google" found Clarke's quote in a few places, and it is usually accompanied with an observation that (paraphrased) "Elliot, as a junior, after just a couple of weeks of beginning training, ran a 1:52 (880 yds?) on a grass track." I guess Clarke was using the figurative tool of exaggeration to emphasize the raw talent of Elliot.

Noakes leaves open the possibility that Cerrutty was still great, but his "main idea" was that their (Lydiard and Cerrutty) training is 60 years old, and that they might not have all the answers to modern questions -- maybe modern coaches have improved the sport.

Surely you don't disagree with Noakes' idea to move forward to modern training?

António Cabral wrote:

Shipsy and Rekrunner

...

But ther´s no way to escape to what Noakes said. He did write, it´s done, ther´s no escape, no way to be evasive. No need to run away from the main idea. Once again. He said just this.

(…Percy Cerrutty may have been a great coach but he also trained one of the greatest milers of all time. Ron Clarke who actually knew Elliott once remarked that his (Clarke’s) grandmother could have coached Elliott and Elliott would have been just as successful….)

Little by little, step by step, idea by idea... sentence by sentence, gramatical by gramatical, word by word. Noakes said so because he wants to let us know that the training that Percy did on Eliott doesn´t justify Elliot rich performances, to be unbeatable in the 1500m. Noakes wanted to say that The main reason what Eliott did what he did is because his talent. This is the meaning of "Clarke’s grandmother could have coached Elliott and Elliott would have been just as successful.

All your considerations, that doesn´t deny the main idea why Noakes said (did write) what he said (write)

This is the fact. All the rest is fantasy, your fantasy. I also love music, arts, films, philosophy, but training methodology is the concrete world, the objectivity, not fantasy. Fantasy is the Lord of Rings, training is objectivity, one runner, one training method, one (several) performance(s).