Why don't more top runners train like Lagat?

HRE. I enjoy your comments and consider you fair minded. Your point about Boit is a good one and a possibility. But Lagat is sophisticated and certainly seems to be an honest sincere guy who loves his sport, so why would he intentionally mis state (or simplistically not count 20-30 mi of training)? For example,

If I had become great, and had done so by running 5x800@ 1:52 every second day, with relatively little other training, at some point in time i would want to share my "secret" . Its human nature to be proud of an accomplishment and how it was achieved. Thus our thirst for training principles and experiences.

I do think that Lagat's ability to run 3:26 years ago was more a sign of his outlier ability than a proof of his training techniques. I'm sure many guys since have trained harder and just as well, but not even broken 3:32.

For the the other posters, simply use the search function herein. There are enough snippets of comments to prove that Lagat has been consistent in his comments over the years.

Problem here is just one and all. People ard running in the wrong track. instead of ask what´s different and unique in every training individual that leads to success, the pre-concept behind the question "why don´t more top runners train like Lagat" is that we al shall train along the same unique/single model. isn´t that right what´s the Lydiardism want to promote when they try to convince the expert that Lagat train "a la" Lydiard ? But you, you are fantastic. You felt in trouble since that is obvious that one top runners is out of the Lydiard paradigm.At that attempt to prove that Lydiard is right and most that is out of Lydiard is wrong or debatable you did post in a hurry this post.

HRE wrote:

realistic... wrote:

They tried to train like him, but found that they needed more mileage.

This.

A little bit later you revised your answer. Might be you don´t know what´s Lagat training.

Actually you moved to the defensive answer: this thread is stupid because none of us knows what Lagat does. Of course, i would answer that we anly knows what one runner does when he is Lydiard. Out of that no one knows nothing about what one does.

One more post and you will say "Even Lagat coach doesn´t know what´s Lagat training.

Finnaly you will admit that Lagat is a Lydiard runner as you knew that Baldini told you. Or even better. Lydiard the man told you all those things.

Your attempt to prove INDIRECTLY that everybody is Lydiard and that Lydiard is th best training model is not idiot. Is just pathetic.

On this thread you didn´t come Lydiard to the debate or argumentation. But we know very well what you what to let us trust. Your all time funniest post on this board is you suggest about Ryan Hall coach. Someone posts what woild be the rich Ryan Hall coach. This before his attempt to train with Renato Canova. You named one coach and you said the reason is because that coach got the same kinf of Ryan faith, when the main reasion why you did suggest that coach is because he is one Lydiard coach. Your funniest post ever there.

I would guess that Lagat is physiologically a little different than most 1500m/5000m runners - more fast twitch muscle fibre, but a big V02 max.

Maybe something like Fernando Mamede, who physiologically wasn't a typical 10000m runner having run for Portugal at 4x400m in the Olympics, as well as the individual 800m.

Really, I have no idea what Lagat counts in his training and what he doesn't. Boit was also sophisticated and sincere by all accounts but evidently accounted for his running differently than most of us do. I'm perfectly satisfied that Lagat runs once a day, takes some time off at the end of the season and may well just do the 60-70 mpw I've seen people here claim that he does.

All I'm saying is that if we want to ask why more people don't train like, say, Bill Rodgers, we can go to Bob Hodge's website and see years of did each day Rodgers so we can be definitive. We can't do that with Lagat or with a lot of other of today's top people. Instead we have some piecemeal reports. To me that opens the possibility that the snippets COULD be less than accurate. If I'd known it would end up as such a big deal I wouldn't have mentioned it.

Antonio, no one is talking about Lydiard here but you.

I think some Finnish runners who followed the Lydiard principles in the 70's didn't count the morning runs. There was really no point to count them because they were mostly done by feel - without a specific pace and most likely without a clock and a specific route (many times athletes had no idea of the distance they had run). The morning runs were run at slower pace than the main workout later in the day and I think the morning runs were only used to spend the extra energy left from training hard only once a day. That's why they trained usually about 80 miles a week but when counting the morning runs the number was usually much more than 100.

Lasse Viren possibly trained a little differently than most of the others Finns. Actually there is a very little amount of information available regarding his training. I have read two of his books and one about his "training secrets" written by his coach. Although the books didn't really tell much about his training secrets. Only thing sure is that he used a lot of aerobic training during the winter. He trained one year in the US (maybe 1969?) but his progression stopped because people there believed in interval training and running on asphalt (Lasse ran often in soft forest trails in Finland).

I have a bio of Viren that actually does have a lot of his training logs included. If you're interested in the title I can look for it and maybe you can find a copy. Or maybe it's one you have.

I actually stayed with one of Finland's better marathon runners for a while in 1975. I don't believe that he counted his AM runs in his totals. I think Viren did count the AM runs. Lydiard's guys didn't count them in their glory days.

There are many ways the same sample in two different containers can produce different results. Container contamination, sample handling, sloppy lab work, etc. That's why they require two tests.But first, what makes you think the "B" sample came back negative?In order to get it, you have to look a little into the science (see the report that Jeff Wigand provided, especially points 8, 9, and 10):- The "A" sample was bad- The "B" sample was ALSO bad -- even worseLuckily for Lagat, after cooking the samples in a car on a hot summer day for 28 hours, the lab didn't freeze the "B" sample until 6 days later. By then, the IEF patterns shifted even further away from normal (and also out of the spectrum of rhEpo):- Both the "A" and "B" sample were outside the "normal" range- Upon closer inspection, both the "A" and "B" sample were outside the reference "rhEpo" range tooThe only way the scientists could interpret the results was that neither actually indicated synthetic EPO (both measures were out of range), and that something in the sample was modifying the EPO, shifting it towards the basic side.

gum on the ceiling wrote:

How does someone have a positive A sample but not a positive B? It's the same urine sample split into two containers. I don't get this unless it was some sort of cover-up/someone paid off.

LETMEGETHISTRAIGHT wrote:

Why don't they? (Doubles, "mileage", Lydiardism. LOL)

In my honest opinion, I don't think they train like Lagat because they have this idea that to train hard you have to be running twice a day and running lots of mileage and long workouts and what not, which isn't true. Lagat trains just as hard or harder than those guys, just in a different way. Everything he does is quality. He doesn't put any slow junk miles on his legs. Any by only doing the mileage that will benefit him and nothing more, he stays healthy and doesn't overtrain and also has the benefit of being able to recover better so he can put in better quality in each training session. If you train once a day or twice a day, once a day will have higher quality. Also, because he has less training volume, his body is more able to absorb the training. Lastly, Lagat is patient, he knows that as long as he doesn't get injured and doesn't overtrain he should at least stay the same or steadily improve every year, while other athletes are too short sided and want quick results so they overtrain and maybe get fast quick but have short careers.

António Cabral wrote:

However i don´t need to be an expert in psychology to know why he tried to answer this one abou Lagat. it´s because causes him trouble that such a good runner isn´t a Lydiard one.

Antonio, you left the "lydiard morning run advice" thread with several questions unanswered, could you please tell us how 800m runners should train? How should they train their aerobic part of training if not threshold intervals?

Thanks in advance

Are you really saying that training once a day is enough to be a world class athlete in one of the hardest sports out there? Athletes from other sports would laugh of this, and evidence shows that doubles are more effective. One outlier doesn't prove that its not.

Looks like the BBC printed a correction:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/athletics/3156744.stm

IAAF wrote:"The analysis of the B sample was conducted by the IOC-accredited laboratory in Cologne, Germany on 29 September and did not corroborate the original result," the IAAF website said on Wednesday.

BLAST FROM THE PAST wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/3078642.stm

I am sorry to say but

EPO hero berny lagat

IS A FRAUD

Now please, post your usual drivel about mishandled tests

hahahahahahahaha

Here is some insight into Lagat's training:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444032404578006274010745406.html- Singles- 65 to 70 miles per week max- "Training is about intensity. Volume is overrated."- 5 week "complete" break every yearI gather this is what the OP is talking about, regardless the accuracy of such snippets.

Antonio,

Let's leave Lydiard out, and talk about another famous coach.

It wouldn't take me long to find training topics from Renato that recommends his athletes run 130-150 mpw, maybe more.

Even a recent "low mileage" thread from Canova talked about marathon runners only running 80 mpw.

So, considering the statement "(they) found that they needed more mileage.", it seems self-evident that most top runners run more mileage than the often reported 60-70 mpw of Lagat.

Maybe you have some information about some top runners who found that they did not need more mileage?

HRE wrote:

I have a bio of Viren that actually does have a lot of his training logs included. If you're interested in the title I can look for it and maybe you can find a copy. Or maybe it's one you have.

I actually stayed with one of Finland's better marathon runners for a while in 1975. I don't believe that he counted his AM runs in his totals. I think Viren did count the AM runs. Lydiard's guys didn't count them in their glory days.

Yes, I have seen those logs. The logs had his annual training volumes and some random training weeks if I remember correctly. However, when I read the books I was expecting some information about his training philosophy and why he does train that way. One thing which I found weird is that (if I remember correctly) during some periods he even trained three times a day for several weeks but usually twice a day. Things like this were never explained.

What I personally liked a lot was books from Kari Sinkkonen (Pekka Vasala's coach). His training methods were 90% the same as Arthur Lydiard's. Unfortunately, I haven't actually read any of Arthur Lydiard's books yet (they are hard to find here in Finland) but I have read basically all the reliable information about him on the net (not letsrun.com).

Kari Sinkkonen used three different aerobic workouts and one fartlek workout during the base period. He called the aerobic workouts what could be translated as 'even paced workouts (EP)'.

...

EP[hard]: run at the maximum aerobic effort, 'steady state'. About 3:20 for elite runners.

EP[normal]: run at pretty pleasant pace (I think it could be the most economical pace [moving fast but not very tiring] if there is one?). About 4:00 for elite runners.

EP[easy]: run at easier pace than EP(normal). About 4:40 for elite runners.

Fartlek: not specific distances or times (I think?). A lot by feel. Intensity wasn't that great: these exercises usually covered the same amount of distance as EP(hard)!

...

I can't remember the exact details but I think the week rhythm was like this:

EP(hard)-EP(normal)-EP(easy)-EP(hard)-EP(normal)-Fartlek- EP(easy)

The distance covered by the exercises where about this (x=any distance):

Fartlek: 4x

EP[hard]: 4x

EP[normal]: 5x/6x (if one was 5x then the other was 6x in the weekly schedule)

EP[easy]: 6x/7x (if one was 6x then the other was 7x in the weekly schedule)

For example, for about a 100km/week runner this could have been a weekly schedule (x=3 km):

M: EP[hard] 12 km (from counting 4*3 km)

T: EP[normal] 15 km (from counting 6*3 km)

W: EP[easy] 18 km (from counting 6*3 km)

T: EP[hard] 12 km (from counting 4*3 km)

F: EP[normal] 18 km (from counting 6*3 km)

S: Fartlek 12 km (from counting 4*3 km)

S: EP[easy] 21 km (from counting 7*3 km)

However, often the Sunday workout was even longer (in this case could be 25+ km) and the fartlek a little shorter (depends on the intensity).

Every third or fourth week was easier (60-70% of the usual intensity) or the weeks when you needed it - it was stupid to try to follow the schedule when you couldn't do it (Pekka Vasala did sometimes 140 km/week but then dropping down to 70km/week the next week. This was because he had a lot of injury problems and had to take a lot of rest days).

Kari Sinkkonen used the same way of doing hill exercises as Lydiard. However, Sinkkonen sometimes used shorter but steeper hills or longer but not so steep or something in between. Sometimes the hills were only 100-150m long but steep (I think Pekka Vasala used even shorter hills!). Usually they were about 400m long. The hill phase was 4-6 weeks.

What I liked a lot was how the book explained the low intensity intervals and high intensity intervals. The low intensity intervals were done usually around the race pace, but the intensity was not as high as in competitions (so that you could train more often).

I think it's not the right way to count the distances that some people use. Let's say someone who trains for 10k decides to run 5 times 2 km in 10k race pace. He might think that it's the same as running 5 times 160 m in 800m pace but it obviously isn't. I think this is because for shorter distances it is always quicker to recover even if a short distance and a fast distance are both done at maximum effort. It is easy to think it this way: sprinters usually run 3 races within a very short period of time: heats, semifinals and finals are usually within 2 days. In 2009 Usain ran 2 runs in the first day (heat and quarterfinal) and two more (semifinal and final) the next day. And we all know what happened in the final. Now imagine a 10k runner doing this - impossible. This is also why it takes so long to fully recover from a marathon - same goes with training.

This is why in Kari Sinkkonen's system 800m runners ran around 2400m (3 times the race distance) in total during low intensity intervals, 1500m runners around 4500m (3 times the race distance), 5000m runners around 7500m (1,5 times the race distance) and 10000m runners around 10000m (1 time the race distance).

Sinkkonen again used three pace system. For 800m runners the system was like this:

Workout 1: 12*200m in faster than 800m race pace

Workout 2: 8*300m in 800m race pace

Workout 3: 4*600m in slower than 800m pace

For 1500m runners:

Workout 1: 20*200m in faster than 1500m race pace

Workout 2: 10*400m in 1500m race pace

Workout 3: 5*800m in slower than 1500m race pace

For 5000m and 10000m runners I can't remember them very well, but what was interesting was that the intervals almost never were longer than 1 km. For example 5k/10k runners used 200m intervals too like 800m/1500m runners: although at lower pace but more in number (to cover around 7,5 km/10 km in total -> up to 50 times).

High intensity intervals were almost like competitions. If you had a race then the race was the perfect workout itself for this purpose but if you didn't have then you had to have your own race, which this workout means. So these exercises was done to the point of extreme tiredness like running in big races. These were done rarely, just during the last month or two before the big race of the season to prepare for it, but not within the last 10 days. Finns actually did one of these exercises as their last hard exercise (to fully empty their body from energy) about 10 days before the big race. After that it was just easy workouts to get body fully recovered. This helped them not only physically but mentally as well (I think that the mental aspect played a bigger role: one type of "last hard" exercise for a 5k/10k runner was running 50 m hard followed by running 50 m a little easier for 5 kilometers (uneven pace workout). Lasse Viren's coach claims that Lasse ran this exact workout in total time of 13:20 just two weeks before the Olympic games: of course it is easy to win anyone with the confidence this type of workout brings).

However, for high intensity intervals Pekka Vasala sometimes used hill running. These didn't have much to do with hill training done during the hill phase: as high intensity intervals they were much shorter and much higher in effort, like a race. This is why some sources say that Pekka Vasala did hill training only a few weeks before the games but the exercises he did then shouldn't be confused with the hill phase workouts. I think that using hills when running these exercises might be mentally easier and help you if you have some injury problems and can't run on a flat track.

For those who know nothing about Pekka Vasala, he won the 1500m in 1972 Olympics (the race Jim Ryun was supposed to win). Before the games he was actually considered as a 800m runner after running 1:44.5 (European record back then, 0.2 seconds off the WR) but decided to take part in 1500m because it was "less risky". A few weeks after the games he ran 1:44.5 again in the 800m (it remains as a mystery what would have happened to Wottle if he had taken part in the 800m). His career ended quickly after 1972 because of his injury problems.

And to stay on the topic: Pekka Vasala didn't count the morning runs, they weren't even on the schedule and they certainly weren't on his training logs.

(Following the previous message).

But he still did the morning runs the way Lydiard recommended (more is always better - even 15 minutes is better than nothing). Just didn't count them.

rekrunner wrote:

Antonio,

Let's leave Lydiard out, and talk about another famous coach.

It wouldn't take me long to find training topics from Renato that recommends his athletes run 130-150 mpw, maybe more.

Even a recent "low mileage" thread from Canova talked about marathon runners only running 80 mpw.

So, considering the statement "(they) found that they needed more mileage.", it seems self-evident that most top runners run more mileage than the often reported 60-70 mpw of Lagat.

Maybe you have some information about some top runners who found that they did not need more mileage?

If this is a thread about Lagat, it makes no sense to talk about marathoners. The event has very different training. Instead, look at comparable runners and see how they train. For example, I think Webb's mileage never got much about 70, and he was too neurotic to omit any mileage. He ran 13:10 in an over-distance race.

Thanks, that's very interesting. I know Sinkonen's name but didn't know much else. A lot of what I initially learned about Lydiard's training I learned in Finland from a guy who had been one of their better marathoners in the 60s, and who, to stay sort of on topic, did not count morning runs into his totals. I also raced against Viren a few times in 1975 and heard from others who knew him that he was only doing distance work at the time other than the races which were pretty much all he did for faster runs.

Well this thread asked about "top runners", so marathoners weren't excluded.Are there more examples than Webb? Seems to me that Lagat is a kind of exception to the rule.Is it better to limit the question to middle distance top runners?

Ho Hum wrote:

If this is a thread about Lagat, it makes no sense to talk about marathoners. The event has very different training. Instead, look at comparable runners and see how they train. For example, I think Webb's mileage never got much about 70, and he was too neurotic to omit any mileage. He ran 13:10 in an over-distance race.

Vasala training was 90% Lydiard With one huge difference. That is all Finns from the 70s up to 80s were all in self blood tranfusion.

The first Finn runner to use blood doping was Jouko Kuha that in 1968 broke the 3000m steeple world record. It follows Juha Vaatainen, an then Pekka Vasala, Pakka Paivarinta, Tapio kantanen and Lasse Viren of course, as others not so well known and so famous. The list of blood transfusion did continue among Finn runners and Maninka or Matti Vaino, being this last one caught with self blood transfusion.

For your information Pekka Vasala in 1974 did travel to New Zeland and did one compelte season of training coached by Arthur Lydiard, Result ? Just 6th in the 1500m european champs and was a shadow of what he did in the 1972 olympics. Soon Vasala gave up to train and compete due to unsuccess.

Conclusion ? Vasala was stronger against the world athletes that against the european athletes, and being coach by the pupil of Lydiard Kari Sinkkonen, he did best that coached by the master Lydiard personally.

The Lydiard method wasn´t bad of course. But what made the difference and turn on that Finns superiors is the self blood transfusion.