There have been a few comments on this thread about how imposing some of those sessions Igloi had seem. How did new runners who joined your groups with either coach react to the sessions. Would you say that retention was pretty high, pretty low, or about the same as in other training groups?
Orville, I'd be interested in your take on this as well.
I was invited to train with the group one time by a fellow runner from a race. The runner said Joe Douglas would give us the workout, which begin with some strides. We started the strides and I was surprised at how slow they were, as the runners were almost jogging doing the strides. We kept doing this and I asked them when we were going to start running.
I don't recall what else we did but it was all very easy. Afterwards, Joe asked if I'd like to join the group, and I said no thanks, that it was too easy for me. Maybe that's not how they trained all the time, but I wasn't impressed.
I think the big advantage was that they got so many good runners together to train at the same time together, and I have to agree that the distance runners trained by Igloi were consistently very good.
HRE,
The growth for both coaches was good. Of course there were injuries and "casualties" but having coached for 19 years, not unusually so. In fact both clubs were very successful in attracting athletes and seemed to have a good retention rate.
Reid Harter
i would guess the retention rate was on par with other groups, but this is only a guess, at least regarding smtc.
in my experience, new athletes were not catered to, at least not initially, and were rarely invited--so j.r.'s experience is more of an exception, than the rule. and, the workout j.r. describes is nothing like anything i ever did in my 6+ years with the club, and i can answer based on this experience, this was NOT how we trained all the time. maybe you showed up in september/october after everyone took a month off. to put a finer point on the perception that it could be boring to be on the track so much and for so long, i think most of the athletes i was training with had a very specific purpose in mind, such as making nationals, or making olympic teams, or medaling, or winning gold. we weren't out there to sightsee, and as mentioned, the challenging nature of the workouts never allowed for boredom to creep in, but i get the point that it may not have been for everyone. i have a very different purpose now as a 46 year old, so i would not subject myself to what i did 20 years ago...
as far as recruiting, joe seemed to be more of the mindset that if you build it they will come. that's not to say he didn't offer services to athletes, but it was rare. when i worked in his office for a short time, he'd get calls virtually everyday from athletes, sub-elite to elite, asking to join the club. most did not know the commitment joe required so were quickly put off for a variety of reasons--either they didn't realize he'd expect them to relocate to either santa monica or houston, meeting for practice 6-7 days per week, etc.
Athletics Illustrated wrote:
So to not completely derail this thread from its original purpose about Igloi, which I do find interesting....I will make this final post in this particular thread about what you and I are arguing about.
When I wrote, "editorial right", granted, I should have used "privilege" or "observation" to be fair.
What a joke. You ask me to not mention Lydiard, then you have the right to break that our agreement and you have the privilege to comment on my answers, commenting on Lydiard point of view, something that you ask me to not mention and that you justify with the justification that´s public known. If is public known as you said, and for that reason it doesn´t matter you that i talk about that, but you got the right to comment on me about the same subject that you ask me to not comment. You are not a journalism, you are a man with one agenda - the Lydiard one agenda.
If you think you have that privilege, i also i´m the owner of my answers in your interview, and i may request to delete it, because i have the privilege to consider that you betray my answers with your observations. I guess i have the right to delete the interview, also based in your post comments about my training, that is similar to the Lydiard one.
Or in USA the authorship and the author rights didn´t work as in my country ? the journalist just wins money without concern and respect the interviewed opinion, and with betray the main core of ideas of the one that the journalist interviews ?
Athletics Illustrated wrote:
Antonio,
Calling out anyone's credibility is rich for you considering your long-standing aggressive behavior throughout this website against anyone at anytime who asked about or talked about Lydiard training. Within many threads you set about to purposely ruin the discussion by very arrogantly and very aggressively accusing people of being disingenuous, manipulative, liars and religious-like in their appreciation of Lydiard (as if he was a God or something) et al.
I gave up long ago to let you understand that i don´t share your opinion on thsi subject
Sorry, but i don´t share your opinion. I guess that in those some 10 years that i post about Lydiard i demystified many of the Lydiard training myths. I guess that i did a rich service to the training community. I did receive more aggressive posts that i did. I can prove it by statistics. Also i rarely started a discuss about Lydiard. I can prove it. I simply react to the exaggerate number of posts and threads about Lydiard that is a distortional related to the importance that Lydiard in the context of the training methodology. I got some LRC threads that i can address that you did the same with me that you did with John Hadd.
Finally about this part, i keep my opinion, some from the Lydiardism made me remember the strategy of the religious Jeova testimonies, They come to my door and the have the answer for everything and all that answers are in the bible. This without offence every religion. For some of the Lydiardism every solution about training comes in the Lydiard sentences. It´s not different to what you are doing on this thread. What are your posts if not the A-B-C from Lydiard, the solution for every training question ? You start the sentence with "the great great Lydiard" and the religious man say "the great great God". But what i see with a good sense analysis is that Lydiard sentences and Lydiard ideas aren´t right related to the rich training principles.For instance, the wrong idea that aerobic progress is unlimited.
Athletics Illustrated wrote:
You were asked many times to stop posting in threads because you were disrupting good conversation, time and again. For anyone interested in the incredible rampages you went on about how Lydiard is inferior and those who followed his training were wrong/liars/failures, just search the massive "Lydiard versus Daniels" thread, for one of many, many examples.
Again, If you want to count the number of offences that i did receive, with the ones i sent, you will know that i did receive much more that i sent. But you are not worried with the offences i received. I repeat, i rarely start that kind of offence, i just react to the other that earlier offended me. See...You are just concerned with my offences, you never stand up with the start of other offences against me. It´s your way to express your journalism independence.
Athletics Illustrated wrote:
There are quite a few people who were associated with Lydiard that posted regularly about their experiences with him, VERY VALUABLE information was shared, some of these people get paid to speak about him, here they were genuinely helping for no charge, right here! They have all disappeared except for HRE.
How do you feel about that? Mission accomplished?
You were relentless!
Now I held my promise in the interview and did not discuss Lydiard with you. However, much to my shock and amazement you indicated some training practices that resembles Lydiard - something that you have vociferously railed against and denied until then.
I was very fair with you during the interview and you were very cordial, I even commented how nice it was, in the past; a pleasant surprise.
Now simply because I observed these similarities between your training practices and Lydiard's principles, doesn't jeopardize my credibility one iota. In fact it reinforces it - providing I understand Lydiard training, which by the way, I do.
Now in another new thread, if you like, I will be happy to point out, where I see the similarities between what you advocate as a coach that resembles Lydiard (from the interview) and I will explain why I see it.
Open one thread as you propose "what is similar to Lydiard in my training" this is a your contradiction. If you think i´m illogic, and offensive why you want to open open one thread ?
You can open that, but this is again your mistake and journalist misunderstand. For instance, In the past you posted (i guess you opened one thread even kind of (Lydiard versus Renato Canova ) commenting on
Renato´s training related with Lydiard. That makes me smile. Why ? Who are you to comment on Renato Canova ? Since the man posts here and is open to send his training opinions what you know about him that he doesn´t know himself ? Th best comment you can do or discuss about him is worst to what he can say about himself. Now, move that my opinion to myself and your comments about my training. What you know about me and my training, the thousand of people i coached as a coach that makes you think you know my training, so well, or better than me, than what i can do about myself. If i say that i´m a Lydiard, it´s you that would say to me (or teach me) what in my training is similar to Lydiard ? Silly proposal ! It´s a your silly proposal and reveals your misunderstand of my person as a coach.
Also, this is the problem of many that wanted to contest my comments on Lydiard related with my training. This would be one impossible task, and their mistake. The only sustainable debate and that would accept would about Lydiard. YOU will post about what you think that is right on the Lydiard training, what is your opinion about Lydiard training aspects, and I will post what i think about your Lydiard ideas with my opinion.This i accept, not relate Lydiard with me or vice versa. Lydiard is well known, public, it´s here where you are right, but to not debate, but to be able to debate. You choose one Lydiard subject, and i will reply about the same subject, and vice versa, i choose one Lydiard issue to comment and you will reply about my post. This i migt accept, so far so good, not the silly thing that would be you commenting on me. Do you think i´m stupid and that you think i would accept know my training as well as i do, or that you know better than me what´s in my training is related to the Lydiard one ? Besides, i remember that in past threads you essay that same your silly proposal "what in the Antonio training i think it´s similar to Lydiard" but your exercise attempt didn´t deserve my reply so big you showed that is your misunderstand about my training.
Sorry, but someone that betrayed me, i don´t trust on him no more. I could accept that debate with Nobby for instance or with another one Lydiard representative, but not with you.
Athletics Illustrated wrote:
If you want to have an honest and open conversation without reverting to religious-like and dishonest accusations of my observations (or Lydiard training), I will be all for it. - hopefully we will see you kindly post in that thread without the usual nonsense.
Again you don´t say the truth. i just did many posts out of the Lydiard subject as i did many posts about Lydiard without the kind of speech you refer: religious, offensive, etc. By the contrary, some of the Lydiardism they did refer about me as a ignorant of the Lydiardism. On this same thread I gonna post one serious post i did about Lydiard and next you will let me know who is the one i did offend.
HRE wrote:
There have been a few comments on this thread about how imposing some of those sessions Igloi had seem. How did new runners who joined your groups with either coach react to the sessions. Would you say that retention was pretty high, pretty low, or about the same as in other training groups?
Orville, I'd be interested in your take on this as well.
An interesting question. I do not have all of my logs from those days. I was not fair with the Coach. I was completely out of shape when I showed up in the first week of November. I had spent a couple of weeks driving across the country and then a couple of more weeks in Tokyo watching the 1964 Olympic games. I began running only once a day. Throughout December and February I had tendon trouble. By mid march he said "Very strong man, Atkins" In the first week of October he said that I should have started twice a day training 3 months before. He thought I couldn't because of work. Now he said"you are on your way-style must develop more." He wwent away for a few weeks.
I believe he often tested a new runner. I think that Bob Schul said in his book that he spent the first 2 weeks he spent with Coach Igloi doing all of his running with Laszlo Tabori, that the workouts were very very hard and he did nothing else but sleep.
He occasionally tested a runner.
Sat Oct 6--30 min warm up-(10x 100 yds)x8--220 between sets-1 set good speed, 2 sets good swing etc--3 large laps jog--"You are in the best shape of your life"
Sun Oct 7--10 big laps of about 600 yards each--15 shake ups--10x 260 hard speed with 180 jog--2 lap jog, 12 x 440 hard swing with 220 jog, 2 laps, 10 x 260 hard speed 180 jog--3 lap jog--20 x 100 shake ups.
Athletics Illustrated wrote:
If you want to have an honest and open conversation without reverting to religious-like and dishonest accusations of my observations (or Lydiard training), I will be all for it. - hopefully we will see you kindly post in that thread without the usual nonsense.
Just one question. With what you would pretend to comment what in my training is similar to Lydiard ? With my posts on mine and John Hadd´s thread "2 kind of runners", or with my thread "The summer of Antonio" or with what ? With my interview you ask me ? With the interview, you can´t, for 2 main reasons.
1/in the interview i just ask me the questions and yoir questions weren´t about my training specifically, but more about my opinion about the training issues you built. ther´s nothing as "how do you coach António, can you let us know about the roots of your training ?"
2/Since in that interview i was the main focus, my opinion was the focus, and you didn´t allow me to express what I think (not you) that in my training is different than Lydiard, every attempt to debate my training wold start by what in my opinion it´s different from Lydiard, but without your "privilege" to comment
Athletics Illustrated wrote:
When I wrote, "editorial right", granted, I should have used "privilege" or "observation" to be fair.
In the political dictatorship the name death, but in fact what he dictator did have the name of murderer.
In your editorial political you name "right" and "privilege" to your comments on my article, but in fact, related to what you ask me o (miss of Lydiard comments) what you did have the name of intellect dishonesty.
J.R.,
At the time I ran for Joe it was mostly local runners in the club. SMTC ran an ad in Track and Field News that may have brought in a few people. I worked full time at Northrop Aircraft, most others did as well.
In regards to the training you experienced, it sounds like you were there on an easy day. One learned early on with both Coaches Igloi and Douglas that you took your easy days really easy. On the hard days you were challenged enough.
Reid Harter
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
J.R.,
At the time I ran for Joe it was mostly local runners in the club. SMTC ran an ad in Track and Field News that may have brought in a few people. I worked full time at Northrop Aircraft, most others did as well.
In regards to the training you experienced, it sounds like you were there on an easy day. One learned early on with both Coaches Igloi and Douglas that you took your easy days really easy. On the hard days you were challenged enough.
Reid Harter
Was there a pattern to the hard days vs easy days, or was that also "artistic freedom"? Also, how much time did Joe spend on running form? His attachment to Geoffrey Dyson's biomechanics was interesting to me as well, as I pretty much adapted that in my own coaching.
Not sure if you can answer this, as Joe continued to coach long after I think you ran for him, but did he continue the Igloi system or did he slowly adapt some of the more modern road/trail running?
I really enjoyed meeting Joe and found him to be a very nice guy, unpretentious and gentle. Did he have that same personality as a coach?
Joe was the nicest person you will ever meet. He was the coolest most laid back coach I ever ran under. He was so dedicated that he flew 20 hours to Tokyo once to setup appearances for Carl Lewis and flew back the next day so that he wouldn't miss too much of our training.
There is a facebook group of former SMTC members, and people can't say enough positive things about him.
Most people don't know it, but he coached Danny Everett and Steve Lewis to gold medals in the 400.
Cowboybob,
In my experience with Coach Igloi and Coach Douglas, I feel Coach Igloi was more proactive on form, and used the cadence changes more frequently. Joe on the other hand made use of tempo running and I would say its use evolved over time. For example, he would send me frequently out on the road alone. Later, when I would return to Santa Monica to visit family I would see his and Merle McGee's athletes doing tempo running. In fact I can recall a couple of times seeing Johnny Gray leading a group of SMTC athletes on a tempo run. The workouts I observed were along San Vicente Blvd and the park along Ocean Avenue. Approximately seven years ago Joe was training a group of 800 meter runner and they were doing a hill workout running repetitions up and down a road in Santa Monica Canyon. In summary Joe training did evolve and departed from the Igloi system on several fronts.
In terms of personality, Igloi was the more the disciplinarian and Joe was more sociocentric. So your observation of Coach Douglas was a correct one, still one had boundaries that one was expected to stay within.
Reid Harter
Reid:
Thank you very much for sharing. It has brought a smile, as I did enjoy Joe's company very much and didn't have enough time to really get to know him.
His article that was posted earlier was also quite interesting. Even at this later stage of my career it is always nice to pick up some new ideas and concepts.
Thanks, again.
Don't be wrong. Antonio has shared a lot of his knowlegde with us, for free. He is a wise coach and a generous person. And, of course, he deserves a lot more credibility than you.
didn't see some of the last posts on this thread, but since it's been bumped, i'll chime in about joe: for the 7 years i was with smtc he was like a second father to me, teaching me how to invest, open an IRA, etc. i doubt i've ever met a more generous person.
i'm not sure i'd call him laid back, though--he was very serious and focused on our goals and would frown if ever i missed a practice (which i maybe did a few times in all my years in the club). he begrudgingly--but lovingly, too--gave me workouts for my honeymoon in may 1991 (i remember him asking "why don't you get married in september?"). fortunately, the week after my wedding i broke 3:40 for the first time, running 3:38 at the santa monica distance classic.
it sounds like his training departed in some ways from igloi, but i think the physiology behind his workouts were essentially the same. as for form, he tried unsuccessfully to get me off my forefoot--he once warned me that after 10 miles of "fresh" running, i'd come off my toes, but to his chagrin, he was wrong, and even at 46 y/o i'm still an extreme supenator, regardless of distance...
joe did not technically coach steve lewis and danny everett to their gold/bronze medals in '88, but he helped john smith create a workout plan when smith came on board at ucla. when smith wanted to create his own club around '91/'92 to make more money by charging a percentage of appearance fees (joe amazingly at the time was only taking a percentage of endorsements, not appearance fees), most of the sprinters chose to stay with joe and smtc (kevin young was a notable exception)--and despite what i've just written, these were NOT financial decisions. joe could coach any event. he did coach danny to his trials victory in '92, but injury forced him out of the games; steve managed to win silver, notably taking second to smith's new charge (pun intended), quincy watts...
beyond his paternal nature, joe is a great and loyal friend--i can't count how many games of hearts and spades i played in europe with joe and my teammates, and at our periodic reunions of smtc athletes from the late 80s/90s you'd see that everyone feels the same about joe...
many thanks to all who contributed to this thread. It has been very informative and for the most part productive and flame-free.
Just one question for Mr. Harter
In the example weeks of your paper I notice especially in the pre-season training that there were a lot of continuous runs. Did igloi only really use these in pre-season? were they used as a warm up and to get in some extra miles? were some of them done fast and others as recovery? they seem to run contrary to most of the information on igloi that is out there so I am wondering just how he programmed them.
thanks for your time