lydiard on the bike?

You can't ride miles on your bike and say you're training the "Lydiard" way. And where did you come up with the number "140" mpw?

140 was just an example of a high-mileage week...it could be lower (say 90) or higher (190). The point is, from what I understand, a true Lydiard system for training involves very high-mileage during the base phase.

As for not being able to do a system the 'lydiard-way' on the bike, I realize that it is not the Lydiard system. What I'm asking is if the effects of a lydiard-like system (increased aerobic capacity, etc.) could be achieved through alternative excercises.

From what I've read, the 'lydiard-way' involves 'marathon-type conditioning' in order to improve ones aerobic base. I'd like to know if one can similarly improve that aerobic base without running as much? (and please, if you wanna post something like 'typical american trying to get more on less'...save my time and yours and don't).

I think what LMH is referring to when he says that it's not rocket science is that, sure you will improve your aerobic capacity if you do a lot of cycling. You don't need to hypothesize about it. It will happen. BUT, it is not the same as running. You'll have a huge aerobic engine in a body that's not prepared for the rigors of running. If you can imagine a distance swimmer who spends all their time in the water, with very little resistance to their leg muscles, then getting out and trying to run a marathon. Sure, they have the aerobic capacity. But their legs aren't trained for it. This is the principle of specificity. If you want to be a good cyclist -- cycle. If you want to be a good runner -- run. But if you decide to do BOTH, then expect some trade-offs. To be the best runner you can be, most of your training should be running.

I used to run 100 miles a week plus up to 100 miles a week on the bike commuting to college. I wouldn't suggest doing it. Makes you pretty tired for those runs. From my experience 90 minutes of cycling equates to about 60 minutes of running, at least in terms of effort.

Lydiard stressed up to 100 miles a week in singles at a good aerobic effort. "In singles" would be the hard part. He then suggested anyone who could handle it to do some morning supplementary jogging of up to 30 minutes a day. So that's how you would get the 140 figure.

His 100 miles in singles schedule looked something like this:

M- 10 miles

T- 15 miles

W- 18 miles

T- 10 miles

F- 15 miles

S- 22 miles

S- 10 miles

He also stressed minutes over miles so...

M- 1 hour or so

T- 1.5-1.75 hours

W- 2 hours

T- 1 hour or so

F- 1.5-1.75 hours

S- 2-2.5 hours

S- 1 hour or so

An alternate approach I've been trying lately is alternating 2 hour runs with 1 hour runs for a week. That also gives you around 100 miles. It's also important to run these runs at a strong aerobic pace, not jogging around, maybe even finishing fairly fast or adding in some fartlek here and there.

Alan

my wife ran her 10k pr after training for and competing in the ironman triathlon... not much speed work, just long aerobic type stuff. the 10k race was two weeks afer the triathlon.

just to add, she was an individual ncaa cross qualifier back in college, and the 10k was a couple years out of college on a hilly road race...

...so i would think additional aerobic work can be done in cross training to boost your running performace.

Barry Magee, one of "Arthur's Boys", offers training on-line and is intimately familiar with Lydiard's methodology.

He advocates getting the running duration up as quickly as is practical, believing the long duration runs of 90mins+ are crucial for capillarization, which he believes is the key. He feels the more long distances run before your speedwork begins, the better.

I understand your question. I believe that Lasse Viren used to do a ton of XC Skiing during the winter months (don't remember if I read that or was told that - anyone verify?). I had also thought about this. The problem I identified is that the capillarization won't necessarily occur proportionately in the right muscles when you bike. You'll be creating an imbalance. Go ahead and try the bike thing and tell us how it worked out for you. Lydiard would definitely say something like, "Bike? Aren't you a runner? A runner needs to run."

Maybe you could get some good info by checking out a tri website or book? I think a website might have more info from runners gone tri, but a book might be helpful b/c some of them are pretty technical, biomechanics-wise.

Good luck finding what you need.

You will gain additional aerobic fitness from cycling that will most likey carry over to your running if you are limited in running mileage. However, there are several factors that must be considered in this approach:

1) Training must be structured in such a way as to limit the impact of bike training (fatigue) on run training

2) Certain bodytypes may discover additional muscle gains from cycling specific strength outweigh the crossover benefits from additional aerobic development

3) Most untrained cyclists will see a negative impact on run performance in the adaptation (early) phase of bike training due to a variety of factors

5) Cycling should be limited to lower efforts to mitigate impact on run specific training

4) Specificity of training can not be overlooked - given equally talented runners a) runs 60, bikes 100, b) runs 100, b) is more likely to see faster peak times provided no injuries occur

In summary, if you cannot train to full mileage in running due to (fear of) injury, additional cycling cross-training done correctly is likely to help you improve run performance over the long term, but not as much as additional run training itself (seek out methods of injury prevention).

You're welcome.

The Lydiard system is based on a big milage base. But it isn't slow, at least not once you're in shape. It's at "fastest aerobic pace" which is completely undefined by design, because you have to pay attention to your biofeedback. (Gotta keep those '70s words alive.)

That's not the only part, though. In a real Lydiard training system, the anaerobic work is preceded by a 4-6 week hill training phase which works on developing strength and speed while attempting to maintain the endurance base with at least one long run each week.

1. If lydiard system is developing a huge aerobic base, any other way is retarded

2. he came up with the number 100 NOT 140, where did you get that? snell even went as low as 60-70 during interval stuff

3. if you can't handle it something's wrong, run slow, run on grass, do barefoot running/walking to strengthen lower leg muscle groups

4. if you can't understand number 3, don't be an idiot. just run your 60-80mpw or whatever and put up some substantial crosstraining. this isn't f***ing rocketscience.

LMH wrote:

1. If lydiard system is developing a huge aerobic base, any other way is retarded

2. he came up with the number 100 NOT 140, where did you get that? snell even went as low as 60-70 during interval stuff

3. if you can't handle it something's wrong, run slow, run on grass, do barefoot running/walking to strengthen lower leg muscle groups

4. if you can't understand number 3, don't be an idiot. just run your 60-80mpw or whatever and put up some substantial crosstraining. this isn't f***ing rocketscience.

LMH,

I realize that "this isn't f***ing rocketscience," so maybe I should rephrase exactly what I'm looking for. Has anyone had any experience with a LARGE amount of aerobic cross training (such as on a bicycle) with supplemented running? If not, do any of you know of any studies related to this, or would you be willing to hypothesize what you think the result of such a program would be?

Thanks to those of you with helpful suggestions.