LYDIARD OR DANIELS?

Leigh Daniels. definitely. younger, more energetic.

the midwest connection wrote:

Leigh Daniels. definitely. younger, more energetic.

For Shizzle

I don't know all that much about either one. I have read DRF and no Lydiard books. What I know about Lydiard I mostly picked up here. From what little I do know Lydiard sounds a little more aggresive than Daniels. If that's true then you may reach higher potential with Lydiard but you might have more injury problems than with Daniels. It depends if you're willing to take the risk. I'm sure more knowledgable runners will chime in and correct me if I'm wrong in assuming that.

The theories are very similar. Arthur Lydiard tends to focus on more strength through drills and hills during the base phase. (for example Peter Snell) Jack Daniels would say more strength through altitude and running more miles during the base phase. (for example Jim Ryun)

That is one difference. Both coaches find out what works for individual runners. One runner could need more mileage with minimum speed and another one could need more speed with less mileage. Jack Daniels will say and has experienced runners successful at 35-40 miles who were elite 5K-10K. While Arthur Lydiard would emphasis a need high mileage to be successful. His magical line was 100 miles to be successful for an elite runner. That is another difference. The balance between the two is where the answer lies for a coach. You need a solid foundation to build upon and both would agree speed is only for a short period of time with minimum amount. What is beautiful for both men is you do not need to do tons of repeats and killer workouts with a great base to build upon. It depends on strength in the base phase for what is applicable to your location. It is better to do the same workouts, where you have measureable results as the season progresses. You can simply add repeats or decrease recovery as the season goes on. Both of them agreed on tapering to lessen the amount you run. (mileage and intensity) You do less repeats while keeingp the same recovery along with time. That is one problem with trying to increase intensity and more intervals at the end of a season. You cannot wrong with both of their ideas if applied wisely.

well, that's easy since Lydiard is dead

Similar Theories:

One of the most clean and most intelligent comments I've seen on the threads. Thank you for your insight.

Nobby

Similar theories wrote......"Both of them agreed on tapering to lessen the amount you run. (mileage and intensity) You do less repeats while keeingp the same recovery along with time. That is one problem with trying to increase intensity and more intervals at the end of a season."

Hmmmmm, gotta take issue with a perhaps not so minor point if one is actually trying to follow a Lydiard program. I was coached by a Lydiard disciple in the early '70s. He followed Lydiard's workouts closely. I later had the fortune to spend 3 days with Lydiard on two different occassions in the mid-70s where almost all we talked about was training.

Lydiard's intensity continued to rise as the volume fell. The intensity of his workouts definitely did not level out. His first book (I have forgotten the name of it) had training plans that were far more a reflection of what his athletes did in the early '60s than the plans in his later books. I think he, his co-writer, or running editors watered the plans down for the "masses" in the later books.

When I was in high school my coach had us do 2 miles of sprint/float 50s. This was a workout straight out of Lydiard's plans. We would sprint 50 meters (55 yards then), float the next 50 (not really slowing down, just not driving one's speed for that 50) for two miles. It was the hardest workout I have ever done, seen, or heard of. This was done about two weeks out from the big meet. It was so tough we coasted the next two weeks. Lydiard described this workout as "tieing everything together" (endurance, strength, speed, etc).

I have coached for thiry years and have never seen a person who could really handle this workout. Though I incorporate the sprint 50/float 50 sessions into my programs in the late season, they are for much shorter duration (rarely these days over 800 meters).

I had one woman who did a mile (not 1600) of 50/50 back in the '80s. Because one is truly sprinting at the start she went through a 1/4 mile at 63, was crying when she went by me at 3/4....and finished in 4:41. She rested two weeks and ran really well in a few summer meets overseas.

A minor tangent if you are still reading......Lydiard's hill session were also incredible. He really believed in bounding up hills....but the bounding was more vertically oriented so one would only move forward a foot to a foot and a half with each bound. He worked toward bounding continuously 800 meters uphill in one repetition with several reps ion one workout. This would take 10-13 minutes/repetition. Ten minutes or more of explosive endurance......does that satisfy the desire of the "Specific Adaption to Imposed Demand" rule?

Enjoy......fun thread.

backstretch wrote:

I have coached for thiry years and have never seen a person who could really handle this workout. Though I incorporate the sprint 50/float 50 sessions into my programs in the late season, they are for much shorter duration (rarely these days over 800 meters).

I wonder how that would work for me if I tried it out. Can you explain it more? I know it sounds simple enough, but is there any special preparation b4 such a workout?

Lately, I have been thinking about that one workout Quenton Cassidy the hero of O.A.R. around the end of his quest, which is 60 400s on the track with 100 meter jog rest in between. He hit 63's for the first 40 and then the book doesn't really tell you what he does for the rest of then. Twenty miles on the track is a long way, specially when doing repeats. I know this book if fictional and all, but has anyone ever done such a thing? Is it possible? I want to know more...

Ok, I won't comment on the fictional workouts. The workouts which are reality are scary enough! ;-)

We gradually blend sprint/float 50s into our training by doing 1-3 X 150 of sprint/float 50s after the main workout (and a long rest). This is done once a week.

Perhaps one or two weeks before the main sprint/float session we finish a workout (whatever is called for that day.....can be very different workouts) with a 400 of sprint/float.

Do not throw these in too early in a season. They really do sharpen one up rapidly. As Lydiard said, "they tie everything together".

Make sure thesse are not just thrown on top of another system. It is a good idea if the sprint/floats are blended in gradually.....and carefully.

Best of luck!

Backstretch,

Are you sure you were running the 50/50's right? For 20 years I have applied the philosophy that Lydiard used the 50/50's as a way of keeping repetition work going without raising the blood ph. I have never run or coached runners to do 50/50's at much faster than 3k pace. The slow 50 is tempo pace at fastest. Done this way, this workout is actually quite sustainable for a runner to handle for 2 or even 3 miles. I have always believed that Lydiard did the work early and pretty much coasted in the end of the season. We do quallity 4-5 times per week at the end of the season with drills, 50/50's, time trials(not at full speed) and sprint training but the volume is minimal (under 20 mpw for the last few weeks of the season for milers). This leads to an incredible peak. I shoot for 3% in the last 6 weeks of the season and often get it. The downside is you cannot race year round like this. Once you have peaked, you REALLY need to rebuild that base.

Were we doing these right? This is how we were taught, and I don't remember Lydiard contradicting this in those two three day stretches thirty years ago.

I am now old enough to accept the fact we might/may be doing these incorrectly but I really don't think so. I wish I could lay my hands on the original book that Lydiard co-authored. Anyone wish to chime in with its name?

I can tell you this, the 50/50s run the way we do them also helps contribute to a very significant peak.

Be well.........

Jack Daniels (and Jim Beam as my agent)!

The 50/50's were to be run at sprint/float/sprint. And maybe you are writing poorly but how can you run "2 or even 3 miles" at "(not)much faster than 3k pace"?

Do you mean the fast parts are just faster than 3k race pace and the float are 6:00 pace?

How could you run 2-3 miles at faster than 3k pace?

NO Not the same.

Daniels emphasizes hard quality (mile pace or faster), early in the season.

Lydiard avoids quality until base it built up.

Two approaches that can work well.

But NOT THE SAME.

DRF plan for 5k-15k has four 6 week blocks. The first is base building with strides. The second focuses on reps (mile pace) as the primary and threshold as the secondary quality workouts. Reps use full recovery so they are not that stressful. I think the most stressful block is the third which uses VO2max intervals (3k-5k pace) as the primary quality workout.

The two systems are not identical, but they are similar. Also, don't just go by the published schedules. The text explains variations on the theme (e.g., DRF schedule doesn't mention hills for the second block but the text does). A schedule is only a guide, not a commandment written in stone. Understand your body and adjust.

None of you are answering the quetion: Who would you have as your coach? And secondly, I think Lydiard has his guys running much faster anaerobic work at the end of the year than daniels. I know a coach who said that Daniels believes that it is important to increase VO2 at the end of the year rather than speed, but when do you need to be more ready to run faster than the end of the year?

I have met Jack Daniels (while he was at Cortland) and I know some runners who improved dramatically under his coaching. They swore by him and gave him credit for their improvement.

Variations on this workout were (maybe still are?) done by high school kids in New Zealand. We did 5 laps as 15 year olds and it was not too tough of a workout.

The version I did a few times (had a Lydiard influenced coach) was jog the bends, sprint the straights, so our coach sometimes called it 100s/100s, rather than 50s/50s

By the time you've got up to top speed on the straight and then ease down you really are only doing 50 at a high speed and 50 easy, whi. There's an intermediate period where you're moving rapidly from sprinting down through other paces to the float.

While you're not meant to shuffle the floats you're also not meant to run them too hard. If you don't let yourself recover enough on the floats you will raise the blood ph and have a hard time recovering from the workout. It's meant to be a workout you can do Tuesday before a Saturday race to sharpen up.

Also, some of the sharpening process comes precisely in the variable speed, keeping the speed of those floats down because then you have to accelerate more as if you were reacting to a move in a race. IIRC this was something Lydiard advanced as a benefit of the session.

Darkness,

My post was to backstretch and he seemed to understand so I won't worry about your comprehension skills.

backstretch - I checked in with a couple Lydiard contemporaries and you were right that it is indeed a sprint. I guess we worked more at vo2 pace to get the greater time under stress in. I'll have to try it like that.

As to the original question. Having run systems of both coaches, I'd have to go with the Lydiard system due to the long term development. If I had only one year to run, I'd go with Jack. More than that, I find there is greater long term improvement with Lydiard.