"... if you are putting together a training system and you aren't going back to constant interval stuff, there is only so much you can do before it looks a good bit like what someone else has done"
I agree with that. Also, in the second edition of Jack's book, he says something of the effect that many 'new' just given a new name.
I've read and re-read Lydiard and Dainels; I have read Bowerman, Dellinger and Van Aaken. If you look at them from a higher level, and don't get caught up in the details of the day-to-day workouts, it's fairly easy to find the similarities and differences - with there being more in common than not. Although Lydaird is the one with the reputation of "100 miles a week" for endurance, all of them emphasized the need to develop the aerobic system in order to sustain the speed required for the distance being run.
Something else I thought of while I was comparing what Peter did with Jack's tables, was that a certain level of performance over training distances must be met in order to race a specific distance in a specific time. That may seem obvious, but when I did this thing, I was curious to see if the efforts by Peter were in the same ball park as the efforts published by Jack. So in order to hit a 1:45 800 meter run, an athlete needs to be able to run repeat 440's in around 60 seconds, or 880's around 2:15 or do 3 miles during training at under a 5:00 minute/mile pace. I may be wrong on this, but it makes sense to my mind.
My understanding is that, for the most part, Jack's training tables were published with the idea of presenting the slowest paces needed to bring about a specific training response. Running faster than that pace just made you work harder to get that specific training response, and just left you more tired and prone to injury. So if running 400 meters in 61 seconds is needed for anaerobic development, running at 58 seconds was over doing it, if that particular training session was specifically for anaerobic development. It would be interesting to see how other athlete's training line up with the training paces outlined by Jack.
Looking at what Peter did, and comparing it to what Jack has in his book, Peter was hitting Vo2Max at Jack's
I-pace, anaerobic training with R-pace, and thershold training with the 3 mile runs, all mixed in together during the 12 or 16 weeks of the published schedule. Arthur sure did have a gift of putting it all together.
In Jack's first edition, he does state at least twice, that a runner should try to learn the amount of effort needed to hit all of the paces needed during training and not depend completely on a stop watch. That really stuck
out to me, because before I read his book, all I had read on the WEB was how he emphasized running paces, not effort. Just like reading on the WEB that Lydarid is all about 100 miles a week of LSD.
I don't remember Jack mentioning the part of learning the effort in the second edition. I'll have to go back and dig through it. I own the second edition, but not the first.
And last, I still think you are reasonable. From reading your posts, you just don't tell someone they are wrong or disagree with them and leave it at that. You explain why you disagree or why you have a different opinion/view
point.
