Patti Dillon has said that back in her AW days, when you were testing everyone there for V02 MAX, you told her you would not bother testing her since "what you have I cannot test for" or something along those lines.
Is that what you recall?
"Thanks for joing us, Dr. Daniels. Great to hear from one of the "real" men for Arthur could not be with us... Of course, if he could, he would yell at me, "How dare you saying I don't understand aerobic and anaerobic...!""
I will say it... He knew all you needed to know. That much is obvious.
All respect Hodgie-san this is not a reply but an attempt to get this thread going again.
Two Kiwis have just made the World Champs 1500 Semi finals (Blincoe and Willis).
Regardless of who trains them this is part of the legacy left by Arthur.
We are only a small country (4 million)and to have 2 Mid distance runners up there shows our current strength.
At present we have something like 3 runners under 3:39 for 1500 and another 3 under 3:44. With another pack snapping at their heels running around 3:45.
I am not sure of the Math, but on a per head of population we are looking awefully good still.
Arthur will be smiling up there somewhere.
To be honest I don't remember, but I have made a similar statement to various runners. Brian Diemer often reminds me that I told him I couldn't measure what was above his shoulders. Billy Mills and I discussed his goals as a runner and we agreed that testing him was not one of them. Now it bothers me that I can't remember what I did tell Patti; I tend to remember most things from years ago (enough on that remembering subject)
jtupper (okay, I know who you are but I still like to respect your sign-in name):
I liked your comment on running shoes in your book; not too rigid, yet, well-balanced recommendation. Having come from the Lydiard school and Japanese school (literally), I believe in what is now known as "minimallist" shoes. Whenever I got together with Arthur, we talked about, some part of our conversation, running shoes even in the last moment on his last tour. I train mostly in racing flats (not exclusively though). You seem to have recommended training in racing flats/skipes at least some part of training but you didn't make much comment on running in today's so-called "high-tech" shoes. I'm almost conviced, when some coaches and runners talk about high mileage causing injuries, quite often it's actually incorrect shoes that's contributing more to injuries. What is your take on this issue? Would love to hear your opinion.
I brought Dr. Peter Snell to MN for a clinic a couple of years ago during the Big 10 championships at U of M. Nick Willis came to the clinic.
One of the things I'm impressed with Kiwis is their view on running. I really enjoyed running with the club while in NZ--they take a long run of 2 or 3 hours rather carually. Than the terrain they run! Some of you might have seen a movie called "On the Run" in which they show Jack Foster running through some very interesting setting! I went for a run with Lorraine Moller in Boulder last year and the course she took was what I called "a goat path."
The thing I was very impressed with Nick Willis last year at Athens is the way he handled the heat. He seems very smart and savvy. I'm very curious to see how well he runs in the final, assuming he'd make it to the final.
That terrain that Jack ran is right behind my house.
You guys get over here and 'Goat trails" abound.
Definitely a couple different ways of viewing the situation -- one from a mechanical point of view (potential for aiding or messing up mechanics) and one from a physiological (what shoe, or lack thereof requirees the least energy to run in). I remember a shoe we played with that was very economical to run in but produced (allowed is a better choice of a word) considerable pronation and probably not for the masses. We saw less pronation when barefoot running compared with a variety of shoes of that time, but barefoot subjects the runner to more landing shock, so for some people costs more to run in than does a particular pair of shoes. You have to wonder if what you wear as you first get into running influences what works best. Then there is the whole issue of people being designed differently. I prefer barefoot running, but I don't log that many miles (notice it is still plural).
Are you taking on new athletes to coach? Do you have a website or an e-mail where I can contact you to discuss?
Never mind just dropped you an e-mail sorry for the thread hijak.
Goat trails apart. Nobby, I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about our club runs and thinking nothing of running 2 or 3 hours.
Running was/is a social activity and clubs have a 'calender' that have something every weekend for the whole year.
I am no historian but this situation existed in New Zealand before Arthur's ideas became famous. Except "long runs" were not part of it way back. He eludes to it in his books when he talks about a run and a few drinks a few times a week.
The 1950's,60's 70's. 80's and some of the nineties saw "Athletic" clubs with very good membership and a strong "Middle class" of runners. That is directly attributal to Arthur.There was a downturn in the 90's due to all sorts of reasons, including "new sports" like Triathlons and Mountain Biking, but a hard core remains.
When I first started running it was with the local club here in Rotorua and then with Lynndale in Auckland.
Every second Saturday was "Pack run" where runners were loosely put into groups, "fast pack, Medium pack, Slow pack"
The groups set off at a leisurely pace with a leader who had "some idea" where they would run. The pace stayed leisurely until a pre determined spot where the pack would break up as the runners headed for home at whatever pace they wanted.
Fast packs tended to run either faster or further than the slower packs (obviously!.
It was nothing for an average runner to be running alongside a World class athlete on these runs and everything from World politics to the Sport we love would be discussed. More often than not there was a huge amount of humour involved (especially with the likes of Bill Baillie or Jack Foster) and it would not be unusual to see a Runners on the side of the Road doubled over laughing as a pack ran on without them.
The camaraderie that existed within clubs was and is strong and there is a lot of banter between clubs at major competitions. Just look at NZ Running websites.
I can still remember vividly my first run with Jack Foster in the 1960's (He was just a 'good' runner then) and on my first day at Lynndale one of the first to greet me was Jack Dolan (Arthur attrbutes a huge amount to him) and the run was with one of "Arthur's Boys" (albeit a less famous one) Bruce Harrison. How could a runner not be inspired.
40 years later I still feel the same about this sport.
First a topic related question, then a slight hi-jack.
Q-As a high school coach, most of my runners get decent training shoes as well as spikes and/or flats. I have read much about the "minimalist" belief that "less is more" and we try to incorporate small amounts of barefoot running into our program. For example, barefoot striders after a disance run or a 10 minute barefoot cooldown; both always on well kept grass. We have always been taught that worn out shoes are the biggest cause of injuries, or "bad shoes", the wrong type for your biomechanics. Do you feel it would be beneifcial to mix in some flats running? For example road work in trainers, maybe fartlek or repeats/intervals in flats?
Q-2 As a current competitor myself, I TRY to still specialize in the 800 and an occasional 1500. I have above average speed for your "sub-elite" runner. Would I be best off by competing for my club in XC or just using this as down time/base time and focusing on some strenghtening exercises in addition to the basework. Also how much base would you reccomend an 800 runner with good speed but who has mostly been a "distance runner" although I ran 4x1 in college as well as XC.
Lynndale was Arthur's club, right? I will be in NZ at the end of this month and it would be great to experience a club run. Do you know any of the guys in the club now?
Did you know he [Quax] ran for the mayor of Auckland last year? Didn't get it though.
Quax a politician? Amazing!
I guess not or he may have won
Lynndale was Arthur's first club but he had a disagreement with one of the Club Administrations and went off to Owairaka. A club he built up to be very strong.
However, he still had lots of friends and athletes at Lynndale.
He attributes much of his own motivation to Jack Dolan and Jack was a Lynndale man to the end.
It would be 17 years since I did a Lynndale Pack run.
I still know a few of the guys, but it is all the "oldies".
I attended the 75th Jubilee 2 years ago and caught up with a few.
Many athletes still run Waiaitarua from the Lynndale Clubrooms although it is 19 miles from there not the full 22 as was done from Arthur's house in Wainright Ave.
I live just down the road from Lynndale athletic club. Plenty of fellas still do pack runs from there on the weekend - when i say plenty about 15 all up. But there are the oldies as kim refers to and us young fellas (18-21) so if you were to rock down to the clubrooms at 8 one sunday morning and explain your predicament im sure youd definitely find someone to show your arthurs route over the waiataruas.
"All respect Hodgie-san this is not a reply but an attempt to get this thread going again."
I hope it wasn't anything I said:)
"To be honest I don't remember, but I have made a similar statement to various runners. Brian Diemer often reminds me that I told him I couldn't measure what was above his shoulders. Billy Mills and I discussed his goals as a runner and we agreed that testing him was not one of them. Now it bothers me that I can't remember what I did tell Patti; I tend to remember most things from years ago (enough on that remembering subject)"
I find it very interesting that "some athletes" might be viewed this way and not others.
I just read the Lindgren book. Was he ever involved in any "testing" that you were aware of?
Thanks for sharing your insight and experience.
Arthur was, believe it or not, not an unreasonable man. I certainly did have a lot of fun jabbing at each other with some topics such as running shoes. I heard that at one time Arthur and Bill Bowerman started going at each other on running shoes (curved last vs. straight last) at one clinic. I would pay lots of money to listen to what they were saying then!
Quite often he simplified things too far in a public setting. He would say something like “the shoe has to be a banana-shape” or “you don’t pronate or supinate; the shoe does.” But, honestly, his knowledge and experience went much deeper than that. To summarize it in a better way, and add my own personal experience and observation; to me, there are basically three causes for pronation/supination: (1) mechanical, (2) structural and (3) shoe induced. Arthur was never keen on orthotics but I personally feel in some cases (1 & 2) you may actually need some device to correct certain foot movements. But I feel we both agree that a big part of running-related injuries can also be caused by ill-fitted shoes.
I think there is a certain element of “chicken or egg” situation in research. For example, two things that you mentioned on shoes—pronation and masses; and landing shock—I wonder how much is actually “what it is” and how much of it is “what could be”. Arthur always said that, “if you have a weak spot, you need to strengthen it; not to support it.” Again, I guess it’s a bit radical statement and some people actually might need some level of support. But that aside, I wonder if the subject, even if he/she is one of the “masses”, strengthens the foot by barefoot running or whatever, would the degree of pronation/supination subsides? And as for landing shock, if one has learnt to adjust his/her running form to landing more softly (it was Jack Foster who said we should learn to alleviate landing shock with our running form), could that individual then afford to wear more “economical shoes”?