You are reporting the following post to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum

translator2
RE: My previous post.

HRE wrote:
So I'm not surprised to see that many of Peter's interval times are fairly similar to examples turning up in jtupper's books. One of my memories of looking through his books was thinking that a lot of it looked like Lydiard, though there were some noticeable differences.



I read the 'Running Formula' very carefully but I only have a basic understanding about Lydiards training principles.
From what I know it seems, that Lydiards training (periodization, the kind of workouts, where he puts the focus on, etc.) is one instance of Daniels' system.
Daniels lets the runner/coach decide, which order of phases or which milage fits best to the runner. You can also see it the other way round, that Daniels' system is a generalisation of Lydiards system, be it coincidently or planned. As Daniels provides more a kind of global guidelines how to train with some sample training programs as realization, it seems to me that Lydiard is focused on a special type of runner (obviously one, who reacts best on high milage).
I think, with both systems you can make a good runner out of a medium one or a very good runner out of a good one.
It will never be possible to make a very good runner out of a medium one. Therefore it makes no sense to compare these two coaches on a level, who made more runners with records or gold medals. Here it is more the opportunity to work already with good runners that counts (the genetic factor, if you like this term). By the way: who said: 90 percent is the runner and 10 percent is the coach?

Hit the submit button below if you want us to review the post.

If you feel this is urgent or want a reply, email us at [email protected] about the post and please include a link to the thread the post is on and what page number/post on that page it is.