Lydiard Deciples – define aerobic

Welcome! Forums Running Forum Lydiard Deciples – define aerobic

This topic contains 24 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  MothAudio 9 years, 10 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #11090

    timmins
    Member

    Define Aerobic Zone in your definition, or by someone elses, or just what you do.  I currently use Marathon pace + 1 Minute with some once a week half marathon pace workouts.  But i was interested in a mass opinion.  Before you answer though please realize these few key points.

    A. I am very aware of all energy systems, and all sub systems of the anerobic/aerobic model, and even agree that this model may not be true.

    B. I realize that at ALL times we are using all systems, but still like to define zones that the majority of one system is primary.

    C. I'm looking for opinions or fact, but remember it is hard to claim something as fact when everything we know about running is still a theory.

    But lydiard's teachings were ones of interpretation, and i am curious how the majority interprets his message.  Either by HR, Feel, Pace, etc

  • #27320

    GTF
    Member

    First, define “deciples.”  8)

  • #27321

    Ryan
    Keymaster

    For the record, timmins and I exchanged a few e-mails on this topic and I suggested coming to the forum to get more input, understanding that I've never claimed to be the all-knowing Lydiard expert and that some people here might be able to offer some good insight on this topic.

    I did mention different philosophies I've seen along the way but I'd actually like to see what others would have to say on this topic myself.

    One thing we didn't discuss was that last paragraph and I am quite sure when I say that Lydiard was all about feel. He would mention paces in the abstract but I've never heard or seen anything of him prescribing pace or heart rate targets in the way that he talked about effort levels.

  • #27322

    timmins
    Member

    A. I can't spell, i live with it  😛

    B. In some of lydiard's writings/speeches he always went against pace or hr, due to day to day variables, which i agree upon completely.  Daniels takes this one step further describing all the events in the human body that can change heart rate without truely changing exertion rate (dehyrdation, rest, cardiac drift, etc)  Pace and HR will drift, but in general there is still a window that if you drift out of you know your doing something wrong.  Meaning my “catch all” is around a 7 min pace.  If i run a 6:50 then great, a 7:20, must been a rough day, a 8:35 something is wrong. 

    C.  Heart rate windows are a different story.  I am a firm bealiver that there is to much to heart rate to use it 100% successfully (1. Must know your real max heart rate, which few do, 2.  Must have an agreed upon window for certain training, but this window is phy different for all people, so were do you define this [time for some lab tests], etc)

    But i do know if i run 8 miles at a 7:00 pace and avg 149 Hr today, and 3 months from now i run the same course, roughly same temp, etc and my hr is 142, i have seen a successfuly training reaction.

    Still wondering, if anyone uses the Lydiard system, how do THEY define there aerobic pace, and how does this compare to their race paces of that same time?

  • #27323

    timmins
    Member

    More food for thought, even at our highest anerobic state, our aerobic state is always maxed out.  So if you run “a little to fast” or just into a more anerobic state, the only draw back would be the amount of training able to be performed at this level, not that we are effectively training our aerobic state less.  So excersising at 100% aerobic capacity and 5% anerobic (what lydiard is probably aiming for) and excersising 100% aerobic, 50% anerobic, (track intervals) your aerobic system still gets the same training stimulus per minute.

    So if i average 100mpw (or for a better arguement 700 mins of running) – no matter what pace, as long as it is near or above aerobic threshold, then my aerobic system would be getting 700 minutes of training.

    If i picked up the pace and ran some workouts harder, this would change my glycogen stores, sorenes,raise in injury rate, training mood, etc and would drop my time to a theoretical 600 minutes per week, my aerobic system would be getting 600 minutes of training.

    So no matter what pace, my time dictates my aerobic training.  The only thing that is wrong with this theory that noob's could get confused, is you can burn out your anerobic system, so running to fast, even if you are avg 700 a week, could still have major affects on your racing.

    But in a long block of no racing, a consistant 700 min (100mpw)  will always pay off like 700 minutes (100mpw.)

    Any thoughts?

  • #27324

    GTF
    Member

    I like poking fun so hopefully you can live with that as well.  😉

    I go by feel, I can usually tell by the taste in my mouth or the feel in my gut whether I am anaerobic or not.  (Given decades of experience, of course.) 

    Vigil sets aerobic threshold pace at mile pr + 1 minute. 

  • #27325

    denton
    Member

    …..i go by Bill Squires pace of 5km pace plus 2 mins

  • #27326

    Double
    Member

    I just go for a cruise.  Generally the pace increases slightly along the way.  I don't have pre-set time goals for aerobic runs, they are what they are.  When I feel like it's enough I go home. 

    Sometimes people would ask me why my long runs were faster than my shorter runs.  Well, basically, I start them all the same and as I move further along I'm warmed up.  I didn't necessarily plan them that way it's just the way it worked. 

  • #27327

    timmins
    Member

    Vigil sets aerobic threshold pace at mile pr + 1 minute. 

    Where did you get vigils defination at?

  • #27328

    Ryan
    Keymaster

    It sounds more and more to me like you're trying to find a definition of what Lydiard called best aerobic effort. Much like Double, I tend to just cruise and settle into what feels right. With experience, most people tend to know where this is. If you're unsure, that usually means you need to slow down.

    Personally, this pace usually falls pretty well in line with 2 minutes per mile slower than 5K pace, the pace mentioned by denton.

  • #27329

    GTF
    Member

    Vigil himself, it is from his stock “critical zone training” presentation given at coaching clinics.  For elite level runners (i.e. Kastor, Keflezighi, Hall) he uses mile pr + 52″, so Kastor's AT pace is 5:18, Keflezighi's is 4:56, and Hall's is 4:51.  For their LT pace, he uses mile pr + 35″, which has Kastor's pace at 5:01, Keflezighi's at 4:39, and Hall's at 4:34, and they do their LT runs for duration, for as long as they are able to hold that pace.  For national level runner (i.e. everyone else), the paces step back to mile pr + 40″ for LT and LT + 20″ (or mile pr + 60″), but otherwise the concept is the same.  Coach Danny Green of The Woodlands H.S. uses this system of training for his runners.  They do LT runs on the track based on pace and the LT runs last only as long as the runner can stay at that pace.  Green has them do their AT runs on a marked road course.  Both LT and AT runs start out at a short duration (especially for less experienced runners) and progress through the season.

  • #27330

    timmins
    Member

    It sounds more and more to me like you're trying to find a definition of what Lydiard called best aerobic effort. Much like Double, I tend to just cruise and settle into what feels right. With experience, most people tend to know where this is. If you're unsure, that usually means you need to slow down.

    Personally, this pace usually falls pretty well in line with 2 minutes per mile slower than 5K pace, the pace mentioned by denton.

    My training is pretty settled, this is more of a research questions.  I just always like to get info/discuss, and becuase lydiard/vigil info is very spread out and not very precise, its fun to discuss.

  • #27331

    Ryan
    Keymaster

    Nothing wrong with that. It's good to always continue learning. It just helps to understand the question sometimes to understand the motivation behind the question and I thought I saw something in there that made it sound like a search for the definition of BAE.

  • #27332

    timmins
    Member

    my theory is anything below 1/2 marathon pace to a true road racer is in the aerobic arena.  If you ever read daniels training formula, in the back under elite training, his long runs included bouts of marathon and tempo pace.  I love this idea becuase they all are truely aerobic efforts, but still the training stimulus is through the rough.  Pair that up with some high mileage old school lydiard miles, and the times just start dropping (for me atleast)

    Another thing i use, that i did not know, but apperently Vigil does this (according to posts on here and other writings) is i take my tempo pace, and try to go farther every week.  Next thing i know its my 1/2 marathon pace and it's time to start over.

  • #27333

    timmins
    Member

    there is a site that is a spin off of tim noakes theory on central governing of the body, that trains almost entirely in terms of hold a pace until you can race it.  It uses intervals at a pace until the rest/length turn into one long run, sort of like a progression speed workout.  3 different race paces a week (i think this is over board) but becuase you pick different distances it kinda falls into the anerobic/aerobic style of training

    Example:
    Wed is 5k day, where you do intervals at goal 5k pace, and slowly remove the rest and lengthen the intervals

    Saturday would be 1/2 marathon day, done same way with longer rest and longer intervals.

    Its funny becuase it gives the athlete a goal to work toward, and they don't even realize there doing speed work and tempo work.

    Interesting if you ask me.

  • #27334

    AKTrail
    Member

    Not that it matters, but I use feel / breathing.

    Remember Lydiard comes from hilly terrain, including 1000ft hills in 22-mi runs weekly. Pace is more of a mechanical measure, while HR is more of an effort measure. BUT they didn't have HRM's when Lydiard started.

    If you're interested in what Lydiard actually taught, I'd look at either some of his original books (like Run to the Top, which I don't have) or Keith Livingstone's “Healthy Intelligent Training” which is endorsed by the Lydiard Foundation. I'm only partway through it, but really enjoying hearing from someone who did some training under Lydiard, and is trying to explain it in reasonable science. It's also interesting how the training was adapted to various runners. More comprehensive than anything I've seen on the web.

  • #27335

    timmins
    Member

    alot of lydiard was not explained at first, and some now has been proven wrong.  but when push comes to shove: (i coach 50+ distance kids, 75 + CC kids, and oversee the fitness of 450+ adults) 

    When i make people run 6 times a day for time, and slowly build there time, and then about 1 month b4 there test or race put them through some speedwork based on their ability, they pr every time.

    I am interested in Healthing Intelligent Training if it is truely a lydiard student

  • #27336

    denton
    Member

    read Ron Daws….or follow the ideas of Chris Wardlaw……

  • #27337

    GTF
    Member
  • #27338

    AKTrail
    Member

    I am interested in Healthing Intelligent Training if it is truely a lydiard student

    I was off in the time frame a little. Livingstone grew up in Lydiard's neighborhood and did meet him, but actually trained under Barry Magee for about 5 yrs starting at age 17, so he was a bit younger than the prime Lydiard training years there. Many of his examples remind me of Nobby's explanations, and I think the book as been adapted as a text for Lydiard Foundation training. There's some interesting stories about what the general principles were and what was actually done in terms of adapting to terrain.

    One nice feature about it is that it is readily available (at least when it's in stock).

  • #27339

    denton
    Member

    …sorry I should probably add if you do some searches for Jon Davies you will find some good insight. He was easily the best of 'arthur's boys' that coached.

    On a slight side note I'll add that when I lived in NZ I ran on the some of more well know routes of kiwi running folklore. the most famous being the waitakere range route (that route of the 22 miler, but we did some slighty shoter version at 20 miles) and it was as nasty a piece of long running as one could imagine. The first 40mins was a nice flat run throu the suburbs, but that last hr 20 was brutal…..we began with a 20min run uphill and then the real fun began with the nastiest rolling hills I have probably ever run which led to a downhill 2-3 miles to the finish. So when lydiard says to go for the easy sunday long aerobic run understand that this was really long fartlek style run ala Bill Squires change of pace long runs. By accident I also ended up running on some of the routes of Dixon in his hometown (Nelson), and went on another brutal run where Jack Foster used to apparently do many of his runs.

    The funniest story of the bunch (which I've probably told before) was the first weekend I was in town and first met many of the guys i would end up training with while lived there. The centre of running in Auckland is a park called the Auckland Domain. I show up and see this old guy in baggy tights who is only coaching and think to myself….jesus buddy at least put on a pair of warm up pants as opposed to those tights. So i meet the guys and one of them aks me if I know who Barry Magee is…of course i reply……and as my luck turns out you can now guess who the guy in the tights was……

    It was interesting to have a perspective of what lydiard said and what really occurred…

  • #27340

    timmins
    Member

    i just think lydiard was a laid back guy.  When he said easy aerobic run, people interpretted it as on the easy side of the aerobic spectrum.  I think he was just meaning an aerobic run, which if done aerobically, should be easy. 

    And the easy was probably compared to normal athletes idea of a run, which was run till the wheels fall off then do some strides….

    To be honest a Lactate Threshold run would be considered aerobic, and it is defiantly easy compared to anerobic sharpening.

  • #27341

    denton
    Member

    ….by all accounts Lydiard was like a little buzz saw with a high pitched squeaky voice……once again to go back to when i lived there and had the good/bad fortune to be able to attend his 'public funeral' in Auckland. The funniest story came from Richard Tayler who had lydiard as one of his coaches. I guess tayler calls up lydiard and thinks he's hot stuff becuase he had ran over 100 miles….lydiard goes into this hyper active speech about how he'll be so much better when he then runs 110…tayler calles him again once he gets higher pitched again and much more hyper and lydiard goes great now imagine how fantastic you'll be when you get 120 miles…anyways the story goes on and on until tayler maxes out at 180 miles…..there were all sorts of stories about how guys would be reayd to quit the sport and they'd go to talk to layiard about quitting. before they even had the chance to tell him they were quitting he go into his hyper mode and talk and talk a million miles an hour and by the time he was done they were out and going for another run and ready to train hard again…..

    i just think lydiard was a laid back guy.  When he said easy aerobic run, people interpretted it as on the easy side of the aerobic spectrum.  I think he was just meaning an aerobic run, which if done aerobically, should be easy. 

    And the easy was probably compared to normal athletes idea of a run, which was run till the wheels fall off then do some strides….

    To be honest a Lactate Threshold run would be considered aerobic, and it is defiantly easy compared to anerobic sharpening.

  • #27342

    GTF
    Member

    That is right, even up to his final days (post stroke) he was still remarkably intense and sharp.  I got the opportunity to meet and chat with him more or less one-on-one and the next night went to hear him speak at the public presentation he gave.  He gave definitive, no-nonsense, encouraging responses.  Lautenslager does a nice job encapsulating the man here

  • #27343

    MothAudio
    Member

        Another “go by feel” runner. Because of environmental or physio changes I just forget about a rigid pace and just use my internal gauges to point me in the right direction. In saying that this year I have been making more of an effort to run a higher percentage of aerobic miles in the steady state zone and less GA miles. And by running my recovery / easy days a bit slower the gap between my range of training paces has increased.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.