Run-Down Forums

[PeterJ]

... because running is the most natural exercise. You will hear this from many if not most leisure runners. I fully supported this opinion until I replaced my running shoes and went into a specialised runners shop. This guy didn't only sell me a pair of expensive shoes, but also invited me to coached training. I told him: "as you can see, I am overweighted, I am slow, I am 49, do you really think this makes sense?", His answer was:"Yes, come and see".
So I joined a running group, people between 18 and 35. The best runs the 10K in 31 minutes, nobody is slower than 35 minutes. So I learned technical exercises, tempo variation, speed training, etc. When I repeated an exercise 6 times, the other did 8 or 9 times, and I felt strange but nobody laughed about me they all gave me a hard time: "Peter use your arms, knees up, fight, fight". At this point I realised the difference between jogging and running, it is not the speed! I guess I have become a runner even if slow.
Is training fun? Not for me, it is hard, it is exhausting, and more than once I had the feeling I must go behind some bushes and say hello to my breakfast. And I always think, why can't you just sit on a sofa, have a pint and grow even more fat. But after the training I always have a great feeling of satisfaction.
Did I get faster, yes a bit, not too much but 2 or 3 minutes. But the major difference you get tougher, you can accelerate for 400 m, pass a frustrated competitor and slow down 100m later. This wasn't possible before.
Therefore I must praise all the running coaches, you do a wonderful job. BUT please don't tell this to my friends to whom I compete, just tell them: "runners don't need coaching".

Peter

[Dan]

The biggest improvements in my running didn't come with physical maturity, but with learning the technical sides of the craft through various coaches.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[Indeurr]

[Dan]

That's not really proof that coaching is a necessity, though. It could just indicate that the best athletes naturally gravitate to teams/coaches any time there is an organized system in place.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[Conway]

Wow ... Sure everyone can run ... But everyone can't run well ...

EVeryone doesn't run the same way ... Some people are naturally efficient .. Some natually inefficient ... And then there is a huge difference between trying to cover 100 meters or 1000 meters ... Everyone can run and everyone can breathe, but everyone can't run and breathe ...

I can think of so many reasons why runners need coaches - even those that do not intend to compete ... Health reasons alone would dictate some coaching to stave off injuries, over exertion, and other physical problems ...

I've stayed away from "distance" oriented topics for a while, but this is a matter of common sense and good health ...
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills

[Dan]

Whatcha tryin' ta say, it's a no-brainer?

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[Conway]

LOL ... Yep, that's what I'm sayin ... Though the one thing I've found with distance running is the no brainers are the one's that seem not to be ...
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills

[Micah Ward]

I wondered why you were staying away from the distance topics. Please don't do that. Us no brainers need all the input we can get.
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`

[Conway]

Don't know about that ... Seems like distance folk typically want to belive what they want to believe ... Which is ironic since we haven't won a major medal in a world event during the lifetime of today's college kids ... Which tells me that the large majority of folks out there running distance don't even have a prototype to look at to determine what is successful for a distance runner ...

See .... Don't get me started ...
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills

[Micah Ward]

A couple of factors at work there.

People are naturally resistant to change. And there is so much "conventional wisdom" in the distance world that has been accepted as gospel for so long that people are hesitant to challenge that "conventional wisdom". I probably don't follow the conventional wisdom as closely as some. In fact, I probably lean more toward the things you and Dan have said in the past.

Some of that conventional wisdom holds that you establish the distance base first with long slow runs and then work on the speed. I believe in establishing the distance base. After all, how can you race a 10K if you haven't run the distance already? But I would be in favor of some speed building runs while establishing that base. Maybe just once a week doing a tempo run to get used to running a faster pace. Once the distance base is established then more speed developing runs could be added.

I have more ideas but I am short on time right now so I will add more later.
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`

[Dan]

Wait, wait! The world was turned on its head this year with the US winning two marathon medals... Not a win, but it is winning a major medal in a world event.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[Micah Ward]

I would like to see what type of training Deena and Meb did leading up to the Olympic games. A recent Running Times had Lasse Viren's schedule before one of his Olympic's and the one thing I noticed was that he did very few repeats of any kind. The vast majority of his runs were long and relatively fast.

Some of the distance running plans of the past have stressed long slow runs and sessions of short fast intervals. One of my theories for distance running is that training should be made up of a lot of runs that mimic the race pace and distance. Which means that training should stress tempos and fartleks rather than shorter intervals.

What say the rest of you?
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`

[Dan]

I don't see a huge benefit in the long slow run side of things, unless you're running long slow races. For 5k/10k type distances, it just doesn't make any sense to me. For marathons and the like, it's much more reasonable. I agree entirely about race specific training.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[Conway]

I agree with the race specific kind of training ... And as far as I'm concerned focusing on long slow distance just makes you slow ... I think the thing that Meb and Deena had going for them is that they have progressively moved up - and brought their speed with them ... My guess is that they have maintained some sort of speed workouts as they have moved up ...
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills

[Micah Ward]

I believe they certainly kept up the speed workouts. What I would like to know is if it was longer faster runs as opposed to repeats.

The concept of the long slow run was begun under Lydiard and popularized by Joe Henderson when he labeled it LSD for long slow distance. But Henderson now says that his original idea was taken to an extreme that he didn't intend. Henderson advocated a longer and slower run as an alternative to sessions of endless 400 repeats. But his idea of the long slow run was something in the neighborhood of 10 miles and at a pace of 7:00 to 7:30. That is not exactly plodding along. But when he first advocated the idea people misinterpreted it to mean run as long as you can and as slow as you can.

Going back to the example of Viren's workouts, he did runs of 5 to 12 miles and anywhere from 7:00 pace down to 5:30. That is the kind of training that I think leads to good distance running and I would think Deena and Meb probably did something similar.
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`