nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Lydiard Training Idea's

ecoli

Following on from the success of the Renato Canova's training ideas thread I thought it could become a regular thing of starting training discussion by looking in depth at different coaches philosophies and methodology

Summary

Lydiard's plan is designed working back from goal race towards a single year peak. The idea is to maximize aerobic capacity before addressing coordination and anaerobic training

The emphasis is on marathon conditioning regardless of your event before you start specific work towards your event

I think one of the most common misconceptions is LSD standing for Long slow Distance and often people tend to aim more towards Slow as opposed to Steady state running

Plan

Lydiard breaks his training into the following blocks:

1. Base building/Marathon Conditioning (As long as possible)
2. Hill Resistance Training (4-8 Weeks)
3. Anaerobic Conditioning (4-8 Weeks)
4. Co-Ordination/ Sharpening Phase (4-8 Weeks)
5. Race Phase (6-8 Weeks max)

Here is an idea of the importance and emphasis put on the different energy systems and training

Lydiard_Pyramid.jpeg.gif

There is plenty of info available on his training:

http://www.fitnesssports.com/lyd_clinic_guide/Arthur%20Lydiard.pdf

Would be interested to hear peoples ideas on the pro's and cons of the approach. To me I feel that there needs to touch on speed year long not just in the final phases (albeit different proportions at different times of the year)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

TFBubendorfer

My coach last year was a Lydiard disciple, but his training was slightly different. It was aimed at one single marathon race, so there was no 6-8 weeks race phase, and he also combined the anaerobic and sharpening phases into one single, slightly longer phase.

ecoli wrote: »

Would be interested to hear peoples ideas on the pro's and cons of the approach. To me I feel that there needs to touch on speed year long not just in the final phases (albeit different proportions at different times of the year)

That depends what you're aiming for, I suppose. My coach very much advised against speed training during base phase (but it wasn't all slow jogging either, which some people seem to think when it comes to Lydiard training).

ecoli

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

My coach last year was a Lydiard disciple, but his training was slightly different. It was aimed at one single marathon race, so there was no 6-8 weeks race phase, and he also combined the anaerobic and sharpening phases into one single, slightly longer phase.

That depends what you're aiming for, I suppose. My coach very much advised against speed training during base phase (but it wasn't all slow jogging either, which some people seem to think when it comes to Lydiard training).

Obviously with the marathon you are building towards one race so a race season is not exactly possible. I think however unless you are using the Lydiard method for a marathon that you somewhat lose some of the benefits associated with racing. While elite runners can work for months towards a single race I think for the majority of us multi peaking or even close to race fitness year round is a better approach. If you are looking to get the absolute max out of yourself then yes probably but factor into account any number of variables (holidays, weather, illness, injury) it becomes an awfully big gamble for someone who is in the sport as a hobby jogger (not a derogatory term rather a non professional/elite athlete i.e someone who does not make a living off the sport)

In terms of no speed work by any chance did you do strides? I know Lydiard does talk about stride the straights jog the bends style session which I would see as sufficient in terms of dealing with speed in the off season/ conditioning phase. I am glad to see the base phase included steady state and harder running to me its the greatest misconception as Lydiard states that yes you will see cardiac efficiency with slower running but it will take alot longer than if you were running closer to steady state - marathon paced runs

BeepBeep67

I used the Lydiard training as part of my base building before Christmas, a mixture of phase 1+2 over a 7 week period, key was increasing the mileage mid week, run my long run (16 miles) at steady state which was MP +10%, with a few quicker miles towards the end and uphill bounding and downhill strides, there was no formal speed work involved. The test at the end of this was a half marathon where I ran the final 3 miles 12 secs per mile faster than the previous 10, felt really strong throughout and ran a 3:26 PB.
I've definitely loss some edge, but strength and endurance have improved and as Rotterdam is the primary goal this Spring I've found it beneficial.

ecoli

Two interesting threads regarding his training on letsrun (only scratching the surface of them myself)

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4030549&page=0
and
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4290090&page=0

TFBubendorfer

ecoli wrote: »

In terms of no speed work by any chance did you do strides? I know Lydiard does talk about stride the straights jog the bends style session which I would see as sufficient in terms of dealing with speed in the off season/ conditioning phase.

Not during base training, no. He introduced strides during the hills phase. In fact, every hill workout started with a set of strides

ecoli wrote:

I am glad to see the base phase included steady state and harder running to me its the greatest misconception as Lydiard states that yes you will see cardiac efficiency with slower running but it will take alot longer than if you were running closer to steady state - marathon paced runs

I had 1-2 runs per week in base training that were faster than the other ones; one with a few miles almost at marathon pace, the other one a little bit slower.

I was always looking forward to either of them. They felt very much like the fun part after the long miles of easy running.

ecoli

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Not during base training, no. He introduced strides during the hills phase. In fact, every hill workout started with a set of strides

Interesting this is one of the difficulties I have with the training. Maybe its just me but I find that if I dont keep in touch with the speed I spend few weeks trying to get to the level I was at and by then the aerobic aspect begins to wain slightly but if I maintain it the muscles adapt alot quicker

T runner

ecoli wrote: »

Interesting this is one of the difficulties I have with the training. Maybe its just me but I find that if I dont keep in touch with the speed I spend few weeks trying to get to the level I was at and by then the aerobic aspect begins to wain slightly but if I maintain it the muscles adapt alot quicker

In his books he mentioned that uphill springing/bounding should be used as supplementary training during the marathon conditioning phase to help transition to the hill work phase, and to keep knee lift high. I suppose thats an important part of speedwork. He didnt seem to do leg turnover until the hill phase which he termed overcoming viscosity.

thirstywork2

using the Lydiard style myself.The mid-week long runs are the main differnce for me.
Also the pace is a little faster than I would have normally ran at but it's amazing the way the body gets used to it over time.

TFBubendorfer

The interesting thing about base training, and one that I still need to fully wrap my head around, is that according to my coach, base training is NOT to build your fitness.

Instead the main purpose is to recover from the race phase of the previous training cycle. According to the coach, it takes a minimum of 6 weeks to get the race phase out of your system, and if you insist on doing faster running, that doesn't happen. Your next peak will be higher the more you recover from the previous one.

That's assuming I interpreted it right, of course.

This, of course, goes totally against the grain of keeping close to race fitness all year round.

TFBubendorfer

ecoli wrote: »

If you are looking to get the absolute max out of yourself then yes probably but factor into account any number of variables (holidays, weather, illness, injury) it becomes an awfully big gamble for someone who is in the sport as a hobby jogger

I agree, but the stated goal at the start of the training was to break 3 hours in the marathon and I made it clear that I did not give a damn about anything else. So yes, it was a big gamble, all eggs in one basket.

Krusty_Clown

T runner wrote: »

In his books he mentioned that uphill springing/bounding should be used as supplementary training during the marathon conditioning phase to help transition to the hill work phase, and to keep knee lift high. I suppose thats an important part of speedwork. He didnt seem to do leg turnover until the hill phase which he termed overcoming viscosity.

Does anyone have a visual or a youtube video of what this looks like in slo-mo? finding it hard to conceptualize what springing/bounding uphill looks like.

ecoli

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Does anyone have a visual or a youtube video of what this looks like in slo-mo? finding it hard to conceptualize what springing/bounding uphill looks like.

Can't access youtube in work but should be able to find something here:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lydiard+hill+bounding+video&hl=en&gbv=2&prmd=ivns&source=univ&tbm=vid&tbo=u&ei=tlsMT6PND8qw8QP00bjEBQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQqwQwAA&surl=1

ecoli

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Instead the main purpose is to recover from the race phase of the previous training cycle. According to the coach, it takes a minimum of 6 weeks to get the race phase out of your system, and if you insist on doing faster running, that doesn't happen. Your next peak will be higher the more you recover from the previous one.

That's assuming I interpreted it right, of course.

This, of course, goes totally against the grain of keeping close to race fitness all year round.

I think this is an interesting point and one which imo should be determinant on the specifc event you are running. If you look to middle distance events and a heavy race calendar you could argue that 6 weeks might be a bit excessive however given the aim would probably be to restore the PH balance within the blood (not exactly sure on how long this takes or the physiology in relation to this) but in events such as 5k/10k/HM where the race calendar would be less congested yet not require the same recovery as a full marathon I dont know would this be necessary?

Krusty_Clown

ecoli wrote: »

Can't access youtube in work but should be able to find something here:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lydiard+hill+bounding+video&hl=en&gbv=2&prmd=ivns&source=univ&tbm=vid&tbo=u&ei=tlsMT6PND8qw8QP00bjEBQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQqwQwAA&surl=1

Hmm.. Lots of use of cross-country ski poles. Is that a Lydiard recommendation, or someone's interpretation?

pgibbo

This video shows the Raelert brothers bounding uphill. I'm assuming this is what he is talking about

woodchopper

Under traditional Lydiardism the base phase seems to avoid true speed work according to previous posts. I am no expert on Lydiard but I believe this is a big mistake particulary after a marathon training segment. Why?

The marathon training segment if done correctly should emphasize on developing and increasing efficiency at target marathon pace. In essence true leg turnover is neglected somewhat, but this is okay because the demands of the marathon are such that it requires a specific training segment aimed at target pace.

However, under Lydiardism the following base phase i.e the period used to recondition the body after the marathon is void of speed work. After a marathon I believe is the time to start developing the 'speed' that was lost in the previous training segment, otherwise an athlete could spend the two months before the marathon, taper, recovery, and initial base phase without any true speed endurance work. This could total up to five months without an important element of the training cycle. Cavona as many of you will know greatly emphazises speed work in the post- marathon cycle to get back what was "lost" during the marathon training cycle.

Nic Bideau and Greg McMillian have come to understand the importance of this speed maintainance work during the base phase. For example despite being true Lydiard apostles Bideau had Mottram run 3 by 120-150 metres very fast once a week to maintain turnover while McMillan has his athletes run 10-12 by 200 metres relaxed on the track to work on turnover. They were never too far away from the speed element in training.

One of the most annoying parts that many lable to Lydiard as many have pointed out is the notion of the long slow run which after a while does nothing to generate a stimulus which will improve fitness. Lydiard had the likes of Snell running six minutes miles for their long run on a Sunday. Also Mark Wetmore a coach in the US used to have his guys hammer the Sunday run. Anyone who has read Chris Lear's Running with the Buffalos will notice Adam Goucher blasting a 22 mile run in 2.03 at 8,000 feet. Something to ponder next time a coach prescribes a "Lydiard" long slow run.

Raighne

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Does anyone have a visual or a youtube video of what this looks like in slo-mo? finding it hard to conceptualize what springing/bounding uphill looks like.

I have the Lydiard Foundation's official video showcasing this in full detail. Unfortunately I cannot share it online at this time but I plan to run a number of Lydiard Hill Circuit workshops in Wicklow and Dublin this year and preferably with a video-showing before-hand.

I have run this circuit session regularly the last few years, so keep an eye on the IMRA forum and other places if interested as we'll be running this again this year for a 4-6 week period.

I will also be running an uphill/downhill workshop in Munster on behest of Munster Mountain Running in Ballyhouras on 21st of January and I will showcase the Lydiard Hill Circuit as one very flexible option for mountain runners to work on both power and leg speed at the same time. Details on this will be in the IMRA forum as well.

Krusty_Clown

Raighne wrote: »

I will also be running an uphill/downhill workshop in Munster on behest of Munster Mountain Running in Ballyhouras on 21st of January and I will showcase the Lydiard Hill Circuit as one very flexible option for mountain runners to work on both power and leg speed at the same time. Details on this will be in the IMRA forum as well.

Sounds great. Any thoughts on the cross country ski poles? is this part of the Lydiard philosophy (e.g. to emphasize knee lift), or just some random interpretation?

Raighne

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Sounds great. Any thoughts on the cross country ski poles? is this part of the Lydiard philosophy (e.g. to emphasize knee lift), or just some random interpretation?

Lydiard would have had a few thoughts on the cross-country ski poles alright, but nothing I could post here ;-) If Ski Poles are necessary to perform the exercise correctly, I would rather recommend simply using a shallower hill.

Lydiard did emphasise the “high knee lift” and one of the three drills focuses specifically on that because Lydiard noted that the height of the knee lift in each stride lowered when athletes fatigued reducing stride length. His hill drills were created as part of the transition from slower running to faster running because to help build the powerful stride necessary particularly for middle-distance runners but this is not achieved just by lifting your knees the way you would in “high knee lifts” or if pulling your knees towards your chest.

The term “knee lift” can be a bit misleading because what he actually refers to is “knee drive”. A lot of modern runners have an imbalance in the activation between the frontal muscles (quads, abs, hip flexors) and posterior muscles (glutes, hamstrings, calves, lower back) so when they are instructed to focus on “high knee lift”, often-times they end up activating their hip flexors first to achieve this “lift”. The hip flexor is not designed for lifting so this instruction easily leads to hip, groin and core issues.

The drive is generated from the force of the push-off so by the contraction of the powerful gluteal muscles extending the leg back into the ground. The movement has to be focused on this powerful push-off. The high knee lift is an end-result of thepush-off (as the leg bounces back off the ground) not a focus in itself. When high knee lift fails to manifest it is usually because of excessive tension in the hamstrings which means the leg is stopped as it is driving forward and upwards by the resistance in the hamstring. Lydiard hoped that his techniques would allow runners to overcome this problem (he saw it as caused by viscosity, which is only a part of the truth).

As a training mechanism to maximise power and flexibility and stride length, the Hill Circuit is not complete. For runners with extremely low flexibility and high involuntary muscle tension, you need to utilise other techniques but I imagine this was much less of a problem in Lydiard's day and nothing he ever explored.

When Wetmore spoke on the topic in Boulder, he mentioned that his experience had found him that the three original Lydiard drills were "incomplete" in achieving all of the stride optimisation and injury prevention effects his team needs so they have added an additional seven. As they do not have time for a dedicated hill phase in the collegiate season, they utiliise these drills year-round.

ocnoc

Raighne wrote: »

When Wetmore spoke on the topic in Boulder, he mentioned that his experience had found him that the three original Lydiard drills were "incomplete" in achieving all of the stride optimisation and injury prevention effects his team needs so they have added an additional seven. As they do not have time for a dedicated hill phase in the collegiate season, they utiliise these drills year-round.

Did he list the 7?

woodchopper

I can see the merit of downhill running for mountain running but hammering down a long hill is more likely to cause injuries rather than prevent them for the majority of athletes. The much talked about hill circuit is basically just hill reps with strides and a fast downhill run, then another stride and repeat the process.

Raighne

woodchopper wrote: »

I can see the merit of downhill running for mountain running but hammering down a long hill is more likely to cause injuries rather than prevent them for the majority of athletes. The much talked about hill circuit is basically just hill reps with strides and a fast downhill run, then another stride and repeat the process.

I can see where you are coming from but I do not fully agree. Hill reps as they are generally run are hard anaerobic effort of running uphill. During the Lydiard Hill Circuit you do not run uphill and the objective is not to work the anaerobic system (although it does get some stimulus, unavoidably, you are moving up a steep hill after all). The plyometric exercises you are doing on the uphill part are purposefully done quite slow to increase the time the muscles involved stay contracted. Because they are also extended fully during the movement, you stimulate strength gains over the full length of the muscle.

By keeping the pace down and the movements quite exaggerated the session causes the muscular system to break down first, rather than the cardiovascular. When performing traditional hill reps, the huge oxygen debt incurred tends to terminate exercise long before the muscles have been challenged to the level they could have been. So I think there is a very important distinction between hill reps and hill circuits and while one can lead nicely into the other, one could not replace the other without causing a very different training stimulus.

Raighne

ocnoc wrote: »

Did he list the 7?

Unfortunately not, he seemed to be an incredibly busy man (he came down for an hour essentially straight from leading the team out on their Sunday long run), so it was quite an informal presentation in many ways but no less informative for it.

I imagine the drills they use are variations of those described by Bud Winters in "So you want to be a sprinter", rightly seen as the "Lydiard of sprinters". Lydiard was very impressed by these sprint drills and saw them having great utility for the running efficiency of long distance runners too. The book is available online here: http://www.budwinter.com/books/so-you-want-to-be-a-sprinter/. Of course, they may have invented their own but given Winters influence on later generations of runners in America I'd say there's a fair chance some of his drills are used by the Buffaloes.

ss43

woodchopper wrote: »

I can see the merit of downhill running for mountain running but hammering down a long hill is more likely to cause injuries rather than prevent them for the majority of athletes. The much talked about hill circuit is basically just hill reps with strides and a fast downhill run, then another stride and repeat the process.

If the athletes can't do downhill runs, that needs to be addressed. It'd be like saying I can't see why someone would do heavy weights cos they'd get injured. They wouldn't if the necessary work was put in beforehand and they had introduced the weights gradually.

If you run well (which everyone should be aiming to do) running downhill can have lots of benefits as it's an extra challenge to your technique and strength. If you have terrible form, it's can cause problems but if you have terrible form, that's the big issue.

The hill circuit is not basically just hill reps , strides and a run. The uphill section is technique work.

woodchopper

ss43 wrote: »

If the athletes can't do downhill runs, that needs to be addressed. It'd be like saying I can't see why someone would do heavy weights cos they'd get injured. They wouldn't if the necessary work was put in beforehand and they had introduced the weights gradually.

If you run well (which everyone should be aiming to do) running downhill can have lots of benefits as it's an extra challenge to your technique and strength. If you have terrible form, it's can cause problems but if you have terrible form, that's the big issue.

The hill circuit is not basically just hill reps , strides and a run. The uphill section is technique work.

Its a bit vague to say that the hill reps work on techinque. Of course they do, as does every single piece of training an athlete does in their preparation. Comparing downhill running to lifting heavy weights is a strange one I must say. No one ever got a stress fracture in the gym as far as I can tell. Your comparing apples to oranges in order to develop your own hypothesis.

Raighne

woodchopper wrote: »

Its a bit vague to say that the hill reps work on techinque. Of course they do, as does every single piece of training an athlete does in their preparation. Comparing downhill running to lifting heavy weights is a strange one I must say. No one ever got a stress fracture in the gym as far as I can tell. Your comparing apples to oranges in order to develop your own hypothesis.

I think what ss43 is trying to say is that going into a gym and lifting a 200kg weight straight off will get you injured and so will going out running a 5 mile downhill (such as Snowdon) at pace. Both are extreme exposures to physical feats that require a gradual preconditioning (both a incidentally very similar since they are linked to adaptations in concentric or eccentric muscle strength as well as durability of connective and muscular tissue).

People can very easily get stress fractures in gyms (although usually not in the foot, but calf raises can cause this if done with excessive weight).

When I teach the Lydiard hill circuit or pass out the session to a runner, I always tell them to do no more than 1-2 circuits the first time. My circuits are also more conservative than Arthur's in that I don't work with Olympic athletes so a 400m/400m/400m/400m circuit seems to work better than the 800m/800m/800m/800m he used with Snell et al. in Auckland.

This means essentially the first time the athlete is exposed to this he does only 1-2 miles of hill circuits and half of this is practically recovery (jogging at the top, easy striding at the bottom). Legs can still be extremely sore the next day but you then allow recovery and the next time you try to do a bit more. Eventually the strongest athletes can do this for an hour.

Finally, the hill phase should not be viewed in isolation (at least Arthur didn't): in the Lydiard system it follows at least 6 weeks (often more) of aerobic conditioning consisting of lots of running at your best aerobic pace and steady paces (sub-threshold) paces. In addition, fartleks, undulating terrain on the long run and often strides help further prepare the body. So everything is sequential. By the time you begin the hill phase you have built up significant strength in your legs and connective tissues and have subjected the body to similar stressors to what lies ahead. The Hill Circuit then helps move this to the next level.

Without this the hill circuit would be a very risk session as indeed are most plyometrics if not done in a controlled manner. A stiff, tense and weak tendon cannot suddenly be asked to carry a huge power over it's full range of motion, that much is clear. It needs to be slowly improved to a state where it will take that type of exercise.

ss43

woodchopper wrote: »

Its a bit vague to say that the hill reps work on techinque. Of course they do, as does every single piece of training an athlete does in their preparation. Comparing downhill running to lifting heavy weights is a strange one I must say. No one ever got a stress fracture in the gym as far as I can tell. Your comparing apples to oranges in order to develop your own hypothesis.

Hill reps work on technique like other aspects of training (generally strengthening the neural patterns that are already there whether they are good or bad). Lydiard's technique works on it in a specific manner so it's a different situation. If you don't agree that it helps or that the technique is a good one, that's fair enough but hill springing and hill reps are not the basically the same.

I was comparing two things as both could injure a poorly conditioned runner but would be beneficial if introduced gradually and done with good technique.

You wrote off a significant part of Lydiard's programme in such a way that showed you didn't understand it. Where did you learn about it or did you just skip to the schedules chapter of one of his books?

woodchopper

ss43 wrote: »

Hill reps work on technique like other aspects of training (generally strengthening the neural patterns that are already there whether they are good or bad). Lydiard's technique works on it in a specific manner so it's a different situation. If you don't agree that it helps or that the technique is a good one, that's fair enough but hill springing and hill reps are not the basically the same.

I was comparing two things as both could injure a poorly conditioned runner but would be beneficial if introduced gradually and done with good technique.

You wrote off a significant part of Lydiard's programme in such a way that showed you didn't understand it. Where did you learn about it or did you just skip to the schedules chapter of one of his books?

Where did I mention that hill reps and hill drills are the same? Again conjuring up your own general hypothesis (hypotheisis means theory or argument) to suit your own agenda. A hill circuit used by Greg McMillan uses a modern interpretation which involves hill reps, strides and downhill running. This is one form of hill curcuit that Lydiard advocates use. Hill drills and bounding are not a difficult endurance workout, rather they work on form just like any other drill only using gravity to gain the stimulus. Im afraid I learnt all my training methodology from my good friend Renato Cavona if you must ask.

Where did you learn yours, Dick or Eddie perhaps?

ss43

woodchopper wrote: »

Where did I mention that hill reps and hill drills are the same? Again conjuring up your own general hypothesis (hypotheisis means theory or argument) to suit your own agenda.

Does this ring a bell?

woodchopper wrote: »

The much talked about hill circuit is basically just hill reps with strides and a fast downhill run, then another stride and repeat the process.

I disagreed on the hill reps part because what Lydiard advocated was hill springing.

Also, I'm aware of what a hypothesis is despite you spelling it wrong to try to confuse me.

woodchopper wrote: »

A hill circuit used by Greg McMillan uses a modern interpretation which involves hill reps, strides and downhill running. This is one form of hill curcuit that Lydiard advocates use. Hill drills and bounding are not a difficult endurance workout, rather they work on form just like any other drill only using gravity to gain the stimulus. Im afraid I learnt all my training methodology from my good friend Renato Cavona if you must ask.

Where did you learn yours, Dick or Eddie perhaps?

Didn't learn from Dick or Eddie. Did learn a bit from Canova amongst others. If you've just learnt from Canova you're probably not in a position to make such authoritative statements on Lydiard.

ocnoc

This tread is pretty interesting - please don't turn it into a p!ssing match