Daniels / Lydiard

    Posted In: Endurance

        • Participant
          rtosh on September 30, 2005 at 9:43 pm #11315

          Could someone give me a breakdown on these two coaches.  I am trying to "establish a philolosphy" so-to-speak about endurance training.  I have began to research both and my initial impression of Daniel's is more favorable currently.  His science appears to be sound and with  my background in rehabilitation, Lydiand's mileage is a concern.  I would love to hear thoughts about each good and bad.  Thanks in advance.

          Ryan

        • Participant
          CoachKW on September 30, 2005 at 11:53 pm #49066

          Are you working on a philosophy of coaching or training?

          In either case, it all starts with Lydiards ideas.  Everything else is either fluff or an adaptation or maladaptation of the man's work.

        • Participant
          rtosh on October 1, 2005 at 2:49 am #49067

          More of a coaching philosophy.  I have  trained ( and continue to do so ) many strength and power athletes and my employer wants to expand our services to endurance athletes.  I train the occasional endurance athlete but want to really expand my knowledge in this area.  A friend of mine, who I respect,  recommended Daniel's book " Daniel's Running Formula. "  I've come across some pretty heated discussions on the net ( not here) about Daniels vs. Lydiard and thought I would see what I could find out here.  Thanks again

        • Participant
          Daniel Andrews on October 1, 2005 at 10:22 am #49068

          Best advice:

          Learn both, not all athletes respond to the same stimulus equally!  Sprint athletes have a little less flexibility, but as I learned the hard way this year, not everyone responds to the way you may have trained or read once.  Variety and adaptability are the keys to success in coaching.

        • Participant
          CoachKW on October 3, 2005 at 4:23 pm #49069

          I wouldn't argue that premise Danimal, but Lydiard puts "first things first."  I don't think that Jack doesn't, but you just can't get away from putting in a sizable base if you are to be a successful distance runner.

        • Participant
          Daniel Andrews on October 3, 2005 at 8:18 pm #49070

          I wouldn't argue that premise Danimal, but Lydiard puts "first things first." I don't think that Jack doesn't, but you just can't get away from putting in a sizable base if you are to be a successful distance runner.

          I won't agrue about not having a good base from which to start, but most coaches should know that already.

        • Participant
          CoachKW on October 3, 2005 at 9:48 pm #49071

          Most give it lip service and really don't do a true build up.  They want to get anaerobic all the time.  Plus, Lydiard really understood early on that aerobic doesn't equal slow.

        • Participant
          Daniel Andrews on October 4, 2005 at 6:35 am #49072

          In a ten week track season in HS it is hard to get that base because they still need to learn to empty out the anaerobic part and recover from that.  I hit my kids hard on mileage and fitness in December, hoping they do it.

        • Participant
          jjm on December 15, 2005 at 10:33 pm #49073

          If you've searched the net on this topic, you've probably already stumbled upon this, but just in case, here's a Daniels/Lydiard post from letsrun.com that has well over a thousand responses to it, including a number of responses by Dr Jack himself, as well as responses from folks who knew Lydiard well personally.  This post was started in July and is still going strong today.

          https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=964958&page=0 

    Viewing 8 reply threads
    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.