Run-Down Forums

[Hammer]

Now I will take full responsibility for the 1st little foray (afor mentioned strike one) that occured last year. I was rude and unporfessional. But this time the story is different. With the exception of my last post I have continued to discuss running.

I believe this all stems from Dan backing himself into saying something he does not truely believe (I do this often with DG and end up getting burned in a debate, I USUALLY admit I was wrong and we move on) The idea of using 200m repeats for speed development in Middle distance training is something I would continue to debate until I lose my voice or my fingers bleed.

Now in one of my posts I stated that runners can and will get faster in a variety of ways. Be it an aerobic based system (Lydiard) or even a speed based system. I believe that a multi-teered, or multi speed approach is the most efficient and the BEST way to get faster in ANY race from 800m-10k.

Now I know that Dan believes in running from a base of speed. And I know that Dan believes that hard work results in better performance. That is why I HAD to agrue against what he has been saying in this thread. It goes against my philoshophy on speed aquisition (for Middle Distance runners) and I truely believe it goes against Dan's Philosophy.

EXAMPLE: If Runner "A" and Runner "B" want to become faster Middle Distance Runners (800-1600 for argument sake) and Runner A is running in a Multi-Teered system and Runner "B" is running in a speed based sytem (W/THE PHILOSOPHY DAN WAS USING IN THIS THREAD) I believe Runner "A" will get faster in a shorter period of time and retain that speed for a longer career or longer in a season or series of seasons.

Now when Runner "B" attempts to run repeat 200s @ 10% slower than 200m max pace he or she will only be able to complete a few intervals @ 1st (4-5) thus limiting the quality training volume to 800-1000m. As the season, year, career progresses Runner "B" will complete more intervals and get stronger but progress will be slow (relativley speeking)

Runner "A" will run 200s @ goal 800m to date 800m pace and will be able to complete 15-20 reps thus completeing 3000-4000m of quality work. Runner "A" will also work on speed development w/shorter (50-100) reps which I believe enhances PURE SPEED better anyway. (EXE. 4-6X 600 of 50/50 killer sprints) Runner "A" will run more speed reps and overall more speed work than runner "B"

Bottom line I BELIEVE Runner "A" will get faster because he or she is running a higher volume of speed and completing a higher volume of work overal.

"If you are not as fast as you want to be, you need to run More, run faster, and run More of your work Faster"-Hammer

[Micah Ward]

I am not a professional coach and without a lot of deep thinking your points sound reasonable.

Now if anyone wants to disagree please keep in mind that all we can do on this forum is argue theory. And until we can actually get two "equal" live runners to test those theories then nothing will be proved one way or another.

So state your beliefs with enthusiasm, passion and a touch of civility. Then have a martini and come up with something else to debate.
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`

[Dan]

It's probably too late for there to be much value in saying this, but here goes anyway. Food for thought, perhaps.

Why did I make the "New Mexico Crew" comment? Quite simply, as a test. I had a strong suspicion it would force the three in question to show their true colors... There is nothing inherently insulting or degrading in that term. I can't speak for Paul, but I certainly would not be insulted if we were referred to as the Oregon Crew. I doubt Micah and Conway would care if they were called the Georgia and California Crews, respectively... Just a descriptive phrase.

The point being that for all the denials about choosing sides, not being overly sensitive, being here just to discuss and not to argue, etc., it all came back to looking for a reason to be offended. Had the line not already been drawn in the sand long before this issue, that one little comment most certainly would not have raised much fuss. Heck, it might have even been taken as a compliment.

I'm sure Hammer, DG, and coachd (in no particular order) -- if they're still reading this -- will be put off by this little "test" (I'll leave the psychology to Hammer, because he's obviously more of an expert at that than I) and explanation, but I think this is one situation where the ends justify the means. If the three of you were so unhappy with things, there's no point allowing that to fester and cause periodic eruptions. That does no one any good.

That said, I applaud Micah's attempts at civility and reason.

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

[Hammer]

Dan I could care less about your little test or psychology. I want you to comment on the last Post. I post on this site to discuss running (with people I know and people I don't) I also ENJOY the exchanges that occur when people don't agree (be them sarcastic or not)

You continue to stray away from the topic at hand. I believe that in my last post I summarized the RUNNING TOPIC IN THE THREAD, correctly. And I will stand by my philosophy on Speed and Speed Development (shorter intervals are more affective in speed development because they replicate the velocity of PURE SPEED, runners can complete a greater number of intervals and complete more quality work overall)

If you disagree, show me the rational. If you agree then post it.

Even with our little arguments this is the most civil running forum on the net. Conversations about banishing me are insane. YOU ALL need to visit some other sites to really appreciate this one. And Dan casting off or "showing the door" to the NM Crew is crazy. Go back and see how much we have added to this site in the last year. And then go visit some of the sites with 'dead' forums (1 comment every monther or so)

[Indeurr]

___Hammer, I have not reviewed the thread complitly. I am on my lunch break, after refuling 10:43+ AM, and before my school traffic duty-high noon, sp to speak. I would like to see a couple specific examples of your and Dan's work-outs. Therefore, I would be able to experiment on my self as a "case study."

[Dan]

I chose not to comment because you seemed so sure of what I was thinking that there apparently wasn't much left for me to say...

[Hammer]

[RangerG]

C'mon guy's...I have had enough pain over the last couple of weeks, without watching two people I consider friends argue.... I am one for standing one's ground on points, but this is not the way. Every day I have to deal with the fact that other people have a different opinon than I do, and I accept that without engaging in a small arms fire fight. Agree to disagree.... this is making me bummed out Heck, I would rather you both yelled at me than each other...
_________________
If I could only run like John Capel...

[Indeurr]

[Dan]

Indeurr, I don't mean to ignore you, but I've got little interest in discussing the various aspects of this thread much further...

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

[Paul]

Well......

This thread had the most potential of any training thread that I've seen anywhere. We had coaches discussing how their training philosophies have evolved, including specific workout examples. With the way this thread was going, you couldn't get this type of info even from big buck seminars. So what happened? In my opinion the whole thread broke down over terminology.

Speed means different things to different people. That probably sounds like a cliche. When I go down to Salem and run with Dan, when we discuss speed, I know he is usually referring to absolute speed. coachd set the tone early on in this thread by stating his goal was to "prepare athletes to run longer at a higher intensity". He also said "you can accomplish this goal in any number of ways".

In my opinion, this is where the thread started to break down. The head topic may have been interval training, but the underlying topic was middle distance speed, and I would include up to 3K in that. The energy management and stride mechanics of middle distance racing do not lend themselves easily to sprint training. The energy cost, alone, is too high. I am a firm believer in speed reserve, the differential between absolute speed for an interval vs race pace for the same interval. But I feel the application is more suited for 400/800 than 1500/3000. We all checked out El G this summer. With no change in stride mechanics, just a perceptable increase in frequency, and all of a sudden he puts 15m on Lagat, with, what looked like no energy cost. So I have no problem with Hammer's 200m intervals in 34 as being a speed workout, taking into consideration the lack of full recovery, and the continuous running element. This goes right to the heart of running longer at a higher intensity. And I think if you were to question DG's longer MD (3K) runners on his 4-2-3-2-3-3-2-4-2 at 90% 400 best, they would claim it was a sprint workout.

By the way, was the connection between New Mexico and Oregon hinted at by Hammer in the thread title (Bowerman (coachd) intervals), lost on everyone?? coachd tried to diffuse the rapidly deteriorating situation with some humor, and then the moderator/contributor line of reasoning, which I found interesting and appropriate.

Count me as an honorary member of the "NM crew". After all, I lobbied for the Team Guru thread, coachd's wheel and cones = pain is my favorite quote of the year, and Hammer's (coachd's) 800-2 mile-800 workout was my breakthrough workout of the winter.

Paul
_________________
Paul

"Gaunt is Beautiful" Cassidy's T-shirt

[Dan]

Paul, as expressed privately, I'm saddened you feel that way.

At this point, I'm not sure there's anything I can say to make things better. If I felt I had cause to apologize, I would have done so already. As such, any apology I make would be insincere, and that's just not something I do, even if it is for the better.

In hindsight, I probably should have bowed out of the conversation before things got heated. In the increasingly unlikely event that things get patched up at some point, I'll probably have to go the route of avoiding topics/members that are likely to lead to disagreements of this sort. I don't believe that gets at the heart of the matter (we'll just have to agree to disagree on what exactly that is), but addressing the symptoms instead of the illness may be the only way to go in this case...

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

[RangerG]

Oh great Every day I look forward to posting notes and questions with my friends on here. This forum is one of the things that has kept me sane with the cancer scare and the house fire. I was looking forward to a new year of trail and road races, and possibly even running with friends on here. I am not a coach, or someone who has been running since their school day's, I'm just some old fart who decided to start over in life, and learn what he could about running from others who have a lifetime of experience. This is truly sad. I for one am not going to jump ship. I hope the old saying that time heals all wounds, will bring us back together. Anyone who wants to email me and vent can do so at: gderr@kidde-fire.com I am willing to be a "middle man" if needed.
_________________
If I could only run like John Capel...

[Dan]