Run-Down Forums

[Paul]

I don't think the terminology is that difficult and I believe it is important to know these terms when discussing training issues. Mike, in ultra competitions, I am assuming there isn't much difference in training throughout the year except tapering before a big race. But in shorter races (5K and 10K) there are definite changes in the training from period to period. I am not a careful reader of Daniels at this point, but lets take his 24 week cycle. The full cycle would be considered the macro, the 4 six-week phases would be considered the meso's and the single weeks would be considered the micro's.
Now, DG pointed out in a thread some time back that this should be considered an entertainment site, not a place that you would get your serious training info from, but I think there's been a lot of good stuff all across the board here and I think aspects of people's thoughts could easily be incorporated in one's training.
When you are looking at a runner's training, and you see he is running 13:40 5K early and 13:10 late in the season, understanding how the training evolved through the year is critical, and I think a knowledge of the terms are helpful.
Also, these terms are used throughout all sports in general, so from that standpoint I think it helps.

Paul

[training2run]

Yes, I am convinced there is a cetain amount of "science" involved in training for short (sic) distances. However, as you suggest, getting in shape for marathons and ultra involves working like h*ll, tapering, racing, recovery, working like h*ll, tapering, then racing again.

Over the years, in my examination of HighSchool Cross Country times, I find that many (if not most) of the runners actually get worse during the season - they're leaving it in practice instead of saving it for the race.

As I mentioned in another post, it's very important not to confuse training with racing.

I don't, by the way, often read books on training. So many of the plans are not actually based on real reseach, but are pretty much repeats of anecdotal comments, passed on over the years.

A perfect example is the statement regarding LSD: "Long Slow Running produces runners that can run long and *slow.*"

I remember when this was first bandied about. It was based on a false premise, and was as incorrect then as it is now.

The error is in the reading of the term "slow." In LSD, slow doesn't mean "slow," it means under race pace, but well up into the aerobic training level. According to van Aaken, the guy who invented the method, this is about 150bpm...but that's not all.

In addition to running long miles at 150bpm, you also do 5% to 10% more at race pace. This, combined with actual racing, provides a tremendous number of "quality" miles. Of course, in my mind, it's all quality: slow, fast, up, down, resting. Mad Dog Mike www.training2run.com

[Dan]

[training2run]

Are you saying they might be coming into the season overly tired, or over-trained, and don't have the reserves to continue training at a "high level?" If yes, I would certainly agree. Mad Dog Mike www.training2run.com

[Dan]

Yep. Of course, many also come into the season under-trained...

Dan

[training2run]

Under-trained and over-fed.

In June, when I asked to get on the XC team, the coach said no, and that I didn't look like a runner.

He was right. I'd been lifting weights, and weighed about 190. I gave him an argument, and he said he'd take a look at me in September.

In September, I was lean, mean and weighed 159. I got on the team. Unfortunately, he was a lousy couch, and none of us really every got in shape. Mad Dog Mike www.training2run.com

[Distance_Guru]

[training2run]

Fortunately, world-class athletes tend to have enough genetic potential to be able to succeed inspite of some of their personal (or coach induced) errors in training.

Ph.D. stands for "piled higher and deeper." I have one, hence I am not particularly impressed by others who may have one as well.

I am sure you are correct in stating that there are a few good training books out there. The operative word is "few." The problem avoiding being sucked in by the bull presented in the others. Mad Dog Mike www.training2run.com

[training2run]

I am most impressed with training programs that stress mental imaging: think like a loser and you will lose. Think like a winner, and you will surely improve. Mad Dog Mike www.training2run.com

[Distance_Guru]

Unless your physical training stinks
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

[Distance_Guru]

I do agree with you that there are a lot of books out there that aren't that good. But using that as an excuse for not studying the sport doesn't seem to productive. I have always taken the approach that I'll read everything I can get my hands on and then decide if the information is worth using or mot.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

[training2run]

I couldn't agree with you more. All the positive thinking in the world won't help if you don't combine it with training. However, combined with training, it can be a wonder worker.

I read at least a book a day.

I also agree with you that it's important to study the sport. Where we seem to differ, is that my emphasis is actually upon studying the sport, rather than reading about studying the sport. Hum. Is that a fine line? Mad Dog Mike www.training2run.com

[Distance_Guru]

I don't exactly follow. There are several ways of studying the sport. Watching races, reading articles and books about athletes themselves, speaking with coaches, and actually getting into the lab and studying the physiological responses people have to the stresses of running are all ways of studying the sport. But none of them are as efficent and complete as reading good books written by knowlegeable authors about the specifics of training.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn