training is a myth
training is a myth
my wife was a myth before I married her...Originally Posted by Fleeter
Was thinking along those lines earlier, you beat me to it IanDarkpeak, another case of swoopismmy wife was a myth before I married her...
Hills and Guinness!
You are right Corniceman. CL's got an agenda which shouldn't sidetrack reasonable discussion about training. It is boring and patronising. I assume he won't apply it to fell running because Billy Bland, Ian Holmes and such like don't fit with the agenda.
Since when did Ian Holmes run 26 minutes for 10k?
Never. His PB is 31' 10" on a one-off windy day. (Profile TFM Spring 2007)
Thanks Graham it ilustrates the point.
It's why the whole CL agenda is so patronising. If you are interested in the training then Ian Holmes would be a fair subject. If you claim IH does it on about 20 miles of some magic sessions a week and whingeing about the others who are on drugs tell us about it.
But then none of those 26 min 10K men could win Ben Nevis in 1:28 even if they wanted to so it doesn't really illustrate any point (2 different sports - but don't get me started on that one!)
More a case of IH is bound not to be on drugs because there's never been any money in our sport like there is in mainstream athletics...
Chris (Leigh), going back to my original point of junk miles I agree with what you say about each athlete having their own limits (with or without illegal aid...) be it 100 mpw of good aerobic running or be it a lot less. But slower miles don't exactly take a lot out of you, I'm saying even if your limit is only 50 mpw of 'proper' running you will STILL benefit from a lot more running as long as it is slow. It's all relative.
The problem for most of us mortals is we have jobs and families so tend to make the most of what time we have available for running. So we tend not to deliberately spend it running slowly! But we can still do other forms of 'low level' activity like walking to the shops instead of taking the car, it's all the same principle and I think it all helps.
quoting (part of) Sarah Rowells book (pg 36) on steady running, there has always been two schools of thought on this in general, in that there were runners who ran a lot of long and slow i.e. ingrid kristiansen, steve moneghetti and those who ran long and hard i.e. grete waitz, steve jones both sets of athletes were top class at varying distances AND disciplines. thus we get back to the original point in question that running volume and intensity is athlete relative and only part of a much broader picture
Hard Work, Hard Training and Suffering...Race Easy
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote