Nice Summary of Jthe Jack Daniels training method in RW (Read 2026 times)

Easy there boozers, I said Jack Daniels not Jack Daniel's. Adding the asterisk apostrophe adds 80-proof! Anyhow, a nice outline of Coach Daniels' key principles in a column by Amby Burfoot. I know we've covered a lot of these items on the site, but it's nice to capture them in one place. Personally, I'm still unsure about #4 (Pump up your stride rate to 180 per minute). I hear this all the time, and I believe it -- for racing and speedwork. But it doesn't seem to work for me for easy/slow runs. Daniels analyzed Olympians in competition and determined 180 was optimal. Ever since the, everyone says 180! 180! Fine for going fast, but not slow, IMHO.

I guess you've already been drinking some of the 80 proof, since that's not an asterisk.

PS - I am belated Jeffgoblue, but I hope you are healing well from the hernia surgery!

Doing very well thank you.

Ugh......cadence....... I'm biting my tongue on this.

Spit it out you friggin' bastard! (Sorry, old Irish joke).

Personally, I'm still unsure about #4 (Pump up your stride rate to 180 per minute). I hear this all the time, and I believe it -- for racing and speedwork. But it doesn't seem to work for me for easy/slow runs. Daniels analyzed Olympians in competition and determined 180 was optimal. Ever since the, everyone says 180! 180! Fine for going fast, but not slow, IMHO.

I think it's helped me in marathons. I notice when I start to tire late my cadence slows down, but if I make a conscious effort to keep it up I run better.

Fair enough. Personally, I just run whatever feels natural and try not to mess with it. I settle in at close to 180 when running fast, and if that's what's most efficient, I guess I'm lucky. Seems like the kind of thing that will cause injury if you tinker with it too much.

That's generally my standpoint. I have seen alot of advocating that people try to artificially focus on cadence (not here, specifically). That's something I don't agree with. Also, I see alot of focus on the 180 as a magic number for everyone, which is not always the case. 180 is an average; some run at a lower rate, some higher. It's a matter of personal efficiency, and mechanics, rather than anything else. Most people, from elite to MOP'ers, already run within 10% of 180 strides per minute as it is. The biggest determinant of speed is force applied to the ground. Higher force allows for a longer stride and higher stride rate.

I think one of the things that sometimes gets lost in the shuffle when trying to dissect theories and applications is the real world mechanics. As was mentioned by an above poster, most runners are fairly close to that 180 magic number. I think if you look at mechanics to see heel strike, body position, etc. then you can determine if a runner is performing efficiently or not. just my 2 cents worth. That being said, a lot of my team's training program is rooted in the philosophy of what Daniels has written about.

I will agree with this. And I don't think his basic philosophy is wrong. I think the application of it is where people run afoul. Of course, I also think it depends on the group that you're talking to. I'm finding more and more that triathletes view running completely differently than runners do.

Good point Scout. I agree that his philosophy is good. His book is also very handy in that it breaks down the training based on the race you want to train for. Triathletes are in a world to their own but i think that with some planning, it would be possible to implement the philosophy for that philosophy as well. I Believe it is Friel (maybe) that has done extensive work on training triathletes (I Believe one book is titled something along the line of 'Triathletes Training Bible' or something to that effect.