Power Running Physiology Enters the Mainstream (Read 2197 times)

Good Idea SrLopez! Actually, howabout this: 1) Everyone boycott Rich_ 's topics 2) Everyone go back and remove the content from their previous postings to Dick's topics? (actually, don't remove if you are good at making Dick look like a dick)

Okay, Dick, since you've asked for it...: I see those "21 points". First off, it is absolutely idiotic, as you demand the comparison, when the Old Man was talking about things like "date of the race" or "track condition" that you want "muscle power" to be included in this list to be compared and, if not included, the list is no good... But anyways, here goes. He has "running technique" as a matter of fact ABOVE aerobic capacity. Now, you've got yourself engaged in this gigantic thread at CoolRunning about running economy and insisted that it's "muscular" and not aerobic. Well, here it goes; since the Old Man was so stupid and incompetent that he didn't even understand the difference between running economy and muscle development. But, according to you, it's muscular; so there it is. Body build. That's muscular composition included, isn't it? And, now get this, he list "talent" way up there. I thought YOU were the first one who ever recognized it (according to Dr. Noak)??? You missed that one from reading this list? Or were you too busy looking for a word "muscle" that you forgot to see the forest? Now, you were so hooked with "where" he list them. Of course, you realize that he said, "we haven't given them in any order of priority..." So you're all bent out of shape because Lydiard didn't mention "muscle". Now, if you read the book, I mean, not just skim through the "list" or "schedule", you would have noticed how much he talked about "strengthening" legs, perhaps not to your liking of specific terms like "muscle contractility" or whatever. I just opened up the book to page 14, just randomly, of "Running to the Top" and this is what it says: " ...Particularly as we get older, we need not only good muscular strength to keep our muscle toned, we also need to improve our cardio vascular system..." Seems to me, in fact, he was actualy talking about "muscular strength" BEFORE cardio vascular system, does it not? Now this is the most recent book of Lydiard's. I probably only read twice, unlike "Run to the Top" like at least a half a dozen times; in fact, I helped Mifuyu Komatsu to translate "Runnint with Lydiard" in Japanese so I literally read that book inside out. But if "Running to the Top" is the only Lydiard book you've read, do you want me to go on and check other pages/chapter? Also, out of OUR website, here are some examples: Athletic Training: http://www.lydiardfoundation.org/pdfs/al_training_eng.pdf Page 13: "...it is necessary to bring resistance to leg MUSCLES to develop MUSCLE FIBERS; in particular the white (fast twitch) muscle fibers..." By the way, this was originally written by Arthur in the 1970s. Osaka Lecture: http://www.lydiardfoundation.org/pdfs/OSAKALECTURE.pdf Page 14: "...not only do we have to have capillary development for mucular endurance, we also have to have MUSCLE FIBER development..." This lecture was taken place in Japan in 1991. Our Certificate Program PPT: http://www.lydiardfoundation.org/training/understandinglydiardmethod.aspx Page 20: "...reintroduce POWER and flexibility in your legs..." I put this together on behalf of the Old Man for his 2004 lecture tour. Or because this doesn't say "MUSCLE" power, it won't count??? As far as I'm concerned, this really proves your selective reading skill. Basically, you don't read well; you only pick up list or summary or phrases with your chosen word(s) or lack thereof and use it to your advantage or other's disadvantage. Would you like to continue this "discussion" and, oh by the way, if you want to continue to bring in Brad Hudson and Tim Noak into this "discussion", can I bring in some of our Advisory Staff of Lydiard Foundation? Peter Snell (Ph D), Dave Martin (Ph D), Steve Jones, Jon Brown, Greg McMillan, Rod Dixon, Lorraine Moller, Yuko Arimori, Yoshio Koide, Hideo Suzuki, Dick Quax, Steve Scott, Chris Pilone... I can bring in some others as well if you want??? By the way, since you've been going on and on and on about how Brad Hudson is the FIRST mainstream coach to talk about "muscles" with endurance event, have you ever heard of runners like Herb Eliot or John Landy? You know who coached them? And do you know ANYTHING about their training regime? It's okay you want to muble-jumble about physiology bullshit. But you certainly don't belong to running/training/coaching world, Dick; you should stop pretending that you know what you're talking about or pretend that you're an expert of some sort; so I "propose" you SHUT THE HELL UP!

Okay, Dick, since you've asked for it...: you SHUT THE HELL UP!

Oh SNAP!!! See Dick, Nobby hits it right on the head. The reason you can't participate in any normal threads is because people ask questions and want to hear replies....from knowledge and experience, not pseudoscientific BS that knowledgable and trusted members of the board can eat for lunch. Since you have no knowledge or experience, yet feel you are the supreme expert, you get booted right quick.

Nobby, That was an interesting read. Thanks for posting it. In essence, you are saying because Lydiard mentioned muscle strengthening here and there that he clearly recognized that muscle (and, therefore, the characteristics of muscle - i.e. contraction rate, force, and resistance to fatigue) was at least as important of a factor in performance as anything else. Further, the fact that he completed ignored muscle in his list of 21 factors controlling performance is completely inconsequential because he mentioned muscle in other areas. Personally, I think that, generally, writers write the most about the things they consider most important and only a little about those things that they consider much less important. And that when you make a list of the important things you include on that list all the things you think are important. If it's not important you don't put in on the list of important things. So, it appears we hold different opinions as to just how much importance Lydiard placed on the role of muscle in performance. As one of the most, if not the most, visible proponent of the Lydiard method, do you think you are being the best ambassador to that method by shouting at those who disagree with you to shut up?

Thanks. I enjoyed a typical "Dick Trick". Dick's purpose in life revealed--only to irritate people. Now his whole "theory" (nobody mentioned muscles until Hudson) has been incorrect and others had been talking about muscle all along, all he could do is "Oh, you can't do that; Lydiard believed my theory. Nah nah nah..." READ MY LIPS: Lydiard would have NEVER had any time for YOU and your bullshit theory, PERIOD. Unlike you, I even knew Arthur Lydiard in person. I know what he was talking about (training) and I know what he's thinking and how he hated a "theorist", particularly irritating ones like yourself. I can tell you what Rod Dixon said when I showed it to him but even I would not use that word here. And one more time, READ MY LIPS (since you don't seem to be able to read what I've written): SHUT THE HELL UP. Now truly I'm outta here.

Dick's purpose in life revealed--only to irritate people.

Ugh. This thread makes my brain bleed. What the hell are you people doing? There's no point in addressing Rong-Way Rich. He's made it clear that he's nothing but some strangely fixated troll with a raging obsessive-compulsive disorder and an inability to read. As some of you told us long ago, he has zero interest in discussion, and just wants to babble endlessly and nonsensically. He's the poster child for passive-aggression. If Rich were an ice cream flavor, he'd be Pralines and dick. So enough about Rong-Way Rich. But that doesn't explain you people. The same people who told us at the start that Rong-Way Rich was a nut job and that there's no point in engaging him ... are the ones who've created this massive ode to stupidity by engaging him. You'd proven yourselves right by page 3. You win. So can we all take your initial advice and ignore him now? Because my brain is bleeding.