In New Zealand, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, a short, stocky, fiercely determined man named Arthur Lydiard experimented with his own body to see how much running the human body could take. Running up to 200 miles in a week, he writes in his book Run to the Top, “…(I) was so determined to find just what the human body would stand without actually cracking that I frequently exhausted myself completely and had to walk the last few miles home”.

After 9 years of experimentation he developed a sequence of training phases, cobbling together marathon-type distance training, hill-springing, leg-speed work, repetition training, medium-pace training, interval training and sharpening and freshening. And soon his runners met with unparalleled success, winning the Olympic Games gold, silver and bronze medals, and accumulated world records like small change. So great was their domination of the local running scene that his runners would meet several months before New Zealand track championships and literally decide who would win each distance event. Lydiard’s training system used aerobic marathon type conditioning before proceeding to faster, higher intensity, anaerobic running in preparation for racing. It revolutionized running around the world, and has remained relatively unchanged since.

And therein lies the problem. No significant changes have been made to Lydiard’s system since, apart from individual adaptations to running in more severe climates such as in Finland, where deep snow curtails the runner’s ability to train outside for several months each year, or where it’s simply too hot to run outside in desert climates. Lydiard remained inflexible with his schedules for many years. For example, he advised runners to run 100 miles per week in their conditioning phase. However, the majority of recreational runners don’t have the ability to run 100 miles per week. Biomechanics, age, and time constraints have proven major limiting factors many runners simply disintegrate attempting to run this much mileage.

Other phases of Lydiard’s training have also proven unrealistic for recreational or even elite runners. The hill springing phase of his program has caused sprained ankles among runners not strong enough for the rigors of this highly ballistic, high impact technique, or sore legs that temporarily incapacitate the runner. Also, many runners never attempt the time trials recommended by Lydiard, because they don’t know what they are or how to do them. More recently, exercise science has shown several other techniques to be advantageous to runners, such as strength training, which Lydiard shunned, claiming that runners get strong enough through their running.

What has changed since Lydiard devised his system is an exponential increase in knowledge from exercise science, based on thousands of research papers and experiments. Several dozen new fields in this discipline have opened up in the past three decades. Today’s most basic exercise science textbooks contain far more information about endurance training and sports nutrition than was ever known back in the 1950s and 1960s. Here I summarize seven major changes that are recommended to runners contemplating using Lydiard’s system. These recommended changes are based on the results of exercise science over the past 3 decades.

Change #1.

Perform running fitness tests before and after your “build-up”. How do we know that long distance running has improved our fitness? Subjectively, we feel we can cover longer distances more comfortably, to the extent where we believe we are ready to run a marathon. But how can we really know? Elite runners have access to a university or Olympic training center treadmill test for VO2 max and anaerobic threshold, so they can have these tests done before and after “build-up”. But most of us don’t have access to these sophisticated tests, so we need to turn to field tests. Towards applying field tests, let’s use a basic exercise science approach to our training. Most research papers that investigate running performance use field tests along with lab measurements. Field tests are simple, easily administered, and reveal a lot of valuable information about our fitness state. Lydiard himself administered field tests. He would often have his runners compete in a marathon upon completion of their “build-up” phase. But that’s an extreme way to measure your fitness because there’s a lot of muscle cell damage done in a marathon, and it takes a long time to recover, wasting your valuable training time. I don’t recommend a marathon as a field test.

Here I provide an example of a field test that you may try. Choose 2-3 distances and do time trials on a track or an accurately measured flat road surface that preferable has accurately measured mile markers. Suggested time trial distances:

1 or 2 miles

3 or 5 miles

10K or 10 miles

Choose one distance from each of these three categories. Your time trials should be performed over a 2-week conditioning period, with 2-3 days of recovery jogging between trials to allow your legs to recover. These time trials should be done solo, without the aid of a pacer, as you want your post conditioning time trial to be under identical circumstances. Note the weather conditions, temperature, humidity, wind strength and anything else that could impact your times in these trials.

Record your time for each distance in the preconditioning tests, then again after your “buildup”. You can easily calculate your percentage improvement in each distance. If you find little improvement from your pre- to post- “build up” tests, you might consider adding another 2-4 weeks to your conditioning “build-up”.

Change #2.

 Include periodization recovery during the “build-up” conditioning phase. Periodization is now a commonly used technique when planning endurance training schedules for cycling, swimming, cross-country skiing, triathlons, and most other endurance sports. It incorporates lower volume recovery running, something that many runners have great difficulty integrating into training schedules. It allows recovery from incessant long running by programming in a lower mileage recovery week every few weeks. Most runners do this on a 3 weeks increasing mileage block, followed by a 1 week recovery block. This is referred to as a step type approach, where running volume increases for three consecutive weeks, followed by a lower mileage fourth week. In this lower mileage week, often called an adaptation week, the intensity of the running can also be reduced.

The purposes of periodization are to program recovery running into the training schedules, as well as to:

• allow muscle glycogen levels to replete

• encourage muscle tissue regeneration and healing

• provide a mental break from the constant grind of long hard running

Who are the proponents of periodization?

Dr. David Costill recommended periodization training as far back as 1986 in his book “Inside Running: Basics of Sports Physiology”. What is interesting is how few of the books by the “experts” on running training recommend periodization during the “build-up” conditioning phase. So how is periodization used to plan training schedules? It looks something like this:

Conditioning Program for advanced distance runner, allowing recovery week every 4 weeks.

Periodized Conditioning Program for Advanced Runner

Miles

120

100                                      _     *            *     *      

80               _   *          *      *     *    _      *     *     *    

60       *     *    *    *    *      *     *    *      *      *     *   

40       *     *    *    *    *      *     *    *      *      *     *   

20       *     *    *    *    *      *     *    *      *      *     *    

0         *     *    *    *    *      *     *    *      *      *      *    

           1     2    3    4     5     6     7     8      9    10    11

                                    Week

Conditioning program for semi-serious runner, allowing recovery week every 3 weeks.

Peridiodized Conditioning Program for Semi-Serious Runner

Miles

90

80                                                                                 *

70                                                       *              *        *

60                                 *            *      *      *      *        *

50              *          *     *     *     *      *      *      *        *

40       *     *    *    *     *    *     *       *      *      *        *

30       *     *    *    *     *    *     *       *      *      *        *

20       *     *    *    *     *    *     *       *      *      *        *

10       *     *    *    *     *    *     *       *      *      *        *

0         *     *    *    *     *    *     *       *      *      *        *

           1     2    3    4     5     6     7     8      9      10       11

                                    Week

Change #3.

Include Anaerobic Threshold (AT) training during the conditioning “build-up” phase

What is AT?

AT is running “at a pace that produces an elevated yet steady state accumulation of lactic acid”, according to Jack Daniels, PhD., in his book “Daniel’s Running Formula”.

Why should we do this? AT running may be one of your most valuable training techniques, as it :

What is AT?

AT is running “at a pace that produces an elevated yet steady state accumulation of lactic acid”, according to Jack Daniels, PhD., in his book “Daniel’s Running Formula”.

Why should we do this? AT running may be one of your most valuable training techniques, as it :

Include Anaerobic Threshold (AT) training during the conditioning “build-up” phase

• increases your AT cruising speed of long training runs, thereby
  



• increasing your overall pace
  



• increases your VO2 max
  



• prepares you for track workouts to come.