I just finished reading a book by Ernst van Aaken Called "Van Aaken Method". I am a huge proponent of long slow distance and started working towards the "Lydiard Method" way of training earlier this Spring. Van Aaken was experimenting with long slow distance before Lydiard, as early as the 40's. Though both methods are quite similar there are some slight differences. I experimented with both over the last bit and have merged the methods into a plan that works well for me, with my plan resembling Lydiard's method the closest. These endurance centered methods are the extreme opposite of the tempo or interval training methods that experienced popularity in the middle of the last Century, the premise of which is to run many anaerobic intervals (using more oxygen than you can breath causing lactic acid to form) without full recovery between intervals.
What is Long Slow Distance? In a nutshell the theory involves running every day and running as much mileage as possible at an aerobic pace that allows conversing if desired. Ultimately it is a running technique that focuses on converting the body into an efficient aerobic machine. Van Aaken believed that the limiting factor to performance was oxygen intake by the cells. His plan was to run at a heart rate (120-150) that allowed optimal breathing and oxygen uptake, for as long as possible each day. It is ultimately this long period of elevated oxygen that trains the body to perform the best. Lydiard came up with a set distance of roughly 100 miles a week as a minimum. Van Aaken said this mileage was actually more aimed towards allowing Lydiard's athlete Snell, who was a heavier runner, to cut weight and stay trim. Van Aaken thinks that this mileage is not necessary for lite, middle distance runner's. A side note though is that anyone running marathon or ultramarathon distances, regardless of weight, should be focusing on this sort of mileage and greater. It is theorized and also proven that these distances grow the maximum amount of capillaries to deliver oxygen to the maximum volume of the body. Second the distance helps to grow a large strong and efficient heart that does not have to work as hard to supply blood to the circulatory system while running. Lastly this method keeps your weight low making for a very high ratio of heart volume to body weight. Ultimately you want as large a heart (and VO2 Max) as possible with the least amount of mass. This fortuitous ratio seems to be crucial particularly in longer distances amongst the elites.
The key differences between EVA's pure endurance method and Lydiard's method are slight but worth mentioning. The EVA method prescribes rest breaks. I typically have way to big of an ego to ever walk in a run. To walk is to admit defeat. Curious, after reading the book, I played around with some walking. There were some interesting observations. My first 15 Km run I decided to throw in a 2 minute walking break every 8 minutes. It was difficult at first, but my body quickly craved the walking breaks. I saw this as a negative aspect of taking walking breaks. I would start running and then my mind was instantly looking forward to the next break. What was interesting though is my final time was only about 12 minutes slower than my previous day's 15km run, on the same course, even though I had taken well over 25 minutes of walking breaks. This seems to indicate when I was running, I was running faster to make up the distance, and because I was rested I was able to push harder during each running streak. I decided the 2 minute every 8 was the wrong ratio for me. I next tried a 1 minute break every 10. This ratio ended up costing me a total of 2 extra minutes on my 15 km route. The most interesting thing is that I was really rested after this run and felt really good and could have gone much further. My final experiment with the walking breaks is to just take the breaks when I feel lactic acid building such as on steep rocky hills or when my muscles were extremely tense. I found that this ends up being perhaps 2 or 3 breaks lasting 1-2 minutes for a 15 km run. Last night's run was 2 minutes faster than the night before when I just ran straight without a break. This appears to be the best break method for me. I don't find my mind becoming weak and looking forward to breaks, and in the end I feel the few short breaks allow me to recover after hard hills or when I am extremely tense, and then I can run 30+ minutes again harder without any problems.
The second major difference is that EVA's method requires little tempo work (less than 5% of total mileage) and no hill repeats. Because I am still working on my base I haven't really played with tempo too much or hill repeats. Lydiard incorporates the tempo and hills in his sharpening segment of training just before a big race. One thing I emphasize is that I only run terrain that I intend to race. Since I like endurance trails with extreme elevation differences I try to only run on challenging single track with hills. I feel that running everyday under the circumstances I expect to see in a race allows me to perform to the specifications the race requires. I do run some roads to get to my trails each day (a necessary evil) because I don't like driving to running spots if I can help it. So ultimately I have some experience on the roads as well. I have played with some hill repeats last spring. These were challenging and really taxed my quads going down and calves going up. I felt that they helped me out a ton but I was incorporating them in my base training and so ultimately they made me run faster earlier on in my training but may have stressed my body too much if I kept them up so that I would ultimately plateau sooner due to fatigue. My new goal is to incorporate hill repeats 12-8 weeks before a major race and after I have a very strong base at long slow distance. This should really sharpen me up and really peak my performance off from my existing high aerobic base platform. So I really lean towards Lydiard's method of training when it comes to hill's I feel they are essential for trail runners and probably road runners as well.
I have little input with tempo at this time, but I feel this will be something I will start playing with. I think that I will take Van Aaken's advice and run a short race distance speed every day <>
Ultimately I am using the theory behind both of these methods and experimenting with different aspects to try and come up with my secret formula.
So far I am aiming for around 100 miles a week including one run that is 30-50 km long each week (which both methods suggest for athletes interested in long distance). I am going to spend the majority of my time on rocky, steep, technical terrain since my long term goals like the Wasatch 100 are this type of run (this more closely resembles Lydiard's method). I am going to take short 1-2 minute walking breaks when I feel lactic acid building up or when my muscles are overly tense after running for a long time (this is more emphasized in the Van Aaken method). I am going to start incorporating some segments of race pace in each run so I can practice every pace, but I will insure it doesn't tax my body and send my into anaerobic running for too long (more Van Aaken method). Lastly I will use hill repeats and intervals 12-8 weeks before a big event to catapult a peak performance from an existing high mileage platform (definitely Lydiard method here).
Perhaps the biggest piece of advice I obtained from reading this book is to have fun. Van Aaken mentions the importance of running playfully and enjoying yourself. I like this and feel that there are tons of opportunities to run playfully each time you hit the trails. For instance incorporating small fartlek's on strategic beautiful sections of trails will be awesome. Cruising through the Douglas and Arbutus as fast as you can is a huge booster. Playing games and challenging myself each run like "lets see if I can do this segment of the trail faster than yesterday" first entertains me, and second it allows me to have small victories each run even if the run in general is not a high quality one.
Both these coaches were well above there times with the long slow distance methods. Both coaches saw their athletes outperform everyone. The methods are very similar but by incorporating small differences from each method that I find to work for me I hope to really grow as a runner this year and the years to come.
Comments