I've been selectively reading more on training ideas, trying to get to the bottom of my own struggle between freedom and rules. I'm only looking at the ethos driving the advice - whether overt or implicit - rather than the quality of the advice itself. It is fascinating going back to basic training advice in the popular running press after reading "Born to Run" (link here to Barefoot Ted's review rather than Amazon this time) as the kind of people discussed in that book seem to be the polar opposite of the audience that standard magazines, like Runners World appear to be pitching to. I will admit that not all magazines are equal; a friend recently told me about Trail Runner, which seems to be targeted at what I will call "lifestyle athletes" rather than "sports fitness people". Unfortunately TR is a US publication and not easy to find here in the UK, but the website holds lots of great information. There also seem to be some really good Ultra-running websites too, but I've not looked at many of those.
The kind of people who are prepared to run in all weathers on trails and roads, for miles and for hours, I think of as lifestyle runners. They have made running a part of their identity and this means that they seem generally to have a can-do attitude to running, and they may pay attention to all the advice that seems to be bombarding us from all directions, but ultimately they run for the sheer experience of it. They are intrisically motivated - that is, they are motiviated from within to run just because it feels like human nature. There is a freedom and lack of constraint in running, you don't need rules, you just need to get on a do it.
In contrast the sports industry seems to be catering to a different kind of runner, the fitness sports type. As a general stereotype they are less personally driven to run, and more doing it because they know that it will make them fitter or thinner, or whatever external goal they are seeking. This is the group that needs to given motivating tips and mottos, who are advised to eat and sleep and think and run in a precise, planned and safe way, to 'optimize their time'. This 'time efficiency' seems to be the underlying philosophy of the mainstream - not running efficiency, though of course techniques for that need to be planned too, but training efficiency. I recently read an article about 'junk miles'. These are miles of running that have no training purpose - they are not building a particular skill or strength base and therefore are worthless. I think that is garbage.
There are many training ‘systems’ – Pose, chi, MovNat, Lydiard's and many others to numerous to find and list. The intention of these is undoubtably good, and they will have positive results to show for themselves (though as they are not being truly evaluated they will never post the success figures alongside the "also tried it and found it useless" ones). I think the issue for me is that every one of these systems to help people improve impose a sense of system and order, sometimes with arbitrary rules. I read an article recently that told me if I wasn't "periodising" my training, setting long term goals and developing rigorous plans at the macro, meso and micro-cycle levels I wasn't training properly. I need goals apparently, and to strive for constant (and fast) improvement. It didn't tell me what to put in these periods but rest was necessary at all levels apparently. If I don't do this my running will suffer and I'll probably be a worse person.
As an example of why this focus could be a problem for the very activity it seeks to help I will consider MovNat, an excellent philosophy focusing on general adaptive fitness, not just running. It's all on the website and I encourage you to have a read if you are interested. I'd love to have a go at one of his courses, Erwan le Corre has developed the MovNat Natural Movement Coaching System® as an update and extension of the older Methode Naturelle coaching system. I’ve heard people call it a natural version of parkour, but it seems more. Though I’m only going on what I’ve read, it involves the combined training of walking, running, jumping, balancing, moving on all fours, climbing, lifting, carrying, throwing, catching, swimming and defending.
It all starts well, Erwan’s MovNat system adds to previous natural movement coaching systems, developing:
Movement principles and drills – identifying key components of actions so they can be drilled. This avoids time wasted learning by trail and error and speeds-up efficiency gains through improving motor-circuit development.
Quality of movement before volume or intensity. A lack of initial emphasis on proper techniques leads to problems through the assimilation of inefficient movement patterns.
Levels of practice enabling incremental progress and injury prevention: defined by limits in difficulty at each level, in terms of technique, distance, height, weight, time etc.
So far so good - teach people the basics in a controlled way and let them get on and develop them. Sounds excellent, and it builds with :
Techniques first, then combinations. There are essential techniques in each natural movement that are fundamental to the beginner and from which many movement variations derive.
“Combo” training: practicing putting different skills together.
Lastly, however;
Specialization cycles: only at higher levels of practice (thus introducing 'levels' of ability that someone else needs to assess for you). Well-rounded natural athletes that have already reached an advanced level of skills and conditioning should frequently manage relatively specialized training cycles in order to make even more progress. Here I hope Erwan remains more relaxed as it seems to be taking a slightly more proscriptive turn - he could just mean that people will need to take the time to remain skilled in a variety of skills, or he could be proposing detailed charts that you must follow or you'll fail. There is to be a book in due course, so I'll look out with interest.
However, while sytems are useful, they tend to become rule bound and constraining rather than fun. And in writing this I think I've worked out my dilemma - I'm going to continue to ignore the rules and guidance and just go and have fun. I'm going to run free, and I'll vary it and cross-train. But I'm not making plans and I'll take my chances with my development rate.
