Throwback: An Analysis of the Training Methods of Some of the Great 800-meter Men and Their Coaches

While living in British Columbia and studying at UBC in 2009 and 2010, I explored the connection between some of histories greatest male performers, and their coaches, at 800-meters and the current literature into the bio-energetic physiology of the event. Comparing the training of Peter Snell and Arthur Lydiard, Alberto Juantorena and Zsigmund Zabierzowskey, and Sebastian and Peter Coe to the available research produced a great deal of commonality between the methodologies of these three groups and suggested alignment with scientific understanding that would not be developed for decades.

The following paper was a partner paper to those written regarding research into the bio-energetic physiology and related training implications of the 800-meter and 400-meter race distances.

Introduction

Coaches develop within their profession through a number of channels. The study of physiology, biomechanics, psychology and other related sport science disciplines give a theoretical basis grounded in evidence. The desire to teach, manifest through sport, and the influence of ones peers, colleagues, mentors and luminary figures often drive this study and contribute to a knowledge base fed by practical experience. These resources should all be utilized as tools furthering development at various stages. It is the combination of these resources, taken into consideration simultaneously, that ensures continued growth and success throughout a coaching career.

The area of historical influence, or the influence of luminary figures, becomes key in the world of sport. In training intensive sports that are largely based on knowledge of human physiology, or in the physical training of athletes in ‘skill’ based athletic endeavors, scientific knowledge will often oppose the methods of those who have produced yesterday’s champions. In other cases, sport specific knowledge leads scientific development through understanding gained by means of practical observation. Whether leading or following, the connections between sport, history, and science are strong.

The Spanish-American philosopher, author, poet, and professor George Santayana famously offered these words, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it” (Santayana, 1905, p.284). However, this common proverb only holds so long as two conditions are also bore in mind. One, that the view of history cannot be limited in breadth or depth to that which serves the investigator, and two, the repetition of history is not invariably to be considered condemnation. With careful examination the attentive coach will learn from those who have marked the way, through wisdom and folly, in success and failure, as they strive to perfect their craft and in the process contribute to the annals of athletic history.

Bio-energetic Research

Current research in human physiology, specifically exercise physiology concerning bio-energetics, shows a close connection between duration, intensity, and energetic contribution during exercise (Duffield, Dawson, & Goodman 2005; Duffield & Dawson, n.d.; Hill, 1999). Often this work centers on the various race distances contested in athletics. This investigation allows the track and field coach to find specific, targeted research into human physiology regarding various event specialties.

The 800-meter race distance, when examining such research over the last three decades, is shown to have a mean aerobic contribution of roughly 62% (Billat, Hamard, Koralsztein, & Morton, 2009; Duffield & Dawson, n.d.; Hill, 1999). Further research has suggested a great deal of energetic interdependence during intense exercise (Duffield, Dawson & Goodman, 2005; Gastin, 2001; Medbo & Tabata, 1993; Spencer & Gastin, 2001), as well as a high degree of trainability relative to aerobic and anaerobic energetic response during exercise (Weyand, Cureton, Conley, Sloniger & Liu, 1994; Granier, Mercier, Mercier, Anselme & Prefaut, 1995; Weyand, Martinez-Ruiz, Bundle, Bellizzi & Wright, 1999; Weyand & Bundle, 2005). Additionally, both alactic and lactic anaerobic energy, have been shown to possess reserves during exercise, largely due to the interdependence of energetic systems (Medbo & Tabata 1993; Billat et al., 2009), yet may be dependant on aerobic capacity to make efficient use of anaerobic reserve (Kutsar, n.d.; Nurmekivi & Lemberg, n.d.; Tikhonov, 1992; Gastin, 2001; Spencer & Gastin, 2001). This interdependence appears in the literature to be a result of the higher than previously believed speed of response of the aerobic systems (Gastin, 2001; Spencer & Gastin 2001; Duffield, Dawson & Goodman 2005), as well as the adaptive support provided by the anaerobic system and anaerobic reserve in exercise lasting up to two minutes in duration (Weyand et al., 1999).

Analysis and Coaching

Such results influence training methodology and design a great deal. However, many coaches will rely more heavily on historical reference when developing their own methodology and training frameworks and often speak about this type of influence more readily (Billat, 2001). The coaching profession is populated with people from very diverse educational and practical backgrounds, making dialogue between peers and colleagues more accessible and intelligible to many than published works regarding human physiology. For example, New Zealand coach Chris Pilone cites, discusses, and compares the training methods of Franze Stampfl, coach of Roger Bannister, Arthur Lydiard, and Frank Horwill, advisor to Peter Coe, expanding little on the physiological principles that drove each training methodology (Pilone, n.d.). Nic Bideau, one of the most successful coaches in Australian history, wrote a good deal on a similar subject in a piece called, Coaching Middle and Long Distance Runners: A Commentary, outlining the training principles behind his recent success with Australian record breaking athletes Craig Mottram and Benita Johnson (Bideau n.d.). With brief homage to the work of Arthur Lydiard and Peter Coe, Bideau also makes little mention of the science behind the methods.

With examination, the relationship between current understandings of exercise physiology and training methodologies throughout history provides cross-reference between these two developmental tools. Examples of this relationship, specifically regarding the 800-meter event, exist in the form of published works concerning training methodology. The training of Peter Snell by Arthur Lydiard, from Running with Lydiard, Alberto Juantorena by Zsigmund Zabierzowskey, from a 1985 lecture to the Athletic Congress of the U.S.A., and Sebastian Coe by Peter Coe from Winning Running: Successful 800m & 1500m Racing and Training, is easily available for investigation (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000; Juantorena, 1985; Coe, 1996). In these writings, three relatively diverse yet highly successful approaches to training are found. These three athletes won a total of seven Olympic gold medals and two Olympic silver medals while holding the world record at 800-meters for 27 of 35 years between 1962 and 1997. With careful examination here, these methodologies are compared to current understandings of event specific energetic physiology highlighting the clear connections that made them so successful over time. Included in this analysis is a brief discussion concerning youth development involving 400-meter coach Clyde Hart of Baylor University in Waco Texas.

Regrettably, it is difficult to find specific training literature or program outlines developed for or by the great female performers. Investigations into the training of athletes including Mozambique’s Maria Mutola or Britain’s Dame Kelly Holmes would, without doubt, provide incredible insight.

Peter Snell & Arthur Lydiard - 1960’s

Coached by Arthur Lydiard, one of the most successful and influential coaches in the history of the sport, Peter Snell reached a level of success paralleled by few. In the 1960 Rome Olympics, Snell won gold in the 800-meter defeating Roger Moens of Belgium who, at the time, held the world record at that distance. Four years later, in the 1964 Tokyo games, Snell would win Olympic double gold at 800 and 1500-meters, a feat accomplished only four times prior and never since. Snell also held world records at both the mile and 800-meter distances, running a remarkable 1:44.3 for 800-meters on a grass track (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000).

Lydiard’s well-tested approach to training was quite simple, yet highlighted the importance of balanced training and illustrated a connection to current understandings of bio-energetic interdependence illustrated by current research (Gastin, 2001; Spencer & Gastin, 2001; Duffield, Dawson & Goodman, 2005). Strongly suggesting that athletes in the middle and long distances must develop enough stamina to enable them to tolerate faster training and racing speeds, Lydiard placed emphasis on training that would elevate the aerobic capacity. “…assume we have conditioned runner A to use three liters of oxygen a minute and runner B to use five liters. We then give them the same volume and intensity of anaerobic training. Runner A will begin to level off, and begin to lose form, fighting a progressively larger oxygen debt; runner B will continue to hold best form” (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000 p.18). Based largely on the knowledge that oxygen is the key to sustained energy, Lydiard offers this logical example of the importance of aerobic capacity relative to the ability to utilize anaerobic energy as energetic demand increases.

Accomplishing this was, for Lydiard and his athletes, a simple matter of running, at various speeds, in order to develop aerobic capacity with special emphasis placed on elevating lactate threshold (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000). Utilizing distances from 160-kilometers to over 250-kilometers a week during what he referred to as his ‘marathon conditioning’ phase, yet emphasizing sprints as short as 50-meters during ‘track training’, Lydiard ensured that his athletes were not only ‘fit’ enough, but also ‘sharp’ enough to tolerate training and racing (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000).

Interestingly, Lydiard often asserted that Snell, while a world-class athlete, was in fact the slowest among his peers at the shorter ‘sprint’ distances of 200 and 400-meters (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000). It was his well-trained aerobic capacity, high lactate threshold, and subsequent ability to utilize anaerobic reserve that allowed him to achieve faster finishing speeds than his competitors, who were better ‘sprinters’ (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000). This is a phenomenon that has not been resolved due to the apparent misunderstanding among coaches regarding energy systems and the resulting deficits in training. Thirty-six years after Snell’s double gold medal performance in Tokyo, Lydiard pointed out the persistence of these misunderstandings saying; “Many runners throughout the world are able to run 400-meters in 46 seconds and faster; but remarkably few of them have sufficient stamina to run 800-meters in 1:44, or 52 seconds for each 400-meters” (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000). Nearly one decade later this phenomenon still exists.

Worldwide, in 2009, 166 men ran 46.20 or faster for 400-meters while only 21 could better a mark of 1:45.0 for 800-meters (IAAF-400; IAAF-800). In fact, only one athlete managed to achieve world ranking in both events, Raidel Acea of Cuba who, with performances of 46.19 for 400-meters and 1:46.68 for 800-meters was ranked 163rd and 84th respectively (IAAF-400; IAAF-800). These results appear to illustrate either a lack of endurance and strength among the more speed oriented athletes, or an absence of speed and sprint ability among true middle distance runners. As research into the bio-energetics of both events illustrates significant aerobic contribution, the former appears to be much more likely (Duffield, Dawson, & Goodman, 2005; Hill, 1999; Spencer & Gastin, 2001). Lydiard’s training methods were far ahead of the research of his time and are exceptionally reflective of the current understandings of how energy is utilized during exercise.

Alberto Juantorena & Zsigmund Zabierzowskey - 1970’s

In the 1976 Olympics in Montreal, 25-year-old Cuban Alberto Juantorena achieved what is considered to be one of the most impressive athletic feats in history, double Olympic gold in the 400-meter and 800-meter races. Juantorena is, as of 2010, the only athlete in history to accomplish this double. However, 1976 was not Juantorena’s first Olympic games. In the 1972 Games in Munich, a then 21-year-old Juantorena was ousted in the semifinals of the 400-meter and did not contest the 800-meter. Improvement of this magnitude and the accomplishment of a sporting feat so rare would certainly merit examination. Thankfully, Juantorena went on to become the Cuban Vice Minster of Sport after his athletic career and has provided outlines of his training frameworks. Upon comparing the periodized frameworks from both Olympic years, one distinct difference will stand out in the readers mind, an increase in aerobic training during all phases.

Juantorena’s training was almost entirely sprint interval and ‘special endurance’, or speed interval based before the 1975 and 1976 seasons (Juantorena, 1985). Prior to the 1976 Olympics, during what Juantorena calls his ‘general preparation’ phase, variable paced but continuous running, often called ‘Fartlek’ training, was utilized reaching volumes of 13-kilometers in one session. In the same preparation phase prior to Munich in 1972, far less training of this kind was employed, with what appears to be a maximum of two kilometers of sustained running in any given session. During his ‘special preparation’ phase before Montreal much more cross-country running, of between one and nine kilometers, was stressed, where in the same cycle in 1972 none was emphasized (Juantorena, 1985).

This would not be significant if Juantorena had simply been moving up from 400m to 800m, as an increase in aerobic training and overall training volume would be expected. However, the drastic improvement at 400m and 800m, with these training alterations, would correlate well with research into aerobic bio-energetics in high intensity exercise, as well as almost directly paralleling Arthur Lydiard’s assertions about the relationship between stamina and speed. Juantorena’s example is a bit deceiving as prior to moving to the 800-meter distance he was an elite 400-meter runner possessing a great deal of basic speed, superior biomechanics, and very high anaerobic capacity. His ability to successfully utilize these abilities fully was the result of improved aerobic capacity between 1972 and 1976. This assertion would be strongly supported by literature illustrating a high degree of bio-energetic interdependence in high intensity exercise (Weyand et al., 1999; Gastin, 2001; Spencer & Gastin, 2001; Duffield, Dawson & Goodman, 2005). With a significant contribution from aerobic metabolism, averaging approximately 25% to 30%, evident in the 400m (Hill, 1999; Duffield, Dawson & Goodman, 2005) and a majority contribution from aerobic metabolism, averaging 62% at 800m (Hill, 1999; Duffield, Dawson & Goodman; Billat, 2009), it is clear that the addition of training for aerobic development previously missing from Juantorena’s program facilitated his transition from international competitor to double Olympic Champion and world record holder.

Sebastian & Peter Coe - 1980’s

One of the most revered athletes in track and field history, Sebastian Coe won Olympic gold at 1500-meters and silver at 800-meters in the 1980 Moscow and 1984 Los Angeles games. Coached by his father Peter, Coe also held world records both indoors and outdoors at 800-meters, breaking Juantorena’s, and 1000-meters, as well as outdoors at 1500-meters and the mile during his career. In the 29 years since it’s running, only two men have eclipsed Sebastian’s outdoor 800-meter time of 1:41.73. These results, coupled with Peter Coe’s lectures and writings, have lead many to look to the Coe methods of training for guidance.

An engineer by trade, Peter Coe’s understanding of scientific principle and attention to detail make his methodology, if not complex, quite comprehensive. This often leads to misunderstanding as, like any training framework, each aspect is part of a greater process and should be understood as such. Peter Coe often makes mention of the importance of ‘quality’ of training over ‘quantity’ of training. Statements like these are often misunderstood to prioritize an anaerobic workload. However, this focus on quality is an emphasis on quality in every aspect of training. No part of Coe’s training was frivolous. Divided into four ‘zones’, with each based on a physiological objective, Peter Coe sought to ensure that Sebastian’s training would be completely balanced. This would effectively ensure preparedness for any circumstance in racing. From extremely fast and energy exhausting opening paces, to sudden mid race breaks, to slow ‘sit and kick’ strategies, Sebastian would be well trained, physiologically and psychologically, to respond (Coe, 1996). This balance and ability to handle such intensity are found in training that parallels recent research into bio-energetic especially regarding the interdependence of the aerobic and anaerobic systems (Spencer & Gastin, 2001; Duffield, Dawson & Goodman, 2005) and the speed of aerobic response highlighted by Dr. Paul Gastin (2001).

Zone 1 and Zone 2 of Coe’s training framework are entirely dedicated to the elevation of aerobic capacity and lactate threshold, while Zone 3 serves to enhance anaerobic capacity and reserve. Zone 4 functions largely to sharpen anaerobic power but is paired with short sprints to stress alactic energy utilization (Coe, 1996). Employing running of up to two hours in Zone 1, it would appear that the Coes had a well-developed awareness of the role of aerobic capacity in the successful utilization of anaerobic energy, illustrating the interdependence of energetic response. Peter Coe directly addresses this concept saying, “It cannot be stressed too often that while successful middle distance racing requires good 400m speed it is still an endurance-based event” (Coe, 1996 p.82). Echoing this sentiment in a section of ‘Winning Running’ called ‘An Example of Poor Analysis’ Coe goes on to say: “No matter how essential it is for all good middle distance runners to possess good 400m speed and a good change of pace, it must be understood that that they are in events that have a significant aerobic content. It is not simply speed but speed endurance that they must have” (Coe, 1996, p.111). Here the importance of aerobic energy in middle distance running is once again illustrated in lock step with current understandings of human physiology and bio-energetics expressed by Gastin (2001), Spencer & Gastin (2001), Weyand & Bundle (2005) and Duffield, Dawson & Goodman (2005).

Youth Development

The three training systems presented, while diverse in their methodology, express clear connection with research into the area of bio-energetics in their event specialty; yet between them leave one very contentious question unanswered. When developing a young athlete for the 800-meter distance, should coaches build a base from aerobic development (endurance) or anaerobic development (sprint-speed)?
Lydiard’s approach focuses on aerobic development, keeping in line with his overall training philosophy: “Youngsters under 15 can handle a great deal of aerobic training because their capacity to use oxygen in relation to their body weight is greater than an adult’s. However, they usually have highly sensitive nervous systems and cannot stand much anaerobic training (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000, p.181).”

While it is not apparent with Zabierzowskey if the intent was to transition Juantorena to the 800-meter after developing him as an elite 400-meter runner first, it is evident, with stunning results at both distances, that this approach was successful. Coach Clyde Hart, of Baylor University in Waco Texas, famed as possibly the worlds best coach of 400-meter runners, broaches one possible advantage of this kind of speed first developmental saying: “The main reason we are seeing more of the sprinter type succeed in the 400 meters today is largely due to the fact that we are able to develop stamina and endurance more effectively than we can increase the sprinting abilities of the middle distance runner (Hart, 2001, n.p.)” Applying this same concept to the 800-meter runner would, perhaps, produce results similar to those provided by Zabierzowskey and Juantorena, however, this example is deceiving for two reasons. First, Juantorena moved away from the Cuban National Basketball team at the age of 20, beginning serious training for track and field at very late developmental stage (Juantorena, 1985). Second, the training alterations in the years between the 1972 Munich Olympics and the 1976 Montreal Olympics, that led to the requisite aerobic development for a transition to 800-meter racing and significant improvement at 400-meters, were adopted largely due to training and racing related injuries in the 1974 and 1975 seasons (Juantorena, 1985). These two factors suggest that Juantorena was simply an incredible athletic talent, who may have had further untapped potential at both race distances but whose career was unfortunately cut short by injury.

Peter Coe was very clear about his approach in developing young 800-meter runners saying: “Very fast 800-m and 1500-m racing should be based on the firm foundation of good cross and road running – best acquired when young and as soon as they start serious training… a serious deficiency like a lack of real endurance training cannot be made up late in the day (Coe, 1996, p.111).” The holistic and highly successful approach to training practiced by Peter and Sebastian Coe was built on a foundation of aerobic capacity. The physiological building blocks for elevated exercise tolerance, and therefore tolerance of more difficult training and racing conditions, are produced as efficiency and oxidative capacity progress.

The question of development appears to be one resolved with an answer of aerobic capacity. Coaches too often take a short view with young athletes, ignoring clear physiological principles, while seeking short-term gains. As Estonian physiologist Dr. Kuulo Kutsar asserts: “A large volume of endurance training at moderate intensity improves the heart volume and the blood supply to the working muscles. These changes are a prerequisite for the development of speed. A too early change to intensive fast running training, while it can temporarily improve performance, will overload the organism and lead to negative results (Kutsar, n.d. n.p.).” Such negative results are not the product of good coaching or training and will often lead to injury, attrition, and/or the failure of proper development and improvement in young athletes. Essential to the avoidance of such negative outcomes, balance in training should be the aim of the competent coach during developmental stages as well as when training elite performers.

Conclusion

There are common threads to be found in the methodologies of Lydiard, Zabierzowskey, and Coe presented here. Each of their athletes, while diverse in their path to the pinnacle of their sports, achieved greatness in part due to balanced training guided by an understanding of the physiological principles governing exercise. Lydiard’s methods, while emphasizing aerobic development, held the elevation of the athletes lactate threshold paramount (Lydiard & Gilmour, 2000). This physiological meeting point of the anaerobic and aerobic systems is crucial when considering middle distance running is performed at very high percentages of, often surpassing, VO2max (Billat, 2009). Zabierzowskey altered the training of his star pupil drastically in the months leading into the Montreal Olympics to include aerobic and specific lactate threshold runs (Juantorena 1985). The subsequent aerobic development leading to a more efficient utilization of Juantorena’s already significant anaerobic reserve produced results unparalleled to date. These training alterations brought balance to Juantorena’s training that had previously been lacking. The stark improvement at the shorter ‘sprint’ distance of 400-meters highlights the importance of aerobic power, further supporting the findings of Gastin (2001), Spencer & Gastin (2001) and Duffield, Dawson & Goodman (2005) regarding the speed of aerobic response during high intensity exercise. The methods of the Coe family draw on significant aerobic development as a base for precisely balanced training that mirror the mean aerobic/anaerobic breakdown of the 800-meter event in research to date almost perfectly. The 62% mean found when examining reviews by Duffield & Dawson & Goodman (2005) and Hill (1999) as well as recent research by Billat et al. (2009) compare well with the 65% aerobic, 35% anaerobic breakdown found in Peter Coe’s training of Sebastian Coe (Coe, 1996). Historically the path to success in the 800-meter event has relied on balanced training with a significant aerobic component that exhibits an understanding of exercise physiology congruent with research that, in the case of Lydiard and Snell, was nearly four decades away. As a coach, the repetition of history this rich in success and understanding would be far less than condemnable. In a sport where success is built largely on training it is important to combine the study of sports science with successful ideas of the past when creating one’s own methodological framework.

References

Bideau N. (n.d.) Coaching Middle and Long Distance Runners: A Commentary. Modern Athlete and Coach. Retrieved November 2009, from: http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%20Methodology/Endurance/General%20Concepts/Bideau%20Coaching%20Middle%20and%20Long%20Distance.pdf

Billat V. (2001). Interval training for performance: a scientific and empirical practice. Sports Medicine. 31(1) 13-31.

Billat V., Hamard L., Koralsztein J.P., and Morton R.H. (2009). Differential modeling of anaerobic and aerobic metabolism in the 800-m and 1500-m run. Journal of Applied Physiology. 107, 478-487.

Coe P. (1996). Winning Running: Successful 800m & 1500m Racing and Training. Marlborough Wiltshire: The Crowood Press.

Duffield R., Dawson B. and Goodman C. (2005) Energy system contribution in 400-m and 800m track running events. Journal of Sports Sciences. 23(2) 993-1002.

Duffield R. and Dawson B. (n.d.). Energy System Contributions in Track Running. Retrieved November 2009, from: http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%20Methodology/Speed/General%20Concepts/Duffield%20Energy%20System%20contribution%20in%20Track%20Running.pdf

Granier P., Mercier B., Mercier J., Anselme F., and Prefaut C. (1995) Aerobic and anaerobic contribution to Wingate test performance in sprint and middle-distance runners. European Journal of Applied Physiology 70, 58-65.

Gastin, P. B. (2001). Energy system interaction and relative contribution during maximal exercise. Sports Medicine 31(10), 725-741.

Hart, C. (2001). 400 meter training – Retrieved May 2010 from: http://www.nacactfca.org/articles/Hart-eng.htm

Hill D.W. (1999). Energy system contributions in middle-distance running events. Journal of Sports Sciences (17), 477-483.

IAAF-400 – Retrieved June 2010 from: http://www.iaaf.org/statistics/toplists/inout=o/age=n/season=2009/sex=M/all=n/legal=A/disc=400/detail.html

IAAF-800 – Retrieved June 2010 from: http://www.iaaf.org/statistics/toplists/inout=o/age=n/season=2009/sex=M/all=n/legal=A/disc=800/detail.html

Juantorena. A. (1985). Specific training for the 400-800m runner (V. Lopez, Trans.) Retrieved September 2009 from: http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%20Methodology/Speed/Sprints/Juantorena%20Specific%20Training%20for%20the%20400%20-%20800m%20Runner.pdf

Kutsar K. (n.d.). Some Physiological Aspects of Middle Distance Training. Modern Athlete and Coach. Retrieved November 2009, from http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%20Methodology/Endurance/General%20Concepts/Kutsar%20Some%20Physiological%20Aspects%20of%20Middle%20Distance%20Training.pdf

Lydiard A. and Gilmore G. (2000). Running with Lydiard. Oxford: Meyer and Myer Sport.

Medbo J.I. and Tabata I. (1993). Anaerobic energy release in working muscle during 30 s to 3 min of exhausting bicycling. Journal of Applied Physiology 75, 1645 – 1660.

Nurmekivi A. and Lemberg H. (n.d.) Local Muscular Endurance in Middle Distance Running. Modern Athlete and Coach. Retrieved November 2009, from: http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%20Methodology/Endurance/General%20Concepts/Nurmekivi%20Local%20Muscular%20Endurance%20in%20Middle%20Distance%20Running.pdf

Pilone C. (n.d.) The Training Methods of Three Famous Distance Coaches. Modern Athlete and Coach. Retrieved November 2009, from: http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%20Methodology/Endurance/General%20Concepts/TMEGC_Pilone_The_Training_Methods_of_Three_Famous_Distance_Coaches.pdf

Santayana G. (1905). Life of Reason, Reason in Common Sense. Retrieved July 2010, from http://www.iupui.edu/~santedit/gsantayanaquotes.html

Spencer M.R., Gastin P.B. (2001). Energy system contribution during 200 to 1500m running in highly trained athletes. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 33(1), 157 – 162.

Tikhonov L. (1992). The Balance Between Aerobic and Anaerobic Capacities in Distance Running. Legkaya Atletika, Russia. (7) Modern Athlete and Coach. Retrieved September 2009, from http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%20Methodology/Endurance/General%20Concepts/TMEGC_Tikhonov_The_Balance_Between_Aerobic_&_Anaerobic_Capacities_in_Distance_Running.pdf

Weyand P. and Bundle W. (2005) Energetics of high-speed running: integrating classical theory and contemporary observations. American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology 288, 956-965.

Weyand P., Cureton K., Conley D., Sloniger M. and Liu Y.L. (1994). Percentage anaerobic energy utilized during track running events. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 25 105.

Weyand P.G., Lee C.S., Martinez-Ruiz R., Bundle M., Bellizzi M.J., and Wright S. (1999) High-speed running performance is largely unaffected by hypoxic reductions in aerobic power. Journal of Applied Physiology 86 2059-2064.