You could probably have saved yourself a lot of time by not writing such a long and painful to read article and go have a nice run instead. This would have been better for your nerves. You apparently never read Roche's numerous articles on training, focusing on a couple of things that seem to obsess you (so called "wokism" or differences in sexes). One might not agree with Roche's views and argue, this is called à debate. But your column is no argumentation. In fact, it contains all the elements you critic in Roche's prose : self-contemption, open-doors opener...
Back in 1996, before you said you got into freelancing, I wrote about hill running for the DRS. The advice was free and about worth its price):
I believe that for most recreational runners (which is what most of us
Deads are), running hills is a much easier and less stressful way to
improve than doing speedwork on a track. I am not advocating repeated
sprints up a single hill. Although this has its benefits, it is very
stressful and is much more like formal track sessions than what I am
suggesting.
What I *am* suggesting is running over undulating routes at least a few
times each week. Put some effort into the uphills. Run them with an
exaggerated knee lift and try to push off hard with your ankles. The
steeper the hills the more exaggerated should be the knee lift. On very
slight inclines, try to run faster than you had been going before
reaching the hill. On steeper inclines, concentrate more on vertical
than on forward movement. On the steepest hills try to lift your knees
high enough that at the top of the motion your thighs are horizontal.
You will get tired, but it is a less damaging tiredness than that caused
by more serious speedwork. Running uphill you will not hit the ground
as heavily as when running hard on the flat or downhills. The tiredness
will be muscle fatigue rather than muscle damage. In this it is
somewhat more like cycling or swimming than most other types of
running. Because they don't have to survive pounding like that involved
in running, cyclists and swimmers can train longer and with a higher
proportion of quality work than runners. (No, I don't have any hard
information to back up this statement. :-))
Wow, way way way too much time on David. Sounds like you need some critiquing of your own!
You could probably have saved yourself a lot of time by not writing such a long and painful to read article and go have a nice run instead. This would have been better for your nerves. You apparently never read Roche's numerous articles on training, focusing on a couple of things that seem to obsess you (so called "wokism" or differences in sexes). One might not agree with Roche's views and argue, this is called à debate. But your column is no argumentation. In fact, it contains all the elements you critic in Roche's prose : self-contemption, open-doors opener...
Back in 1996, about 6 weeks after writing about hills, I wrote about tempo runs.