Glyn Griffiths

So genuine question, how come you don't train to reflect this in your own running? Why aren't you pulling an Emil Zatopek and doing 400s every day? Why do you train using a traditional distance running philosophy and periodization if the mitochondria adaptations, which are one of the main drivers of aerobic performance, are HIIT driven/superior? I think what's often lost in these studies is: -Short term vs. long term -Isolated studies that don't reflect the real world. No one worth any of their salt recommends only HIIT or only moderate training. The genius breakthrough of Lydiard wasn't to ONLY run a ton of easy/steady miles...it was that sequencing mattered, and that a whole lot of easy set you up for better results once you sharpened up. He realized that sharpening plateaued on its own, and was better when preceded by lots of aerobic work. And that was the big innovation that drove distance performance, and we've been iterating off it for decades. So when I see people argue HIIT vs. Moderate, I really do mean that we're stuck having the arguments of the 1950s. You can go read these arguments in Fred WIlt's wonderful books. They are right there. Why are we acting like its the 1950s? Why not move to the modern era, where we say: we need everything, and it's not either/or, it's timing and sequencing. Now, for the novice, will it matter much in the short term? Maybe not, they will respond to anything initially and get better. But...where I think it does people a disservice is you have amateurs listen to folks who say "go run HIIT 5 days a week!" or "never go above zone 2..." And both do people a disservice. Can people survive off either? Sure. And still get better. Go look at Jim Ryuns training... but we know so much more than the 1950s now. Why not treat folks like adults and give them the truth and nuance? The way I think about it is: If I saw a high school coach taking in novice kids who had never run cross-country before and said, "Great, 5 days a week of HIIT. Get those mitochondria up!"... we all knew those coaches growing up and the end result... We called them old school for a reason... Let's not make the mistakes of ignoring history because it's really hard to do good science that translates to practice in training studies.