How much endurance training?

I am not sure why I don't like the article on training 8-10 year olds so much,aside from it's total lack of data. I'm sure this type of training is very good for many,perhaps most swimmers. However,it is a fact(for which I have seen data) that USS is trying desparately to recruit more boys. It has been said in that same journal that boys like to race. Then this article proposes a non-racing,anti-sprinting formula. My fast twitch muscles(and probably my testosterone)recoil from this. I know more than a little about child developement,cardiovascular systems,and energy metabolism and I can't see a mechanism for this window. None the less if there is data backing up this hypothesis I'd love to see it.(Data is not the same as saying"it works for X Olympian so it must be right.) I didn't really like the article too much either. There is a difference between yardage for 10 & U kids and 13 & O kids. I know that GoodSmith complained in one thread that kids were showing up for college with no "engines" from too much focus on technique. But when is the real engine building supposed to start? 10 & U seems kinda young, like you would risk burnout. And I thought the focus was supposed to on technique then anyway. Plus, if you're doing distance at that age where do you have to go if you're, for example, an early maturing girl whose growth tails off in early adolescence? But that is all just supposition on my part. As you say, it would be nice to have "hard" data. My son the runner says he has seen the theory espoused in the swimming article in some running books he has read. I'm sure they weren't scientific, but I might check them out. It sounds like that article has gotten your goat! Thank you for keeping us up to date about any emerging computer research or thoughts!

I am not sure why I don't like the article on training 8-10 year olds so much,aside from it's total lack of data. I'm sure this type of training is very good for many,perhaps most swimmers. However,it is a fact(for which I have seen data) that USS is trying desparately to recruit more boys. It has been said in that same journal that boys like to race. Then this article proposes a non-racing,anti-sprinting formula. My fast twitch muscles(and probably my testosterone)recoil from this. I know more than a little about child developement,cardiovascular systems,and energy metabolism and I can't see a mechanism for this window. None the less if there is data backing up this hypothesis I'd love to see it.(Data is not the same as saying"it works for X Olympian so it must be right.) I didn't really like the article too much either. There is a difference between yardage for 10 & U kids and 13 & O kids. I know that GoodSmith complained in one thread that kids were showing up for college with no "engines" from too much focus on technique. But when is the real engine building supposed to start? 10 & U seems kinda young, like you would risk burnout. And I thought the focus was supposed to on technique then anyway. Plus, if you're doing distance at that age where do you have to go if you're, for example, an early maturing girl whose growth tails off in early adolescence? But that is all just supposition on my part. As you say, it would be nice to have "hard" data. My son the runner says he has seen the theory espoused in the swimming article in some running books he has read. I'm sure they weren't scientific, but I might check them out. It sounds like that article has gotten your goat! Thank you for keeping us up to date about any emerging computer research or thoughts!