Salazar - The Anti-Hanson?

Link:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/more/10/31/salazar1105/

some people believe in talent, others believe in hard work. Maybe he believes in science too much. If you have a mediocre talent, it requires a lot more hard work, things that a Jack Daniels wouldnt suggest. If you are only mediocre naturally, you have to take a risk.

One forgets that Salazar was one of Victor Conte's first clients.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030715173248/http://snac.com/athletes.htm

Whatever happened to Caitlin Chock? Remember how Salazar said "we have to get em while they're young"? She dropped out of college to go to NOP then was abandoned.

Mate, I promise you'll be more at peace if you can let it go.

Also, anyone that thinks Alberto is more about science than hard work should go and spend a week with his athletes and then make an assessment.

Actually, if you have ever heard Alberto or Daniels speak, they by no means stress a science-only approach.

Alberto proclaims to actually fall far from scientific in his methods. A lot of his basis uses intuition and good old-fashioned work ethic. Any of us may argue that the altitude tents and underwater treadmills are gimmicky, but I wouldn't classify them as scientific means of training.

Daniels, while using heavy scientific underpinnings, also speaks to the value of hard work. I saw him classify runner into four classes, listed here in ascending order of attractiveness to coach/work with: 1) low ability, low motivation 2) high ability, low motivation 3) low ability, high motivation and 4) high ability, high motivation.

Even Joe Vigil has the "triple A" in his coaching philosophy - aptitude, attitude and altitude. As scientific as he is he knows that runners are not robots.

Whether you like it or not, genetics/talent, or whatever you want to call it, has a lot to do with success. Hanson's may be "blue-collar," but they select their athletes very carefully and are not simply taking on low talent distance runners and making miracles with them.

slowtwitch wrote:

[Unless a male runner has near-27:30 speed at 10,000 meters, Salazar doesn't regard his potential as world-class and won't take him on.

Good thing guys like Brian Sell, Clint Verran have an option...

Good thing he didn't wield this rule consistently with Dan Browne either: he had yet to break 28 when Alberto took him on.

The Portland Beaver wrote:

Mate, I promise you'll be more at peace if you can let it go.

Also, anyone that thinks Alberto is more about science than hard work should go and spend a week with his athletes and then make an assessment.

Chad Johnson has run in both programs and says that Hansons work way harder.

Having "near 27:30 speed" is not the same as having a 10k pr under 27:30.

i can run a 66.00 second 400m, that is 27:30 10k speed right? i'll fly out to oregon asap

i know a division 1 coach who doesn't "waste time" with developmental runners. ironically he passed up a female 12:30 high school two miler who would eventually run low 16:10 before graduating at a rival conference university, then eventually a low 2:30ish marathon. what's even more ironic is that his team sucks and has never qualified for nationals under his coaching. it almost makes it easy for every runner he turns down to get the last laugh, in a way, they're better off going somewhere else where someone believes in them.

Old stuff worth reading

I am a HS senior and the team I picked for next year was/is based a lot on the coach who believes in me. He has said it multiple times that he thinks I can do HUGE things and that has a big influence on the athlete. My current HS coach things I can do ANYTHING. He sometimes is unrealistic with it like saying I should pr by 15 seconds and go sub 4 this year but the point is that he BELIEVES in me and that translate into me beleiving in myself. THAT IS A HUGE PART OF COACHING!

PassMeUp wrote:

ironically he passed up a female 12:30 high school two miler...

Not only is that not ironic, but it's not in any way surprising. Just because someone runs fast later doesn't mean a coach made a mistake by turning down a 12:30 two-miler. At some schools, she'd have to PR not to get dropped on the warm-up.

a few years ago, i think it was salazar (if it was someone else please correct me) who said having a bunch of 212 marathoners does nothing towards helping a country being internationally competitive.

So what the hell has Salazar been doing to counter that assessment and put his talk into a walk?

slowtwitch wrote:

Good thing guys like Brian Sell, Clint Verran have an option...

I agree, but are they ever gonna medal?? Not likely. Salazar was trying to produce a medalist or even gold medalists. That ain't gonna happen taking on guys with limited talent who work really hard. Sorry, but it won't. It might produce a 2:10/11 guy like Sell, but will it produce a 2:06 guy or 26:40 guy who can win a gold medal possibly? gotta have tons of talent to even start with to dream of THAT. And THAT was what Salazar was dreaming of producing.

How many entrants in this OT marathon are currently Salazar-coached? Looks like Salazar's best efforts, even with much more funding and resources for bait than the Hansons could ever offer, have had zero impact.

crazy streaker wrote:

I am a HS senior and the team I picked for next year was/is based a lot on the coach who believes in me. ... THAT IS A HUGE PART OF COACHING!

No, that is a huge part of recruiting. There is a difference.

Don't believe everything that a coach whispers in your ear, especially those sub-4 dreams. Far better to help an athlete achieve measurable goals than filling his head with wild unrealities.

And what schools are these where the GIRLS run 6:15 miles to warmup? I doubt there are many guys teams who run that quick.