Project 30 Results

who wants to read that for me?

Well, it's a start:

“Through benign neglect, USATF has allowed shoe companies and agents to take over management of the sport,” the report states.

From the AP:

A task force reviewing the U.S. track team's failures at the Beijing Olympics has issued a report calling for changes in the relay system, the Olympic trials and the way the sport handles doping cases.

The nine-person panel, headlined by sprint great Carl Lewis, released its 69-page report Monday. The leader of USA Track called for a full review of the federation after the Americans won only seven Olympic gold medals.

Suggestions included shortening Olympic trials to five days instead of eight and a thorough revamping of the relay system after both American 400-meter teams dropped the baton in Olympic qualifying. The panel also said dopers should enter a 'rehab' program as a condition of their reinstatement into the sport.

From USATF:

Based on its findings, the Task Force makes the following 10 Recommendations:

* Hire a professional General Manager of High Performance.

* Create a transparent, criteria-based Team Staff selection system.

* Restructure the composition of Team USA staffs.

* Shorten the U.S. Olympic Team Trials - Track & Field to five days.

* Terminate the National Relay Program.

* Establish a comprehensive 2012 team preparation program.

* Target technical events for medal growth and develop those events.

* Create a well-defined Professional Athlete designation.

* Establish a more stringent anti-doping reinstatement system.

* Promote and foster a self-sustaining professional athletes' union.

Couple things jump out after skimming through the report:

1--Shorten the Olympic Trials. A couple of athletes at the USA cross country championships sitting around the lobby thought the Trials were too long.

2--The men's track & field committee was called out in the report, especially in the area of the relays and the staff selection.

3--The relay program that Brooks Johnson started a few years ago must be terminated. Interesting to see how Brooks fires back at the committee on his blog.

4--From page 36 of the report:

Cutting-edge sport science is available to every event group, but they leverage it to different

degrees. Sprints and hurdles are the most receptive to the application of sport science, while the

distance events are most resistant to it. In one coach's words, American distance runners and

coaches focus almost exclusively on physiology and endurance training, while it is biomechanics

that is the difference between winning a medal and not making a final. Sport scientists confirm

this reticence on the part of most American distance coaches. (It should be noted that two of the

most successful distance coaches in the last three years have been the two coaches most often

cited as applying sports science and biomechanics. At least one of them consults regularly with

sprint coaches to discuss and analyze the biomechanics of his runners.)

Deutsch Mark wrote:

In one coach's words, American distance runners and

coaches focus almost exclusively on physiology and endurance training, while it is biomechanics

that is the difference between winning a medal and not making a final. Sport scientists confirm

this reticence on the part of most American distance coaches. (It should be noted that two of the

most successful distance coaches in the last three years have been the two coaches most often

cited as applying sports science and biomechanics. At least one of them consults regularly with

sprint coaches to discuss and analyze the biomechanics of his runners.)

This clearly has come straight from Ralph Mann on the task force. Ralph has stated MANY times publically that mechanics are what are holding our distance runners back, not physiology. he has stated altitude training is a waste of time, and success in the 10k is based on being able to run 53 for the last 400m.

couple of random observations:

1. report is on front page of NYT online; they didn't publish squat for a meet in their own city. Wankers.

2. not quite sure how "decreasing shoe companies' and agents' influence" might or should work. It's not like USATF has the money to fund developing runners, much less the top-flight runners.

3. what's wrong with athletes going to Europe between the trials and Olympics? if they're sprinters, there are still things they're working on. If they're field events, they often haven't peaked at OT and need sharpening in competition setting. And if distance runners, can be an opportunity to work on specifics (for example running the steeple but focusing on water jump, or going to Europe and working on shifting gears in a non-100% effort 5k in preparation for the importance of reacting in Olympic trials/finals). Plus, people need to make a living while they're still good. Injuries can happen at home training or in Europe.

4. not sure why there's a big "physiology versus biomechanics" debate. And I've read a great deal on both. If you don't have the physiology, you won't be there for the "53s final 400m." If you don't have the biomechanics, sure you can learn it, but no one messed with Geb's funky arm carriage, did they? While the importance of short foot strike times and running economy improvements with biomech drills are noteworthy, it's also important to remakr that it's unclear whether training biomechanics "fixes" anything or simply is another means of getting additional 0.5% (or some amount) extra, at a level when improvements of 0.1s/lap are vital. Most studies of biomechanics are on already trained runners--did they already have supreme abilities, and thus we're looking at correlation, not causation? And most studies of physiology report short-term (not years/decades) of training regimens, or use untrained runners, or focus on a tree and neglect the forest.

5. I think the biggest thing that might come from Logan and project 30 (and reforms in general) will be a BETTER SALESMANSHIP OF THE SPORT. If he/they can pull that off, and deepen the interest from a deep talent pool, kudos to them. More money makes it more viable to pay athletes. More youth interest means more potential once in a generation finds.

6. Anyone who has watched the 4x100m relay for the US in the past decade knows our handoffs are a joke. Didn't need a committee to figure that one out. And for Carl to say he ran every leg is great, but he also ran at a time when the US would give him a 0.5s lead or more in every prelim, and he could run 90% effort and extend said lead. Times have changed.