Can keep up/in workouts ,but 10sec slower per mile in races? Coach Rubio,Tinman,Daniels others please input.

The workout king complex is often compared to the Napoleonic complex. There will always be a minority who think that they have to win the workouts. Don't race your workouts, they are not about "keeping up," or showing that you're good enough. For most of the people being a workout is the death of potential. There are a few who buck the trend and thrive off of "winning" workouts, our own Hinderloppet (aka Dan Nelson), being the most notable example.

I never wanted to win a workout, I just wanted to get better and I can attest for the runner I coach, this kids make up is not about winning workouts. Why cant we keep up or at least be closer to these other runners in races. More input please.

Keeping up in workouts doesn't neccessarily mean they have that same ability in the race. They may be putting in more effort to keep up, on my team there were people that could keep up in workouts, but I would be very surprised if they were up there in the race. Some people just run better in workouts(intervals with rest) than in races where there is no rest. Try more continuous no rest workouts such as tempo runs or fartleks to better assess your athlete's abilities.

the aerobic/anaerobic ratio as well as the running economy is different for example in a 10x400m workout than in a 1609m race without rest.If you cant keep up in races with the guys you beat in an interval session i guess your endurance is not as good as your lactate tolerance.

A few things to consider... workouts are based upon race pace (ie lactate threshold, max vo2), so why would this person be running intervals at the same pace as those whose race times are much faster? (Unless you are using heart-rate... Either he is racing in workouts while they are achieving the intended objective or they are dogging it in workouts. My guess is the former. It is one thing to be intense in workouts, it is quite another to race them. I would also guess that if he is one who gains a psychological advantage by "winning" workouts, then he may experience a phsychological disadvantage if he struggles to keep up with his teammates or other familiar competitors in actual races. Finally, one big aspect that I really took to heart from RWTB... go into each race like "business as usual", rather than trying to summon something out of the ordinary (getting extra psyched up, whatever that means). Maybe he is getting stressed for a race and then that feeling is increasing if he can't keep up.

My guess is that your teammates were running their intervals at an easier effort than you were. They were fitter. I have an article written by a friend of Steve Ovett. They trained together for many years, daily. The friend was a good runner, about 49 minutes for 10 miles. The friend said that when they ran their weekly 1k reps on a rolling hill grass loop, Steve was running at an effort that was must less and hence not really overworking his body. Sound familiar? Tinman

agree with tinman; might want to check heart rate or something a bit more "objective" than just keeping up in workouts. i know people who would push me in workouts but couldn't stay within 10-15s of me per mile in a race or, perhaps more importantly, over longer, sustained efforts. they were racing their shorter workouts and i wasn't. (maybe that wasn't a good thing on my part but it seemed to have worked out fine.) some people, as at least one poster above alluded to, are better at shorter reps or reps where they can get rest.

je wrote:

As a h.s. senior I was able to keep up with a runner who

went on to win Kinney/Footlocker Natls and another runner from my h.s who placed 17th.I was an all-state x/c runner,but not near there class. In our races I always finished 7-8 seconds per mile slower than them,put me in a 4xmile or 6x800 workout with them and I could keep up or on a feel good day push some of the intervals.

I now coach a 6th grade boy who is an animal in the workouts, but consistently places 10 seconds slower in our mile cross country races behind my number one and two man.Is he, was I, overtraining? What could be other

explanations?

thanks je

The kid is in 6th grade, I wouldn't stress too much yet the kid probably has a few years until his face touches a razor. Not many 6th graders know how to race. Actually not many HS kids know how to race either or college kids or people out of college for that matter. Most think just run as hard as you can until you slow down which those that know how to race will tell you is an ineffective and painful way to compete. Racing is a learned skill for pretty advanced athletes. Really your 6th grader should just train, have fun and learn a bit about running first before going all hogwild on trying to win the 1609 XC champs and realize his potential. Racing performances in the whole realm of things shouldn't take on too much importance for the first 4-6 years of a career. Before that things such as learning how to actually run with good and proper form, developing overall kinestetic sense, developing general body conditioning, actually learning how to run fast and do it efficiently, that's how things should start off. Then in HS most of the emphasis should be placed on learning how to train. Stuff like consistency, warmup/cooldown routines, being exposed to tempo runs and reps and intervals and stretching and hills and running camps and relays and nutrition, hydration, just all the training stuff the newer runners always ask about, well HS kids need to learn it too. It's just a learning curve. So by just showing up to practice and running XC meets (notice I didn't say racing) the athlete learns what they are capable of, they gain some confidence, race a little harder, try some new stuff suggested by their coach and soon they have a lot of experiences to draw from. That and they keep adding fitness which allows them to carry out the race strategy.

Most are not fortunate to be the young phenoms who usually come from a competiitve swim background who show up for their first XC meet, race to the front and win because they are fitter than everyone, plsu they have tons of previous experience actually racing. Most people like me gotta actually learn how to race first, which took me from 1976 until 1979 I actually was able to race with the guys I was working out with.

You and he most likely were focused (as you should have been at the time) on learning the basics of working out. That's what you gotta learn first, so of course you're gonna workout better than you race. In college or maybe as a junior or senior in HS if you have plenty of previous experience, you start focusing on the racing aspects. It's a big mistake to focus on racing without first teaching the kid all the other aspects of the whole competitive runner's experience first, so they can then start focusing on competition as the final learning stage of their careers.

My $.02, let the kid be a kid the next few years and he'll get better just from showing up to practice and the races. Then after all the basics apects of training are almost second nature, then you start incorporating all the fancy racing aspects. It takes an athlete I get a good 2-3 years before they can actually execute a reasonable race strategy and these are people who have run in HS and College for the most part. Most kids haven't a clue because few people ever get beyond the mind set that fitness is the only aspect to racing. There are so many guys who shouldn't win races that do because they have learned how to race it's scary. Probably the reason most of the same guys usually win races.

Just trying to get many people to start a race slower than they think they should and finish strong is one of the hardest things to teach, imagine how long it takes to teach someone all the various strategies out there and have them do it in low ke\y races so they can be effective with a wide variety of races so when they get to nationals and it goes out in 65 for the men's 1500, they have a plan of what to do to succeed. Atkinson and I have this plan of doing a DVD on race strategy cause every year we watch guys at USATF's and shake our collective heads. Maybe It's time to get on it.

Sorry to ramble. Probably didn't even address your question. If not, let me know and I'll dial it in at lunch tomorrow.

Joe

Thanks for the input.I can see by all of your answers it is a difficult questiom to answer.I do agree that these runners ahead of me probably werent puting out as much effort as I was ,as well as Steve Ovetts partner.(see Tinman)However it surprises me that these top notch runners wouldnt try to put out an effort now and then above their lesser talented training partners.When we refer to better fit, are we speaking of being in better shape at the time, or being physicaly more talented?

Another poster put that the rest allowed the lesser runner to hang with the better runners, that the lesser runner couldnt do this in a sustained race situation.

I also agree with Joes input on learning to race aspect. I might ad that as a h.s runner I would just pound a race

because if I left my guts on the dirt and grass I knew I had done my best.It wasnt until college that I learned that I could run smarter, more relaxed and have better results.It just seems to me though that a runner who could keep up with the workout on hard effort days and rested properly on easy days would have less of a gap on race day.

Any more thoughts would be great.

je

p.s as for my 6th grader believe me i let them be 6th graders even though some take this seriously , but I am wondering if it would be advisable to have him stay a few seconds off the pace of our lead guys during workouts.I dont want him overtraining but at the same time I dont want to blow his confidence by trying this.

Joe Rubio hit it right on about most don't know how to race. I was also wrongly taught in high school that you had to stay with the leaders if you wanted to win the race. If they go out too fast and you follow, everybody runs slower than they should. If you run the proper pace and they don't, you gain an advantage that may allow you to stay with or beat them.

Another point that hasn't been brought up is that your teammates may have been doing extra training. Since they would not have been as well rested for the workouts, their times would not be as fast even if they are giving the same effort as you are.

Joe:

For many years I too have said that runners seem to have shook my head in amazement while watching races such as nationals. Runners bolt to the front and burn up their energy too soon. It is ridiculous is some cases, even.

It seems that most runners are foreign to the concept of expending their energy evenly througout the majority of the race and then acclerating at the end. Skilled runners set national and world records by using negative splits in races of 1500m and longer.

What can we do to help the masses get this understanding? Perhaps we need to ground roots the educational process by starting with pre-college coaches. As an example of holding back, I have watched two incredibly successful high school programs use the idea of holding back early with amazing results. Both York High School of Elmhurst, IL and Mead High School of Spokane, WA hold back early then trounce others because of it, in the latter stages of the state meet. Literally, many times I have watched York boys stand at the starting line and count to one-thousand three as the rest of the teams hammer away. Joe Newton has them wait, especially if they are on the left side of the starting line for a full three seconds. They run a longer route around the first turn too.

Pat Tyson of Mead will hold boys in groups of 2-3 and they run together in a very conservative way compared to other contenders, catch others in the middle of the race, then pull away at the end. It is smart racing that assures their success, not luck.

On the collegiate level, I have watched Jack Daniels teams run at the back of the pack for the first 800-1000m, even his runners that won or put all 7 in the top 25 at nationals did that. They ran smart. They held back, didn't blow up, pored it on in the last mile.

What do you think can be done, Joe? Tinman

Tinman,

I think the main thing is coaches need to become aware of strategy and tactics themselves so they can teach their athletes how to race. There are only a few race strategies out there so it isn't that hard to have athletes try most of them, figure out which they like the best and which suits their individual strengths. Once they've done this, the athlete is more competitive in a variety of circumstances and gains greater odds of having successes in races. Just become aware of the various ways to run and then suggest small things here and there for the athlete to try and gain experience. Simple stuff from the time Phiddipides like:

1. Don't pass on the curve.

2. Stay out of a box. If a runner goes directly in front of you IMMEDIATELY get to their outside shoulder. If you get boxed, be patient and wait for the turn, a gap will appear to your outside - look for it and aggressively take your opening.

3. Only lead if you're the badest SOB in the race and there isn't anyone who's even close to you in terms of talent or past performances. If the field is full of athletes of similar capabilities and you try to drop them from the front by leading from the gun, Atkinson's line of truth "if you lead you will loose" will reak havoc on your race.

4. The race starts at 2/3's the race distance. Doesn't matter the race, the last 1/3 of the distance where the real racing begins. Deena used this one pretty well in Athens with running a conservative first 18-20 and a wicked last 10k. When do things heat up in the 5k? About at 2 miles, heck this is what Pre did in '72. Who was leading the women's 1500 Trials with 500 to go and then raced her heart out to make the team? Tollefson. When do the Ethiopians hammer the begeezus out of the 10 throwing in surge upon surge? Starting at about 6k-7k. Now there are exceptions to this as with any rule, but for the people we deal with the race generally goes to the athletes not so much with the fastest last 300, but more likely the 1-3 guys in the field with the strongest last 1/3 race distance.

I just do my best to have athletes run a variety of strategies throughout the year. Sometimes it's go out hard and hang, others it's go out in the back and work your way up. We'll do race simulations like doing an 1500 in spikes with the first 800 at 3k effort, the next 400 at 1500 effort and the last 300 hard, just to get an athlete used to starting conservative and finishing strong. Sometimes it's run a 800 where we want the athlete in last at the bell, then we want them to work the back straight and home straight but run the curb on the turns. For the marathoners we'll do a longer marathon specific simulation with 5 miles moderate, 5 miles at MP, 5 miles at tempo or better.

Some don't want any input and I'll let them run, watch their race and suggest things to try next time out or tell them what they did particularly well. Some people just do not have success starting in the way back and moving up. They get excited by being near the lead and being pulled, so we discover that in a few low key events and make sure not to ask someone who is most successful running in the front pack to start in the back at the bigger meets. Others like to lead, they like to set the pace, are mentally tough enough to drop nearly everyone in the field and can successfully execute that strategy. We'll have them try other tactics but know deep down we've got to get that kid so fit they can execute the plan you know they'll run. Others like to sit way back and hunt people down, so we want to work our workouts in that fashion particularly at the end of the season. I suggest that athletees try all of these in races so if they get placed in any of these positions at a big event, they can get the job done. Whatever strategy is, it's a mistake in my opinion to try a new race strategy in the biggest meet of the year. Why try something completely foreign at the biggest event for the year?

Coaches should learn the tactics themselves first, then we need to teach them to athletes, have them succeed or fail in lower key events so the athlete has a plan A, B and C they are certain will lead to their greatest chances of success no matter how the race develops or where they are within that race at any point. We're the teachers in this situation, they are the students. You can't expect a kid to race well if you don't talk about it beforehand, provide feedback after a race (video works great here) and then tinker with it.

Still, some athletes just aren't good at tactics. They just don't get it and probably never will. There are also the ones who understand exactly what to do but are not yet fit enough or don't have the talent to execute. Then there's the kid who understand the logic of what you're telling them and will agree it makes all the sense in the world, they just refuse to run in a fashion other than go out hard and die, they just will not at least TRY an alternate plan which is very frustrating to say the least. All you can do is suggest ways to improve as an athlete. It's ultimately up to the athlete whether they want to listen and actively make changes or not.

Final story on talking tactics . I have a female 1500 runner. At the Stanford invite last year she was in the invitational women's 1500. She was fit, just kind of rusty. I gave her a plan of being with the leaders with 600 to go. I suggested starting the first lap mid pack, stay out of trouble on the outside and the start moving up gradually after the first lap with the goal to get in position over the course of the next lap and be with the leaders with 600 to go. Race starts she runs just as planned and ends up with Teter at 600 to go, right on her outside shoulder. Then an amazing thing happened. My athlete lost an inch, then a few more, then a few feet, then a few yards to Nicole over the next 300 m. My athlete looked like she was not really dying, she just was going through the motions. The last 300 my athlete took off and had about the fastest finish in the field. She finished 3 seconds back of the winners in 3rd. A PR for my athlete, but the kind of race where you think "man, she could have been in the running for the win if that 3 second gap didn't happen from 600 to 300." I showed her the video of the event a few times the following weekend and I asked her what she thought. She too thought that she could actually run with just about anyone in the country with a bit more experience. She said she just didn't know exactly what to do from 600 to 300 to go and the fact she was running with some of the best runners in the country made her think about what she was doing instead of concentrating on winning the race. She knew she was supposed to kick at 300 so she was waiting for that and when she got there she finished like she knew how. When talking tactics before the race I never explained that come hell or high water she needed to stick to Teter like glue from the 600 on and then let her emotions carry her home after the bell. I assumed she knew what to do the last 600, she didn't. Big mistake on my part not giving her a specific plan for the entire race distance. Kinda makes me laugh whenever I think about it, I knew exactly what I wanted her to do, I just never let her in on the little secret.

You just can't assume the athlete knows what to do.

Joe

Have his iron/ferritin levels checked. My junior year of college, I could hang with the team in workouts, but in races I was toast. Turned out to be extremely low iron.