Will one of you nostalgics please share with us the "right" training method? And don't tell me it involves running to school uphill in the snow both ways. I've already heard that one from the old man.
Will one of you nostalgics please share with us the "right" training method? And don't tell me it involves running to school uphill in the snow both ways. I've already heard that one from the old man.
outsiderunner wrote:
Sir runsalot wrote:Rodgers, Beardsley, Salazar. etc were running 2:08-2:09 at Boston nearly 40 years ago with a noon start. It took a race with gale force tailwinds for an American to go under those times. Don't tell me today's US marathoners are training right. Get out of the pool, alter-g and run more like we did.
I know. I hear you.
I think we may have lost sight of the fact that the training needs of someone in his 20s-20s looking to go sub 2:10 is different than someone who is approaching 50 looking to break 3:00...who has an overuse injury...and has tried pushing the pace on all his runs for at least 2 years with no improvement in race times.
The reason only 3 Americans finished in the top 15 last year at Boston is because it was 2 months after the US Olympic marathon trials. Elite Americans were NOT focusing on Boston 2016, especially with the Olympics right around the corner. For a better comparison, 15 Americans finished under 2:25 in 2015 and another 7 ran in the range of 2:25:xx, 4 Americans finished under 2:25 in 1971 (the best 2:22:45).
Anyway, I don't even really want to get into the argument of the definition of "American runner" because you mention Ryan Hall but apparently don't consider Meb Keflezghi an American?
We'll also ignore the fact that Rupp's recent 2:10:05 was in Rio heat and humidity. That Hall didn't just "go under those times" with gale force tailwinds...he did it by 5 mintues, and he's run 2:06 elsewhere...and he's run 5 marathons faster than Salazaar's best (which was on an NYC course that was 150 yards short), and 6 marathons faster than Rodgers (who only bested 2:10 by 33 seconds so he was not going "2:08-2:09" regularly, and all his sub 2:10 time are questionable wind years at Boston too). This list is from 2011, so it's a little bit out of date...since then we'd need to add Ritz's 2:07 in Chicago, Meb's 2:08 in winning Boston, Meb's 2:09 in Houston, Hall's 2:09 in Houston, Ritz's 2:09 in Chicago, Abdi's 2:09 in Houston, Ritz's 2:09 in Houston, then you'll note the first 80s or earlier runner doesn't show up till 12th, and only 12 of the top 43 American performances pre-date 1989.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4305942There is not something amiss. Nostalgia makes people think things used to be better than they were.
https://youtu.be/NP0mQeLWCCoAngryjohnny wrote:
Will one of you nostalgics please share with us the "right" training method? .
12 of top 25 American marathon runners come from a 5 year period: 1979-1983.
Yeah. We were doing something right.
I see your points about American runners, David S.P., but in regard to my racing, it is not as if I have had no improvement, as you say, in my last two years. That is false. In the last two years, I have PRed in the 5k on more than one occasion, running 18:57, 18:57, and 18:40 (last July). I have also PRed in the 10k (in August of 2015). Likewise, I have had numerous solid training runs. You forget that everything must go well in order for someone to do something outstanding in a race--everything...whether it is a guy like me, a sub-elite like Smoove, or an elite like the guys you mention above.
Ran eight miles today, and my IT band is improving. That put a smile on my face. Thank heaven.
ole man wrote:
12 of top 25 American marathon runners come from a 5 year period: 1979-1983.
Yeah. We were doing something right.
Interesting fact, ole man...
Angryjohnny wrote:
Will one of you nostalgics please share with us the "right" training method? And don't tell me it involves running to school uphill in the snow both ways. I've already heard that one from the old man.
I'll break it down for you real simple, sport.
These days runners are told too much to don't work too hard or you'll get hurt. "If you can't make it to the starting line then you can't run." That's great if you want a lot of mediocre performances. Most runners underperform compared to their ability.
When I trained we were told to run hard, run long, run hurt and most of all - just run (and then run some more). Sure people got hurt and some people couldn't hack it and quit the sport. But by God the ones did make it through came through with some exceptional performances.
So sure, we have more mediocre elite runners these days, but there were a lot more exceptional runners in my day.
Got it now, son?
I hear you. I have to say that I love training hard. It puts a smile on my face. I feel as if I have accomplished something. In fact, a sub-3:00 in the marathon would be great, but running a 19:14 5k on a bum leg puts a smile on my face, too. I do things like that because I love to run.
I get where you are coming from, Jim E.
ole man wrote:
12 of top 25 American marathon runners come from a 5 year period: 1979-1983.
Yeah. We were doing something right.
Four different Americans have run as fast or faster than the fastest guy from 1979-1983...since 2012.
Maybe you had an arguement in the 90s, but those days are over.
Thanks Dad! That's really helpful! I can't believe I never thought of running harder and longer! I guess kids these days are just a bunch of wusses.
In all seriousness, if someone wants to provide details of this better training method from yesteryear I would love to hear it.
Angryjohnny wrote:
Thanks Dad! That's really helpful! I can't believe I never thought of running harder and longer! I guess kids these days are just a bunch of wusses.
In all seriousness, if someone wants to provide details of this better training method from yesteryear I would love to hear it.
I would love to hear it, too. It would be interesting to see some specifics on what those great runners did back then.
Many training logs are available online.
David S. Pumpkins wrote:
ole man wrote:12 of top 25 American marathon runners come from a 5 year period: 1979-1983.
Yeah. We were doing something right.
Four different Americans have run as fast or faster than the fastest guy from 1979-1983...since 2012.
Maybe you had an arguement in the 90s, but those days are over.
1980 US Trials had 56 sub 2:20s. Let that sink in for a minute.
ole man wrote:
David S. Pumpkins wrote:Four different Americans have run as fast or faster than the fastest guy from 1979-1983...since 2012.
Maybe you had an arguement in the 90s, but those days are over.
1980 US Trials had 56 sub 2:20s. Let that sink in for a minute.
That was a swing for the fences.
ole man wrote:
David S. Pumpkins wrote:Four different Americans have run as fast or faster than the fastest guy from 1979-1983...since 2012.
Maybe you had an arguement in the 90s, but those days are over.
1980 US Trials had 56 sub 2:20s. Let that sink in for a minute.
And the 2012 US Trials had 50 sub 2:20s. So...
Also...the greats of the 80s are the coaches of today. Salazar, Pfitzinger, etc. You're telling me they discovered the secrets of hard work in the 80s but now choose to write books and coach athletes to be wusses? Nonsense.
I repeat. The 80's were not better than now, they are tinged in nostalgia.
I don't get it because there are 4 guys since 2012 that have run as fast or faster than the most exceptional runner of the 1980s. So why aren't they exceptional now, pops?
My question is this: where were all of the Africans back then? Since I graduated college (1994), all but three of the top marathoners of each year were African (I am including Khannouchi as African for this purpose since he originally shows up on the list as a Moroccan and later shows up as an American).
But in the period between WWII (1945) and through 1993, only three Africans show up on the list of each year's top performers (and 2 of those 3 were the same guy).
My guess is that there just wasn't as much money in the sport for the top performers back then, so the Africans were not in the game the way they are now. In short, it was a relatively watered down sport back then (like before MLB was integrated).
I suspect others may have other opinions on this.
Where were two of these guys born?
Those precious 3 or 4 seconds a mile are wasted away doing all sorts of "strengthening" and "stretching" that impedes the recovery to run more.
Prnser wrote:
David S. Pumpkins wrote:I don't get it because there are 4 guys since 2012 that have run as fast or faster than the most exceptional runner of the 1980s. So why aren't they exceptional now, pops?
Where were two of these guys born?
This man is an American.
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1763650.1398099037!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/boston-marathon.jpg
And anyways, your point would then be that there are still 2 guys faster than that "exceptional talent" in the last 5 years? I'm right either way. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these