Tinman says that people with fast twitch fibers must...

There was an epic thread (which I can't find) that had Antonio Cabral and John Hadd discussing this while talking about two types of runners and comparing-contrasting the training of Carlos Lopes and Fernando Mamede.

Have you ever heard the phrase, "play to your strengths"? It's basically that mentality.

You spend phase 2 or 3 giving a runner a recipe for what they need. Spend the last phase of a season giving a runner what they already have.

This is that thread ^^

"People with fast twitch fibers". Well that narrows it down to everyone alive. "People with slow twitch fibers." Once again, everyone has slow twitch fibers as well. Could you be more vague?

Beale St. Blues wrote:

There was an epic thread (which I can't find) that had Antonio Cabral and John Hadd discussing this while talking about two types of runners and comparing-contrasting the training of Carlos Lopes and Fernando Mamede.

Wasn't that a bit of false dichotomy in that surely there cannot be only 2 types of runners?

It is ok and somewhat intresting to discuss training theories but much more difficult to put them into working pratice - who did Cabral or Hadd have coaching success with exactly?

What Tinman says seems about training is pretty solid and he is a fairly good coach going by his results.

A fast twitch runner is someone coming at their event from the speed side. A slow twitch runner comes from the strength side. I'm a fast twitch 5k runner but a slow twitch 800 runner.

Hobby Logger wrote:

Have you ever heard the phrase, "play to your strengths"? It's basically that mentality.

Yes, but surely Tinman isn't that narrow minded? Cuz ya focus on your weaknesses too?

Look at the top marathon guys, they can run a fast 400 before they specialize.

JillyKingBean wrote:

"People with fast twitch fibers". Well that narrows it down to everyone alive. "People with slow twitch fibers." Once again, everyone has slow twitch fibers as well. Could you be more vague?

One of those statements had "more" in it and the other should have as well. Less vague now, Champ?

Yes, some people have more fast twitch, still vague though

Some people have more slow twitch, again still vague

Some people have equal proportions of fast and slow twitch, not vague.

There aren't two types of runners are there?

speed endurance wrote:

Hobby Logger wrote:

Have you ever heard the phrase, "play to your strengths"? It's basically that mentality.

Yes, but surely Tinman isn't that narrow minded? Cuz ya focus on your weaknesses too?

Look at the top marathon guys, they can run a fast 400 before they specialize.

Define what you mean by a fast 400?

I doubt those guys are sub 50.

plague of vague wrote:

Yes, some people have more fast twitch, still vague though

Some people have more slow twitch, again still vague

Some people have equal proportions of fast and slow twitch, not vague.

There aren't two types of runners are there?

Crystal clear on the first two and the third can be added in with medium intensity/medium volume.

So there's three types. Better, Champ?

JillyKingBean wrote:

"People with fast twitch fibers". Well that narrows it down to everyone alive. "People with slow twitch fibers." Once again, everyone has slow twitch fibers as well. Could you be more vague?

Generally people with fibres, or perhaps people without. And maybe we're not just talking about people here.

what??? wrote:

speed endurance wrote:

Yes, but surely Tinman isn't that narrow minded? Cuz ya focus on your weaknesses too?

Look at the top marathon guys, they can run a fast 400 before they specialize.

Define what you mean by a fast 400?

I doubt those guys are sub 50.

They wouldn't do sub 50, I agree. 51-52 for the marathon runners who can kick at the end of a race and slower for some of the others. There will be some who are very fast over marathon distance but somewhat slow over 400.

Lots of different types even in the marathon.

runnah wrote:Wasn't that a bit of false dichotomy in that surely there cannot be only 2 types of runners?

It is ok and somewhat intresting to discuss training theories but much more difficult to put them into working pratice - who did Cabral or Hadd have coaching success with exactly?

What Tinman says seems about training is pretty solid and he is a fairly good coach going by his results.

I say there's a 90% chance this was Tinman posting... (dude had a fragile ego, from what I recall)

Are you suggesting Tinman has a personality disorder?

speed endurance wrote:

what??? wrote:

Define what you mean by a fast 400?

I doubt those guys are sub 50.

They wouldn't do sub 50, I agree. 51-52 for the marathon runners who can kick at the end of a race and slower for some of the others. There will be some who are very fast over marathon distance but somewhat slow over 400.

Lots of different types even in the marathon.

Not at the top. They all fit a narrow range. No room for outliers anymore.

I read somewhere, years ago that the late great Sammy Wanjiru ran 1.48 for 800 when he was 16. I have never been able to find a link though.

What is the slowest 400m time a future major city marathon winner would need early in his career?

JillyKingBean wrote:

"People with fast twitch fibers". Well that narrows it down to everyone alive. "People with slow twitch fibers." Once again, everyone has slow twitch fibers as well. Could you be more vague?

You would be correct. Its the distribution that determines the optimal event for a runner. Only way to find out (other then a coaches observation that one either sucks, or is good at sprinting, middle distance or distance) is a muscle biopsy.