There are some incredible blowhard know-it-all morans on this site, as seen in some of the replies.
There are some incredible blowhard know-it-all morans on this site, as seen in some of the replies.
Rojo? Seriously? Come on.
I'm so sick of this whole "puberty burns girls out" narrative. It's true that not every high school phenom achieves college and professional success. But you are ALWAYS treating this like it's one sided.
Really????
So MANY boys burn out. so many of them, I would argue that it's equal to the rate that girls do. I won't name names. That's just a mean thing to do, but you know it's true.
sick of your sexism, sir.
Does the American youth system cause disproportionately high burnout rate in high level female distance runners?
The answer to that question is pretty multi faceted, but I will give you some things I have seen as someone who has done PT/rehab for many many teenaged distance runners.
Firstly, girls distance running is seen by many upper income families as a way to help pay for college. The talent pool is far less deep than it is for boys and there are far more scholarships available than there are for boys, so this is mathematically sound logic. Most college coaches recruit girls as to their most recent performances (accounting sometimes for even a steep decline in improvement), which stands in stark contrast to the development-based recruitment of male athletes. Thus, there is an immense pressure to run really fast the spring of your junior year in HS. Everything is then pushed to an absolute maximum training-wise.
I would estimate that nearly half of my female collegiate runner patients come back home from their freshman years injured, and I have witnessed several eating disorders arise within this group.
And of course, these are the lucky ones who did not peak in middle school or their freshman year of high school.
Training to wrote:
The real truth is simple.
Oregon wants he scholarship to use. By declaring he medical they get her scholarship without reducing Murphy and battling her.
No doubt in my mind they pressured her to do this to save money. They likely invested a full in her.
Yeah, Oregon has no money...LOL!
I loved watching Kate run. I remember her blasting Katie Rainsberger on the final lap of the mile (no dis to Katie, a great runner on her own merits), looking like a tethered greyhound set off the leash.
As a runner who experienced injury setbacks throughout my early years, including premature retirement, but eventual renewal, I truly sympathize with all of these young talents, taken down so hard. But of all the recent casualties amongst younger runners, and there have been a few, it is for Kate that I most will be rooting for. May she find a solution that allows her to carry on on her own best terms.
My point all along about her and others is if puberty is such a hard thing to handle, is there any correlation to a high amount of high level training per-puberty and burn out? At the HS level we see it with just the slightly above average kids all the time. It bugs me. I by no means have the answer but for the most part in my coaching have my seniors running better than they were as freshman.
SlipperyPete13 wrote:
The people on this board are good evidence of why someone like Trump can thrive as a politician. Those coming on and saying stuff about how she was overtrained...do you actually know that?
My reading of the situation is that she had an extremely rare issue in her leg that kept her out for two years, she tried to come back but it didn't work and now she has decided to move on. It's devastating, but it sounds like the right move for all parties involved.
Are you CNN-addled?
They are limited in scholarship totals. It doesn’t mean that they don’t have billions of dollars. They just can’t use it.
KM was no skinny anorexic HS runner. She went through puberty in HS and ran fast.
Her injury and surgery were prior to her leaving for college.
She was not over trained in HS.
Think about all of the studs in the past decade:
2008- Chanelle Price, Jordan Hasay
2010- Emily Sisson
2011- Amy Weissenbach, Aisling Cuffe
2012- Ajee Watson, Cayla Hatton
2013- Mary Cain, Wesley Frazier
2014- Alexa Efraimson, Elise Cranny, Bethan Knights
2016- Kate Murphy, Christina Aragon, Katie Rainsberger, Ella Donaghu
2017- Sammy Watson, Brie Oakley
2018- Caitlin Collier, Kaitlyn Tuohy
Too early to tell for the more recent. But the only one out of these yet to anything remarkable on the world stage or display any kind of longevity is Ajee Wilson.
You'll see that being a stud in HS is more of a curse than a blessing.
takealook wrote:
Think about all of the studs in the past decade:
2008- Chanelle Price, Jordan Hasay
2010- Emily Sisson
2011- Amy Weissenbach, Aisling Cuffe
2012- Ajee Watson, Cayla Hatton
2013- Mary Cain, Wesley Frazier
2014- Alexa Efraimson, Elise Cranny, Bethan Knights
2016- Kate Murphy, Christina Aragon, Katie Rainsberger, Ella Donaghu
2017- Sammy Watson, Brie Oakley
2018- Caitlin Collier, Kaitlyn Tuohy
Too early to tell for the more recent. But the only one out of these yet to anything remarkable on the world stage or display any kind of longevity is Ajee Wilson.
Chanelle Price won World Indoors in the 800m and was an NCAA champion
Hasay was 3rd in two different World Marathon Majors (Boston and Chicago)
Thanks for accusing me of making it up that college runners sometimes or more than sometimes race road races and also make efforts not to be noticed. What would be the point of naming D1 runners?
Many of the women you mentioned are still performing at a high level. Yes, a few did not perform well in college, but many of these women have performed, or are performing, at the top of the college ranks. Cranny has a very realistic chance to finish top three at NCAA xc this season. Christina Aragon has performed well in track. Sisson is a pro, along with a few other girls on the list. You're list makes no sense to prove your point.
Agreed. Pull Cain from the list and the remainder has 90% of the group improved since HS. Just because the are not winning world championships does not mean that they haven’t had success.
Here she is anchoring the prep DMR national record ...
notrump wrote:
This happens way too often. The sport needs to step back and weigh the serious health effects of competitive running on girls and young women with an eye to establishing limits on training and the amount of racing they can do in high school and college.
Why? What harm was done? At a minimum, she got a full ride to college.
Her 'failed' running career netted her family about $150k.
aovinewaofien wrote:
Rojo? Seriously? Come on.
I'm so sick of this whole "puberty burns girls out" narrative. It's true that not every high school phenom achieves college and professional success. But you are ALWAYS treating this like it's one sided.
Really????
So MANY boys burn out. so many of them, I would argue that it's equal to the rate that girls do. I won't name names. That's just a mean thing to do, but you know it's true.
sick of your sexism, sir.
It's called biology although apparently in this case it's not what I'm referring to. There are so many 9th grade phenoms that regress. Murphy was great as a senior though.
Tons of blame to go around here- her high school, the Ducks, her parents. The fault is the American system. Everyone wants to "get rich quick". High school team wants her to be national high school champion, parents want the same for a college scholarship, Ducks want her to immediately compete at the national level collegiately. When an injury comes along a runner is expected to push through it until she can't, then it is all over because she can't produce. Ten years from now she will be one of those cautionary tales about WHAT SHE did wrong, not what her parents, high school and college did wrong.
Just to be clear Kate Murphy was not great as a senior, she was great as a junior. Jr. year was her year she ran 4:07 and 9:17 1500/3k. Senior year she struggled (by her standards). She missed all of XC season, ran 4 races indoors, returned at Penn to run a 2:17 leg on a 4x8 and finished the year running a 4:59 mile and a 2nd place effort running an 11:03 3200.
In my opinion Oregon/Powells acted with character by still honoring their scholarship agreement and bringing her in as a Duck. By the time she got to Eugene her health had left her.
takealook wrote:
Think about all of the studs in the past decade:
2008- Chanelle Price, Jordan Hasay
2010- Emily Sisson
2011- Amy Weissenbach, Aisling Cuffe
2012- Ajee Watson, Cayla Hatton
2013- Mary Cain, Wesley Frazier
2014- Alexa Efraimson, Elise Cranny, Bethan Knights
2016- Kate Murphy, Christina Aragon, Katie Rainsberger, Ella Donaghu
2017- Sammy Watson, Brie Oakley
2018- Caitlin Collier, Kaitlyn Tuohy
Too early to tell for the more recent. But the only one out of these yet to anything remarkable on the world stage or display any kind of longevity is Ajee Wilson.
You'll see that being a stud in HS is more of a curse than a blessing.
What makes you think that any more than 1 or 2 should have had long successful international careers? That seems about right from a statistical perspective. As mentioned just about all of them either improved or at least matched their best times. to think that someone who is good in the US should automatically be good on the international level show either bad math or a skewed perception.