Has there ever sub-par runners in HS that later in life ended up in the olympics?

Daws

What is your definition of a sub-par athelete. GuysSymmonds 1:53 Wheating 3:54Christian smith 1:51Sure don't make my list either.NowFam was a 9:24 guySell was a 4:28 milermight be getting close to the Ok category but if your a 4:28 miler running 25mpw, you have a lot of talent. The reason you didn't run in 4:15 in HS is because your were lazy.Do the top guys in high school make the olympics or become the best internationals? Nope. But most of the guys that were not on the top 25 lists have a story to explain it. See http://espn.go.com/blog/high-school/track-and-xc/post/_/id/4026/high-school-experiences-helped-shape-the-u-s-olympic-mens-track-and-field-team for a break down of the US team.For a fun time count how many 5k/10k guys in the past 30 years never competed at footlocker. It is a very small list.

bcta wrote:

Sell, Fam, Symmonds, Wheating, Christian Smith, the list is endless really

Idontevenknow wrote:

You're looking at this the wrong way. Track is not a sport where you can just train harder than everyone else and become elite. Only the top 1% have the potential to be elite runners. Everyone has an individual limit to what they can achieve as a competitor in this sport and very few of us can ever dream of competing in the olympics.

The idea that elite athletes hit their stride as teenagers is a myth. It's just the way the development system works - there are resources for colleges and high schools, very limited resources, so you have to mature very early as an athlete to have any chance at all. That has nothing to do with your overall potential as an athlete, only your potential to peak at a young enough age to get financial support. Not to mention to find the right sport in only 1 or 2 years.

Who was that British Marathoner... Priscilla Welch, didn't start running until her late 30's, took 6th in the Olympics in 1984 at 39, and won New York at 42.

She told me she was good but not a great highschool runner. 2:09 I think was her best 800.

dsafd wrote:

What is your definition of a sub-par athelete. Guys

Symmonds 1:53

Wheating 3:54

Christian smith 1:51

Sure don't make my list either.

Now

Fam was a 9:24 guy

Sell was a 4:28 miler

might be getting close to the Ok category but if your a 4:28 miler running 25mpw, you have a lot of talent. The reason you didn't run in 4:15 in HS is because your were lazy.

Do the top guys in high school make the olympics or become the best internationals? Nope. But most of the guys that were not on the top 25 lists have a story to explain it. See

http://espn.go.com/blog/high-school/track-and-xc/post/_/id/4026/high-school-experiences-helped-shape-the-u-s-olympic-mens-track-and-field-team

for a break down of the US team.

For a fun time count how many 5k/10k guys in the past 30 years never competed at footlocker. It is a very small list.

bcta wrote:

Sell, Fam, Symmonds, Wheating, Christian Smith, the list is endless really

Its a tough lesson, but the truth is you would know already.

All the guys you see on TV are simply just more talented than you, but also work hard enough to get it done.

Rupp, Lagat, Farah, Bolt, Gay, Blake, Willis...

These guys all work hard, very hard....but they also are just born to be great.

Yes, sell wasn't elite, but he was always good...but keep in mind sell still isn't an elite pro runner.

Move up and start doing ultras. You just have to be able to run 10 minute miles for hours on end to dominate.

The above is true.

When I was in high school I could roll outta bed and jump 33 inch vertical. I just could and I didn't have to work hard. I could run a very fast 200m and 400m without too much work while others worked their tail off and were not close. MY skill was limited though. Even when I worked my tail off I could onyl run pretty good, but not elite elite.

YOu are born with a given amount of potential. Just make the most of it.

Its just easy to tell by your body type. Rupp and Webb could run a very fast 5k or 2 mile in grade school just because. Other guys could run a 10.5 without much training. So peple are just born to be great at runing.

bill rodgers 9:38 2 miler

pat porter 4:29 miler

steve scott never broke 4:20 in the mile

frank shorter not sure of times in high school just know it was nothing special.

many many more.

like minded wrote:

Its a tough lesson, but the truth is you would know already.

All the guys you see on TV are simply just more talented than you, but also work hard enough to get it done.

Rupp, Lagat, Farah, Bolt, Gay, Blake, Willis...

These guys all work hard, very hard....but they also are just born to be great.

Yes, sell wasn't elite, but he was always good...but keep in mind sell still isn't an elite pro runner.

Hard work this, hard work that, that's what makes kids overtrain. Anyone can work hard. Too many runners work WAY too hard.

Especially when you tell them if they've got the talent, it'll show up right away. As if all kids hit physical maturity by the time they're 18.

The reality is, they won't get a scholarship unless it shows up early, and without a scholarship, they'll never get anywhere, talent or not. So pointing at all the runners who got somewhere and saying you had to be good in high school to have talent now is pointless. It's circular logic.

For all you know, there are runners out there who mature at 22, 23, or 25, but they have no league, no coach, no track season, no free doctors, trainers, physical therapists, and no money to train for several years to reach pro level. OP could be one of them. Until there's an expensive development program for 20-somethings to match the university system, you'll never know.

So don't go around insulting people about talent. Kids who grew up early don't know how good they had it.

From what I understand, Brian Sell ever broke 10 minutes for 2 miles in high school. Even though I know I won't ever compete in the Olympics and probably won't compete past highschool, I like to keep that fact in the back of my mind. Provides some hope for us mid-packers trying to break 17.

You're right, not all kids mature at 18. But if you will be an elite athlete, most of the time you know this before 18. You want a runner is doing well before completely matured, then gets better...obviously.

Talent is the key to being an elite runner, without a doubt. Talent first, then a lot of hard work.

Great runners are not made, but born. Yes, you can reach your potential, and more likely than not your potential is way better than you think...but you are born an Olympic caliber athlete, not made in to one with training.

Volume plus time equals champions.

Talent is overrated (but not irrelevant).

Lydiard is God wrote:

Volume plus time equals champions.

Talent is overrated (but not irrelevant).

I just don't think this is right.

Volume did not make bolt, gay, or rupp great. They were born to run fast and volume made them even better.

Talent is not overrated at all...in fact it is underrated. In our weak society today everyone thinks they can do anything they put their mind too. While this may work for parts of life, in athletics it just isn't true.

No matter how hard you try you will not be rupp or bolt. but you can be the best you

I just don't think this is right.

Volume did not make bolt, gay, or rupp great. They were born to run fast and volume made them even better.

Talent is not overrated at all...in fact it is underrated. In our weak society today everyone thinks they can do anything they put their mind too. While this may work for parts of life, in athletics it just isn't true.

No matter how hard you try you will not be rupp or bolt. but you can be the best you[/quote]

But if you don't do the 'volume'-in other words, years of hard work-it doesn't matter how outrageously good you are at something. You will never be a champion. Lydiard did not cherry pick runners from all over NZ. He worked with people of all levels of ability. If Snell had not been made to do the legendary long runs, he would never have won three Olympic gold medals.

Frank Shorter, Bill Rodgers, Lasse Viren

Everybody ran 4:30 in high school(mile)

F. Shorter from Once a runner

Bannister only ran 5 minutes freshman year of college, never mind High School.

Since when is 9:38 in high school sub-par? Or 4:30, for that matter? I haven't seen anyone posted yet who wasn't pretty good for high school.

McMullen

All this talk about 'talent', yet no-one has a clue what it is.

OP, sit down and pencil yourself out a 5 year plan. Consistent progression is THE NAME OF THE GAME.

Performance wise, your next year in high school is not as important as your first year in college, which isn't as important as your last year in college.

Patient perseverance. If you want to be elite, you have to live like an elite. Not just train, but live. Devotion, consistency, patience.

And an unwavering sense of belief in yourself. That doesn't mean you go tell anyone that will listen that you're going to be pro, but it does mean not listening to all these lackluster peons on this board telling you you have no chance. You keep pushing yourself year after year, keep getting in the miles, and understand that it's a long-term process that will require patience, and you might just do it. Good luck.