Wetmore doesn't believe in high mileage for retired athletes like Kara.
Wetmore doesn't believe in high mileage for retired athletes like Kara.
At this point Kara peaked more than five years ago. She seems sweet and is obviously a smart marketer, but I wish real running fans would stop caring as if she's still an elite runner.
NJ Possible wrote:
At this point Kara peaked more than five years ago. She seems sweet and is obviously a smart marketer, but I wish real running fans would stop caring as if she's still an elite runner.
This. Kara & Lauren, along with all of Oiselle, are constantly promoting themselves on twitter/instagram/facebook. Its can be annoying but it's also gotten them more recognition and keeps them relevant.
I've noticed Shalane has started posting more on all social media outlets but I wish more elite athletes would join in. Then maybe Runners World wouldn't only discuss Kara & Lauren constantly. Do we really need another article on Kara? Maybe let us see Molly Huddle, Shannon Rowbury, or Desiree more often.
If Kara had tweeted just that she was running 105 in preparation for a marathon, how many here would have accused her of "low mileage"?
You can't win.
It is certainly lower than Hall and Kastor were running at Mammoth Lakes at altitude.
Come on people. We didn't mean for this to turn into a debate as to whether GOucher still has it. It was meant to be about whether Wetmore believes in high mileage or not, and what that means. 100 certainly isn't low mileage in my book.
As for Goucher, at her age, she likely isn't quite what she once was. It's sad that this fact upsets so many of you fans. In ohter sports, people play for a long time past their absolute peak. Jeter is still drawing huge crowds.
In running, someone has to finish second, fifth, etc. In our view, it's nice to see someone like Goucher up there in the mix.
The sport is a weird one. In the Olympics, if you win a bronze, you often celebrate. In a major marathon, people get upset if they don't win.
it's all relative. i remember reading somewhere when kara and shalane were preparing for boston in 2013 that the volume of mileage they were doing was something absurd along the lines of 140 a week. in badger miles.
if you consider 100 to be high mileage, you probably don't consider 70 to be high mileage. kara has done 140mpw, probably for large blocks, with jerry in the past. 105 in comparison--or even 120 for a small period--isn't huge miles for her.
i'm sure wetmore believes in high mileage; i'm also sure that mark wetmore realizes that kara doesn't need mileage for mileage's sake at this point in her career--especially as she probably does a good portion of her easy runs and a small portion of her workouts with coburn and simpson.
vivalarepublica wrote:
Come on, guys. She is just collecting checks at this point based on her popularity, not competing for the win. Nothing wrong with that, because do it if you can.
She's there for Oiselle and no other reason. If she agrees so much with Wetmore's training right now, then why did she leave him years ago (think Nike and what they can provide).
Money folks, that's all it is. She's not going to do anything great at the NYC marathon. She's simply exposing a clothing line that she's getting paid to and will wear it anywhere and everywhere around that city. The lady who hired who is like a kid pouring out their halloween treats after trick or treat. She wants a return on her investment as Goucher is getting paid.
Go DESI!!!!!!
She should just work at nitro club in boulder
everything above 65 is high mileage.
rojo wrote:
Come on people. We didn't mean for this to turn into a debate as to whether GOucher still has it. It was meant to be about whether Wetmore believes in high mileage or not, and what that means. 100 certainly isn't low mileage in my book.
As for Goucher, at her age, she likely isn't quite what she once was. It's sad that this fact upsets so many of you fans. In ohter sports, people play for a long time past their absolute peak. Jeter is still drawing huge crowds.
In running, someone has to finish second, fifth, etc. In our view, it's nice to see someone like Goucher up there in the mix.
The sport is a weird one. In the Olympics, if you win a bronze, you often celebrate. In a major marathon, people get upset if they don't win.
Well said
yyy wrote:
everything above 65 is high mileage.
Everything under 150mpw is low mileage.
Naoko Takahashi and Muzuki Noguchi used to run 170+mpw before their Olympic titles. American runners are too soft. No wonder they suck at marathon.
rojo wrote:
Come on people. We didn't mean for this to turn into a debate as to whether GOucher still has it. It was meant to be about whether Wetmore believes in high mileage or not, and what that means. 100 certainly isn't low mileage in my book.
For one thing, you don't care what the "debate" here is about as long as people are arguing. I think this affords you a brand of satisfaction that may even qualify as sexual. For another, even you know better than to pretend that you can control how a thread unfolds one you've started it, and that you didn't expect people to talk about whether an aging marathoner who is one of the best distance runners in U.S. history can still bring a good performance.
I think it's encouraging that you recognize that 100 miles a week is not "low." But I'm guessing you've probably figured out for yourself that no one here is going to reliably answer the question of what Mark Wetmore specifically "believes in" when it comes to workload any more than Kara's quotes already answer it.
Wetmore on the whole is indisputably a coaching genius (although he has coached relatively few marathon runners and older athletes). Clearly, he varies his approach from runner to runner, and within individuals, from week to week and from year to year. This ringing any bells?
All anyone can take from the article is that Kara is doing lower mileage now than she did under Schumacher, and that she's training hard. Yet of course you have the losers here that claim she's just in it for the money despite the fact that anyone putting in even 2/3 of the work she's apparently doing would not be mailing it in.
Hey, she likes Shalane and misses her as both a training partner and a person. Why not focus on that quite instead? Too much goodwill for a Letsrun.com thread?
sorry, a typo. I meant 165 and you are off course correct.
Lets talk facts , Wetmore is a great track coach and great collegiate x-country coach. He can peak athletes. Wetmore has no experience as a marathon coach , his post collegiate marathon athletes all went to other coaches. Kara will be a grand experiment , lets hope for success , NYC is a tough course , maybe not your best comeback course. Appearance money is good at NYC if your a favorite of Mary W. Kara has talent , Kara is tough , a sub 2: 30 gets her in the top ten , sub 2:27 gets her a $10k bonus.
John Clendon wrote:
gwalkerruns wrote:Rooting for her but she has been on a downward trend for a long time, not as long as Hall but years. Father time is undefeated.
Lagat 1, Time 0
Lagat has already won too, no matter what happens in the future it's all just icing on the cake
Goucher's older and breaking down frequently, but she'll get a good few races in still when she has a fit of health for a prolonged period one of these years.
Freds statue wrote:
Lets talk facts , Wetmore is a great track coach and great collegiate x-country coach. He can peak athletes. Wetmore has no experience as a marathon coach , his post collegiate marathon athletes all went to other coaches. Kara will be a grand experiment , lets hope for success , NYC is a tough course , maybe not your best comeback course. Appearance money is good at NYC if your a favorite of Mary W. Kara has talent , Kara is tough , a sub 2: 30 gets her in the top ten , sub 2:27 gets her a $10k bonus.
What Wetmore has is experience coaching Kara Goucher. Any coach will tell you that this counts. Kara has plenty of high-level marathon experience. I imagine Wetmore can help her use it.
rojo wrote:
Come on people. We didn't mean for this to turn into a debate as to whether GOucher still has it.
I'm not sure if she still has it, but she can certainly still get it.
The Poultry Strangler wrote:
rojo wrote:Come on people. We didn't mean for this to turn into a debate as to whether GOucher still has it. It was meant to be about whether Wetmore believes in high mileage or not, and what that means. 100 certainly isn't low mileage in my book.
For one thing, you don't care what the "debate" here is about as long as people are arguing. I think this affords you a brand of satisfaction that may even qualify as sexual. For another, even you know better than to pretend that you can control how a thread unfolds one you've started it, and that you didn't expect people to talk about whether an aging marathoner who is one of the best distance runners in U.S. history can still bring a good performance.
I think it's encouraging that you recognize that 100 miles a week is not "low." But I'm guessing you've probably figured out for yourself that no one here is going to reliably answer the question of what Mark Wetmore specifically "believes in" when it comes to workload any more than Kara's quotes already answer it.
Wetmore on the whole is indisputably a coaching genius (although he has coached relatively few marathon runners and older athletes). Clearly, he varies his approach from runner to runner, and within individuals, from week to week and from year to year. This ringing any bells?
All anyone can take from the article is that Kara is doing lower mileage now than she did under Schumacher, and that she's training hard. Yet of course you have the losers here that claim she's just in it for the money despite the fact that anyone putting in even 2/3 of the work she's apparently doing would not be mailing it in.
Hey, she likes Shalane and misses her as both a training partner and a person. Why not focus on that quite instead? Too much goodwill for a Letsrun.com thread?
Why are you so angry? Rojo legitimately tried to redirect the conversation back to her question in the original post. Wetmore is probably the one coach who does NOT flip flop his approach to training elites based on the flavor of the week (low mileage, Lydiard, etc). A consistent approach applied over years is what develops athletes, something you probably didn't follow and thus sucked and quit.
Stay angry letsrun.
Straw M Thoroughman wrote:
Why are you so angry? Rojo legitimately tried to redirect the conversation back to her question in the original post. Wetmore is probably the one coach who does NOT flip flop his approach to training elites based on the flavor of the week (low mileage, Lydiard, etc). A consistent approach applied over years is what develops athletes, something you probably didn't follow and thus sucked and quit.
Stay angry letsrun.
rojo is a she? Please sober up or shut up. Or both.
In his original post, rojo said, "Isn't Wetmore's reputation one of being a Lydiard guy?" This, apparently, was in response to the idea that he's not into "high mileage." But what does "eing a Lydiard guy" even mean? Like there's a formal definition for such a thing any more than there's one for "high mileage"?
If these guys really want to generate a meaningful discussion, they should speak in meaningful terms. This topic amounts to "Wow, Freddie Mercury was married once. We thought he was more of a gay bisexual guy. Discuss. And please no talk about how he died of HIV people!"