Wetmore Haters: What do you say to the nice old man (voice of stern parent scolding ignorant, stupid child)?

First off, I agree with a poster that earlier mentioned that Wetmore's guys SEEM to get injured because they run their easy days too hard. This is not an order from Mark.

Second, Colorado has no more injuries than a Stanford (Sage, Robison pretty recently) or a Michigan (Willis, Brannan recently), or a Wisconsin (Spiker, Teg, etc recently). This is just our sport people. Everyone... me, you, your buddy... we all get hurt. Some of us get hurt off of 40 mile weeks trying to better a 17:00 5k to a 16:30 5k! Now can you imagine if you're a 13:50 guy trying to break through to 13:30 and beyond? And you're running 90-110 mile weeks, going to school, and racing? Its just part of our sport, and Wetmore's teams and individuals amazingly seem pretty healthy come NCAA's the last 4 or so years with 4 team Champs (men and women), 2 individual champs (Torres and Ritz) and 2 more in the top 5. That is amazing and shows the HEALTH of his team if anything else.

Now lastly... let's pretend that Wetmore does push his guys too hard. Lets just assume that. What would you rather have... a Bekele or a Geb, Tergat or a Komen... 4 of maybe 1000s of talented athletes that "survived", or 100 guys who run 13:20 all day long? It obviously depends on what you aim to achieve. A guy like a Goucher or a Ritz they're not trying to run 13:20... they're trying to run 12:45 and 26:45. They can't do that training conservatively. They just simply can't. Wetmore needs every talented guy in this country post collegiately. He needs to take Broe, Ritz, Torres, Riley, Goucher, Rupp, Sanchez, Lane, Gonzalez, Asmeron, etc and train them the way he trained Gouch when he ran 13:11. Fine, maybe 2 survive and run 12:50 and we "lose" a lot of talent by breaking all the others... but isn't that better than the alternative- training a bunch of really talented guys more conservatively, to run about 13:20, and never even give them the chance to maximize their potential?

I know for me, if I felt like I had the natural ability to run 12:50, I would rather risk breaking myself to run that, and risk having lots of people telling me my coach sucks if I broke, than have that same coach train me more conservatively to be a good national class runner.

Regardless, someone like Gouch was hurt from doubling at the 4k and 12k in the snow when he shouldn't have... and because he hurt his back working in his yard. Neither of those 2 major set backs was because of Wetmore running him too hard. Ritz has had stress fractures because of his growth spurts or something is obviously wrong biomechanically, or he isn't responding to altitude or he is running his easy days too hard. Again, those aren't things Wetmore can control.

Happy Thanksgiving

Michael

I think you can measure the best coach on how many Olympians they have. Ron Warhurst had 3 guys running healthy in Athens. Wetmore had one guy running wounded who dnf'd. Ron had a guy in 2000, in 92, and 84. He has coached the last American distance runner to medal at the Olympics. John McDonnel from Arkansas has much better record at NCAAs than Wetmore, as does Vin Lanana, and even Martin Smith when he coached Wisconsin in the 80s and through the late 90s. Wetmore is not the best coach out there.

muk wrote:

I would not call this a healthy environment for young athletes.

Running at a high level is not a healthy environment to begin with. No one runs at a high level without injuries.

The ironic part of what you said is that guys like Bekele and Geb don't hammer all day. They take it easy most of the time. Kind of like Frank Shorter.

Wetmore haters are basically Runner's World wimps who believe it is better to have a generation of happy mediocre runners than risk injury for the chance to be great. What a bunch of wusses! Nothing great comes without risk you couch dwelling, Internet "champion" wannabes. Grow a set!

Go Buffs! Job well done.

Ahh... trackhead... let me rephrase: Hammering as defined by the Letsrun Crew. I don't necessarily mean hammering as in running 5:00 pace all day ever day for 120 miles a week. Most people on here think that because Wetmore advocates 80-100 mile weeks in singles, he "hammers" his runners. I disagree. That is the very minimum at what you need to compete. After that 80-100 in singles, you need 6 days a week of doubles. On top of that, you need to build to 3 days a week of quality and speed development. To the majority of Letsrun posters, this is considered "hammering" athletes and "breaking" athletes. I call that pushing the envelope in terms of volume.

If you read all of what I wrote, I mentioned that imho, Wetmore should not be blamed for injuries among his athletes and that they are a consequence of them running workouts and training runs too hard. Implicitly, therefore, I am saying that Wetmore, in my own definition, does not hammer his runners. In Letsrun lingo, however, it means he does.

I think he trains his athletes hard. He does push them in terms of volume. Anyone over 80 miles a week pushes volume... that can not be denied. However, how that volume is run is where some of his ambitious guys get into trouble.

There is a difference between:

*pushing the limits in training and getting injured while pursiung greatness

vs

*having all of your guys injured or burned-out heading into the olympic trials, the second most important race of the last four years behind the olympics

Conto wrote:

However, how that volume is run is where some of his ambitious guys get into trouble.

very very true...

but on slight note of disagreement, I think you should always have runs of 60min or less for active recovery.

Californian wrote:

He has coached the last American distance runner to medal at the Olympics.

Warhurst didn't coach Meb.

Sorry, I meant to say before Meb's sliver this year. Should have clarified.

News flash body, wetmore is a COLLEGE coach..the Olympics are not his concern. As far as a i know of the only athlete hes coached outside of college was gouch, was he won the 4k the 12k and ran 13:11, not to damn bad. In fact i wouldnt say gouch has done much better sence he left wetmore

Every f*king program in the nation has injurys, and anyone whos actaully run distance at a decent level in college knows injuries are just part of running(more so for some them others).

i bet your were one of those guys in the back of the pack of your team, who told everyone else wht they were doing wrong.

lol....so you dont agree with wetmores training program(like you actaully know jacksh!t about it). We'll im betting Wetmore(the only practiceing NCAA coach that has ind. men and women championships, and men and women team champ.) probably isnt going to lose a whole hell of alot of sleep over it.

Guess what? Ron Warhurst is a college coach too, and he is able to train some elite runners as well. Wetmore loses some of his guys after college because they want to train with anohter coach. And anyways, who ever said you can't have a guy make the olympics while still in college? Nick Willis did it. Brain Diemer did it. Allistar Cragg did it his senior year. Shalane Flanagan did it her senior year. Kim Smith did it.

Well said. Thank you.

Thats pretty funny...

I think wetmore is happy in the NCAAs, and why not. whats the big deal about the olympics anyway. The very very best americans ,are going to lose in Cross the 1500 the 5000 and the 10000. Not just lose,,they are going to lose to like 17 and 18 year olds. Im sure wetmore is aware of this, but still has a strong disire(like many of the BEST NCAA coaches) to coach american talent. AND wetmore has dont very well in this regard.

as far as the theroy that he does this just off of talent, wis. was far more talented that CU, but on that day(when it counted) CU was better. AND i am certain that the best coachs in the NCAA has great deal of respect for Wetmore.

"I think wetmore is happy in the NCAAs, and why not. whats the big deal about the olympics anyway. The very very best americans ,are going to lose in Cross the 1500 the 5000 and the 10000. Not just lose,,they are going to lose to like 17 and 18 year olds."

I think most people would agree the olympics are more prestigious and more important than NCAA Cross Country. Just because we "lose" at the olympics and can win in the NCAAs, doesn't make the NCAAs more important.

Also, I wouldn't say that many of the best NCAA coaches have a strong desire to coach only American talent. John McDonnell is the most successful college coach at cross country in the last 20 years, and he works with both foreign kids and American kids. Providence, Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Arizona, Butler, and, Iona all have been top 5 NCAA finishers in the past decade with considerable use of foreign runners.

"AND i am certain that the best coachs in the NCAA has great deal of respect for Wetmore."

So, let me ask you, did you go talk to all of them and find out their opinions of Wetmore?

LOLOLOL Yeah well im just assumeing that they arent egotistical enough, to just blow off a program that just came from a fourth ranking and beat a VERY VERY HEAVILY favored WIS. LOL But who knows...look i dont think you know jack about Wetmore's or anybody elses program for that matter.

Californian wrote:

So, let me ask you, did you go talk to all of them and find out their opinions of Wetmore?

"Yeah well im just assumeing that they arent egotistical enough, to just blow off a program that just came from a fourth ranking and beat a VERY VERY HEAVILY favored WIS."

Since you are so fond of bringing up their better than expected success this year, maybe you should also mention how Colorado finished worse than its ranking four out the past five years at NCAAs before this season.

"look i dont think you know jack about Wetmore's or anybody elses program for that matter."

Funny you should say that, as I ran for a top 5 team and was recruited by most of the top schools and got to talk in depth with each coach about the training methods.

My intention in starting this thread was to, much like Red Sox fans did towards there dethroned Yankee brethren, rib good-naturedly the nay-sayers who had been all over Wetmore for years.

If you, Mr. Californian, read further into it than that, that is your literary deficiency, not a problem with the content of my post.

Further, clairvoyancy is indeed an apt summation of your attempt at insult by guessing (incorrectly) about my education level.

It is a mark of idiocy to be unshakable about total stupidities that have no basis in fact. I am well aware of the injuries in Wetmore's camp. If you did any reading of articles about Ritzenhein and Goucher over the years, you will note that the last person in the world who deserves fault is Wetmore.

The blame lies upon his athletes. Reference Goucher's 22 mile run in Running with the Buffaloes. It was way outside Wetmore's recommendation in terms of pace. Same with the guys hammering there easy days.

Ditto with Ritzenhein's impatience. Do you think Wetmore assigned him stress fracture volumes after he already broke both femurs? I do not think even many posters on this board would be so stupid. It was really Ritzenhein's impatience, which both of them conceded was present, that led to him pushing too hard.

All of those guys always have the option of actually RECOVERING on an easy run. Wetmore only wants them doing the HARD workouts hard. If they go out and hammer away at altitude and wonder as they tearfully exit the semifinal of the Olympic Trials why they never qualified, the answer lies with them.

We all know that Goucher has suffered enormously from a host of depression-related ailments as well as a sports hernia that completely crippled his training since 2001. That's not Wetmore's fault, nor is most of the other stuff he is blamed for. Therefore, my intent was to dispel that myth and give credit where credit is due. It IS his doing that the Buffaloes improved off his training program, so he deserves praise for that and not slander by the bitter wannabes that sometimes infest the board.

As for your request that I provide evidence of your attacking me, I think the following will suffice:

"Now perhaps you can you go run along, graduate from high school and learn how to argue something of substance without calling people morons."

Best get your facts straight, next time, dear poster.

"My intention in starting this thread was to, much like Red Sox fans did towards there dethroned Yankee brethren, rib good-naturedly the nay-sayers who had been all over Wetmore for years."

So, let me ask you, do you consider the following statement to be good-natured?: "do chime in and tell how much you've learned and admit to being a complete and utter moron, because you were." Thats what you said initially. Doesn't sound very good natured to me.

"Further, clairvoyancy is indeed an apt summation of your attempt at insult by guessing (incorrectly) about my education level. "

Actually, I wasn't guessing; i was hypothesizing, given your immature tone and bad natured statement, that you probably weren't out of highschool. I suppose its possible that you could be a really immature college student or adult.

"It is a mark of idiocy to be unshakable about total stupidities that have no basis in fact. I am well aware of the injuries in Wetmore's camp. If you did any reading of articles about Ritzenhein and Goucher over the years, you will note that the last person in the world who deserves fault is Wetmore."

I personally know people who have run on the Colorado team, so I know a little bit about what goes on there. It is a coach's job to temper the enthusiasm of his motivated runners and keep them from overdoing their training. If he has no authority with respect to what his runners do on their easy days when he is not physically watching them run, then he is poor leader and a poor coach.