Get the inside scoop on Drew Hunter's training - LetsRun's feature on Tom "Tinman" Schwartz

There is sooo much out there on this - it'd be like shooting fish in a barrel.Here's one study that shows evidence of Type II converting to Type I with marathon training (if you can even call it that). Note that the percentage of Type IIa actually increased. http://jap.physiology.org/content/jap/101/3/721.full.pdfRelevant image:http://d13geadg2uyg93.cloudfront.net/content/jap/101/3/721/F1.large.jpgThat being said - I really enjoyed that writeup on Tinman. I've always been a huge fan of his posts.

Melibe wrote:

The stuff about critical velocity is interesting, although I would like to see some peer-reviewed articles that actually demonstrate that running at certain speeds can change type IIb fibers to type IIa ones. However, the linchpin of the success of this program seems to be the emphasize on recovery rather than the minutiae of the workouts; Hunter is able to recover quickly, and thereby is able to take less time off and get in more quality running over the course of a season.

Excited wrote:

So, the guy encourages running easy days easy, changes the name of 10K pace to "CV", encourages lots of strides, and discourages too much many fast interval workouts.

I've never heard anything like this! He is a revolutionary!

LOL, yes. As the saying goes 'there is nothing new under the sun'.

Lydiard's 3/4 effort, marathon pace, or steady-state runs in McMillan terminology, are all run slower than true threshold (tempo) runs, and provide excellent benefit in raising the lactate threshold from below.

Daniel's cruise intervals at 10k pace are an excellent addition to this strategy, further enhancing stamina, and paving the way for more impressive 5 and 3k pace work.

Learn to sprint properly as well (strides, whatever), and you are set up to maximise your potential at a range of distances.

Excited wrote:

So, the guy encourages running easy days easy, changes the name of 10K pace to "CV", encourages lots of strides, and discourages too much many fast interval workouts.

I've never heard anything like this! He is a revolutionary!

Right, yet most people will still screw it up and overcomplicate it.

I think Tinman is a very good coach. But the claim that Hunter is a normal/good/unexceptional talent, and the associated idea that all of his success is due to his great coach, and supportive family, and complete buy-in to the program... I don't buy it at all. Hunter is clearly very, very talented, more talented than almost any other US HS runner. And, yes, he is well-coached too, and everything else. But ff every FL finalist was somehow hypothetically world-class coached too, then (I think) Drew still wins the race, maybe not by twelve seconds, but don't pretend he would be fifteenth. If they all really believe that, fine, maybe it's good psychological ammunition, but certainly not right. So, certainly a great coach, but don't pretend that stumbling upon a sub4 HS miler was inevitable.

luv2run wrote:

First, I really enjoyed the piece on Tinman. Great insight.

I have an issue with this paragraph though.

Copied from the piece:

Schwartz’s key postulation centers around Type IIa fibers. Type IIa fibers produce energy and sustained power — say the kind a runner would need during the final 400 meters of a mile — but because they rely on oxygen, not glucose, to produce energy,

Yes that paragraph is not correct.

Blah Diddy Blah wrote:

This is so lame. Tinman changed the name of lactate threshold work to "Critical velocity" work and spouted a bunch of scientific muscle fiber terms and acts like he invented the next big thing.

Drew Hunter is coached by his parents, who want to stay out of the limelight.

Excited wrote:

So, the guy encourages running easy days easy, changes the name of 10K pace to "CV", encourages lots of strides, and discourages too much many fast interval workouts.

I've never heard anything like this! He is a revolutionary!

Apparently at least non-obvious to the 99% of HS and college programs who dont adhere to that basic recipe.

I asked Tinman his definition of CV and he said it was the pace an athlete can run for 30 minutes at full effort. You can also see his suggested workout pace schedule for difference distances on his web site http://www.runningprs.com/calculator.html

I was coached by tinman a few years ago, and I had good success. It was a positive experience. Here is why I think his system works:

1) by slowing down easy mileage, you can run more mileage without injury, illness, etc. and most importantly absorb your workload. Most people do not have the patience to do this unless they are told to by an experienced coach.

2) there is nothing magical about 90% vo2max vs. 87% or 93% vo2max, but the consistent non-overburdening high end aerobic work of the weekly CV workout developed endurance in a wide range of runners that is the backbone of races from 800m up. 90% is around the sweet spot of the effort/volume trade off that one can run consistently, week after week.

Happy that tinman has an ultra talented runner to show that his approach works.

I was coached by Tinman for a couple years directly out of college. A few things:

1) Tom is a humble person and has never tried to take credit for "inventing" anything new with respect to training. His system builds upon what other (successful) coaches and athletes have already done, and Tom will be be the first one to tell you that. He is a true student of the sport.

2) CV pace is slightly different from LT pace. My workouts were often based off my current 5k fitness; as a general rule of thumb LT was 5k + 25s per mile and CV was 5k + 20s per mile. A typical LT workout might be 5-6 x 1600m w/200m jog rest and a CV workout might be 7-10 x km w/200m jog rest, depending on mileage and fitness.

3) Tom is not always the best with words. He says that Hunter is not especially talented, then goes on to say that there are probably 15 boys in the country with the same talent level. Obviously, being in the top 15 puts you in exclusive company. I think Tom's point is that while Hunter is very talented, he's not some once-in-a-generation superhero.

4) What makes Tinman standout is not what he tells you to run (paces, mpw) but how to run it. The story where Hunter goes to running camp is a perfect example of this. Almost any other kid in his situation would have hammered that second run, but Tinman is so adamant about consistency and each run having a specific purpose that Hunter didn't. That's Tinman training in a nutshell.

Jsjshdh wrote:

I was coached by tinman a few years ago, and I had good success. It was a positive experience. Here is why I think his system works:

1) by slowing down easy mileage, you can run more mileage without injury, illness, etc. and most importantly absorb your workload. Most people do not have the patience to do this unless they are told to by an experienced coach.

2) there is nothing magical about 90% vo2max vs. 87% or 93% vo2max, but the consistent non-overburdening high end aerobic work of the weekly CV workout developed endurance in a wide range of runners that is the backbone of races from 800m up. 90% is around the sweet spot of the effort/volume trade off that one can run consistently, week after week.

Happy that tinman has an ultra talented runner to show that his approach works.

So his approach worked with one athlete in 20 years. How many sub 4 milers have there been in the past twenty years, and what method did they use?

I don't think that Vigil's athletes have trained this way. B Mart and Estrada hit some hard paces.

When Hunter hits a hour flat for a half marathon, we'll look at his training.

Blah Diddy Blah wrote:

This is so lame...

Jesus effing Christ you people are bitter. The point is not that he's invented something new, he's mindful of intensity and it's strategic role in becoming faster at a young age.

Meanwhile, coaches are running the other dozen kids actually able to run Hunter's pace into the ground on endlessly intense workouts. When they show up for competition, "the tank" is running on empty.

Yes, for sure, the Hunter kid is genetically gifted.

I totally agree there are a dozen other kids who could do Hunter's times on lighter, more strategic schedules like tinman's. Meanwhile, coaches show administrators they are doing their job running kids way beyond necessary (debatable) max intensity.

My God, the guy is coaching the #1 HS runner in the country and is sharing his training philosophy, and a dozen LRC malcontents need to spout off about his lack of originality. Please try to be constructive.

The Dirty Duck wrote:

My God, the guy is coaching the #1 HS runner in the country and is sharing his training philosophy, and a dozen LRC malcontents need to spout off about his lack of originality. Please try to be constructive.

Is he really coaching the kid, or are the parents?

fred wrote:

So his approach worked with one athlete in 20 years. How many sub 4 milers have there been in the past twenty years, and what method did they use?

I don't think that Vigil's athletes have trained this way. B Mart and Estrada hit some hard paces.

When Hunter hits a hour flat for a half marathon, we'll look at his training.

Tinman has his athletes do hard intervals, however they are not the main focus and are done sparingly. All paces on the training spectrum are worked on, but the most focus is on the CV/LT range.

Yes, Tom has not personally coached many elite athletes, but he also doesn't typically get the most talented athletes to begin with. My PRs were north of 4:10/4:30, 15:00, and 31:00 coming out of college and I was one of Tom's better runners at the time. I was able to run a low 67 half after a year of training with him.

If you calculate Hunter's CV pace as 90% of his likely 5000m pace (13:38-40 seems reasonable, very close to Rupp's best in hs), you get 3:00-3:02, which is his cv pace. If you take 90% of his 3000m pr (just under 2:40/km), you get roughly 2:57.5, a bit faster than his actual CV pace. I don't think that he can be basing this (in contrast to what he says) on his 10k pace, since the last two hs records for 10k are chapa's 28:32 and rupp's 28:15 (or is this the jr record?), and Hunter's surely not that far back from them to 30:00). Conclusion seems to be that he calculated his cv pace based on his estimated track 5000m time.

Find a gifted athlete and you can make up any dumb idea and claim it is "the reason" the athlete is great.

I don't think he ever claimed to have invented CV - at the very least, my D3 program was largely based on CV pace mile repeats starting around 2007. I want to say that was based on an article by an Indiana coach, but might be off.

Nah, that started in 05 or so, and it has the same source as Hunter...