Talent? When did you realize you had/didn't have it?

i should clarify what i mean... i ran 4:01 and 3:43 in college off a ton of mileage and very little speed work. i did not have the ability to run fast and hard intervals without getting hurt. also, i only ran 56 for the 400 and i did not break 2:00 for the 800!!!

my strength or aerobic ability is natural, but speed, i have none what so ever. i always consider someone with very good natural turnover and speed as more talented.

i was a 5k/10k runner running those times because i was always recovering from injury, which prevented me from running a 5 or 10 at my highest fitness level.

STL_Runner wrote:

I thought I was talented my freshman year of high school when I finally broke 70 in the 400 and 2:40 in the 800. Seriously, I had been so pathetic at every other sport my whole life that I thought I was some sort of a track god. I'm a guy too, so don't think my times were anywhere near respectable.

I didn't run those times until my junior year of high school (although I only started racing as a sophomore) so don't go complaining about how you're so damn untalented. I'm in college now, and waiting another two weeks to get a chance to race (I raced once so far, and was sick and didn't do very well. Another meet got canceled, I'm observing Yom Kippur this Saturday, and we don't have a meet next week.) I've improved a lot -- I nearly ran my two-mile PR from last spring in a workout, then came pretty close to it again after eight minutes' recovery.

My goal is to make the top ten of the strong (went to nationals last year) D3 team I run for, so I can run in the conference championship. And then -- who knows?

Now I've rambled on quite a lot about myself, but my point is that if you're talented -- great. If you're not -- work harder and you'll beat a lot of the guys who are. Talent is irrelevant until you get to a very, very high level.

I realized I had talent freshman year in HS when I stepped in off no summer running and became 2nd man on a team that would finish 9th in the state.

I realized I had no talent when I trained my ass off this spring, gave running as much as I had, and Bekele set the world record just about one minute faster than my 5000m PR.

There's a lot of perspective involved. Almost anyone on this board is faster than 98 of 100 people. However, the top is still so far away.

Got injured in my second or third x-c race in my 1st year of HS and couldn't run a step again until mid-April. Managed to run a 9:52 2-mile that season in my third try at that distance. Made me think I had some talent. I still think I did, but that first injury was just a taste of things to come.

Wow you got better endurance than Bob Kennedy, he had 53-speed and ran 3.38/3.56.

But 3.43 is faster than 2.00-pace for 800m......so I don't think you made a serious atempt at 400/800

Talent, a funny thing...

Remember this... at one point Bekele was training his butt off and ran 13:37 (presumably your PR) in the 5000... and now he is at 12:37. Who knows where your talent, or lack thereof, will take you 3, 4, 5, 6 years down the line. Maybe sub 13:00?? You can't just say Bekele has more talent than you because you don't really know what he has done or sacraficed to get there. So much of running is a mind set and believing that guys like Bekele or Craig Mottram, or the Kenyans aren't any more talented than you... they've just made a longer term investment and believed that they could make the jump.

Bekele's progression...

2000 13:20

2001 13:13

2002 13:26

2003 12:52

2004 12:37

Or how about Craig Mottram's progression...

1999 13:40

2000 13:27

2001 13:23

2002 13:12

2003 13:17

2004 12:55

I mean, for all intents and purposes, these guys "stalled" out in the 13:teens and 20s for a few years before popping 13. Bekele has taken it another step, but I'm certain when they were running 13:26 and 27 they weren't thinking "Man, Geb is so much more talented than me, I'll never be able to run with him."

Next thing you know, Bekele has his WR's and Mottram was runnin him down at Crystal Palace.

I think anyone who can run 13:30's off of a high school and college career has the talent to be a low 13:00 guy or even sub if trained properly MENTALLY AND PHYSICALLY for another 3-4 years.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

I don't think so, there is one more factor.

A 13.30 runner with 56/400-speed will never get close to 13.00, but a 13.30 runner with 52-speed will...

Maybe,

I agree, there is a certain amount if natural speed someone needs to have to run that fast. I assume most guys who can run 13:30's in college, if they work on their speed a bit, can run a 52. But, along those same lines, I think that Bekele, Mottram, Geb, etc all work on their speed year round. They certainly are very naturally fast, but its not like they run 120 miles a week and then run 50 or faster. They're constantly doing drills, plyometrics, "sprints", etc to make sure that speed doens't need much more than sharpening as the season goes on. I think many distance runners in the US ignore training pure foot speed and explosiveness way too much. If you can run 13:30 off of 56 400 speed, its a good possibility that you could have run 13:teens if you had worked on your speed year round so that 51 or 52 was possible. And if you run 13:30 and 56, chances are you have the capability to run a 51 or 52 if trained properly.

When I started in H.S., I was so slow, the rest of the team made fun of me, so I figured I had no talent and just needed to work really hard. I worked my butt off every day, and dropped 1 minute off my 800 by my senior year. My 1600 got under 5; I got DI offers; and I ran well at NSO's. I started to think I was pretty darn good. I knew there were a lot of people faster, I just thought they had more experience, and I would get there, too.

Then, I went to college and realized how good some people are naturally. We had a few girls that would get hurt and run in the 16:00's off 2 weeks training. Some of the girls were making provo off 35 miles a week, and barely putting effort into their workouts.

The funny thing is, those girls aren't running any more. It was so easy for them, they never learned to enjoy it, and they never had the pride in their accomplishments that I did. Several of my teammates that were footlocker finalists or state champs never even finished their college eligibility.

some natural talent wrote:

The funny thing is, those girls aren't running any more. It was so easy for them, they never learned to enjoy it, and they never had the pride in their accomplishments that I did. Several of my teammates that were footlocker finalists or state champs never even finished their college eligibility.

First, good to hear you're still running. The last part about former talented runners quiting before finishing college is not new. Happened before my time and'll continue indefinitely. There are a multitude of reasons for this, some that frustrate coaches/parents/friends/fans to no end. And there are many that quit w/in days after their eligibility ends. Being talented is, obviously, no guarantee for longevity in running.

When I started lapping people in my first race and they were men.

nope....probably all out maybe sub 7 min...balky joints led me to 'retire' at 28...now in my 50's....but I did manage 4:04 in the late 70's

scotth wrote:

The last part about former talented runners quiting before finishing college is not new. Happened before my time and'll continue indefinitely. There are a multitude of reasons for this, some that frustrate coaches/parents/friends/fans to no end. And there are many that quit w/in days after their eligibility ends. Being talented is, obviously, no guarantee for longevity in running.

_____________

Good point. I've been seeing that for years. And I think the inverse corollary also holds. A lot of folks who do have longevity in the sport are probably not hyper-talented, but get great satisfaction from hard-earned modest accomplishments. I don't mean Gallowalkers -- but the legion of 50-60 mpw folks who target BQs and such fill this category. I wish I'd had the talent to consider the other option, but it wasn't in the cards.

I was 12 years old, I rode my K-Mart 10 speed bike from home to my aunt's house 45 miles, then walked 3 miles with my cousin to 7-11, played basketball for 2 hours and jumped in the pool for a couple more hours. The next day, I had to ride the 45 miles back home. When your young, you don't think of it as workouts, just going outdoors and having fun.

In high school I remember my coaching having us do a hilly 7 1/2 mile run and I had never run further then 3 miles. I could not finish the 7 1/2 miles. Then a week later in my first xc race I ran a 19:22 5k, I was a junior in h.s. Then brought that time down to 17:40 my senior off a little training maybe 25 miles a week, but still was not on the varsity team. After high school I kept running road races and gettting faster. I also started to put in 50-60 miles a week and worked my way up to 100 miles a week with 3 years out of high school. Two weeks after the first 100 mile week I dropped my five mile time from 27:15 to 26:30. I had to work hard to get where I am at. I can only manage mid 25's for a five miler now and I am 26 years old. I have brought that 5k down to a 15:26 on the track, but believe I have some more talent then the times I have run. I relise I have some talent, but when guys that run like 40 miles a week compared to my 80-100 and run the same times or faster. . .then I relise I do NOT have much talent!

Started racing in Ireland around 1973 and ran the 5000 in 17:39. The next year I made the mistake of doing only slow running on an uphill course and plummeted to 19:48 for 5000. Then in 1976, ran 15:56, 1977 - 15:43, 1978 - 15:17.

The 15:17 was run on a cinder track at Wimbledon Park in August 1978, and in the same race were great runners like Bob Holt and John Roberts. I ran the entire race just behind Mike Fuller, who had a best time of 14:17 for 5000 a few years before. I never wore spikes in my track races or on the cross country, preferring the feel of light road racing shoes. Favourite shoes were the Tiger Cubs.

My height (6ft2inches) was always a disadvantage because it made me less efficient as a runner.

In 1977 I also ran 54:20 in the Walton 10 miles road race (Surrey, England) off just 35 miles a week training for the past year. In 1978 I upped the training to 50-60 miles a week and ran the 5000 in 15:17, 10 miles in 52:48 (Wimbledon 10 miles road race) and 1:50.49 for the Finchley 20 miles road race (April 1978). All the times were run on about 50-60 miles a week. No track work - ever.....

At the time the standards in England were so high that the times I ran were considered very average. Now that standards have fallen, the road times are considered quite decent.

I never had any speed, and this is reflected in my short distance times. Bests: 800 - 2:10, 1500 - 4:19, 3000 - 8:57 (Rochester, February 1981, indoors), 3 miles - 14:42 (Feb. 1981, Bucknell, indoors), 10.000 track - 32:22 (Crystal Palace, October 1979).

I never broke 60 for 400, and so was always the slowest in pure speed, but still won a track and cross country tuition waiver scholarship to Mansfield University (PA) in 1980-81, under coach Ed. Winrow.

Anyone know me?: e-mail:

chris.moulton@mail.mcgill.ca

(Now a Canadian Citizen and resident of Montreal, Canada). Friends welcome to e-mail me for chats and nostalgia about the past...

I realized that I didn't have it when I saw this thread.

I realized I was good at track my freshman year when I ran 2:10 off of absoulutely no mileage at conference.

I realized I had some talent in cross country yesterday when I ran 16:25.2 in the 5K, a minute behind potential national champion John McGuire.

Hey great thread. I always knew I didn't have any talent at distance running. However, this has never caused me to lose my love of running. I never broke 6 min. in the mile in HS yet a few years later while avg. 50-70 miles per week I avg. under 6 for 5 miles and under 7 for 15 miles.

Now over 30 years later and at well over 300 lbs. I'm still running and still think distance running is the greatest of sports.