No O'Keeffe in marathon?

badform wrote:

1609 wrote:

She cannot be called an Olympian unless she at least starts the event. Being an Olympic team member is not synonymous with being an Olympian.

This is the heart of the discussion, isn't it? I think the spirit of this "You have to start a race to be an Olympian" is that you have to *compete* at the Olympics to be an Olympian. If we take the individuals out of the situation, then does it make sense to call someone an Olympian when they have no intention of *competing* because they are too injured to make a good faith effort? Shouldn't being capable of competing without major injury be part of the JD? Or is it being named to the team, and training as part of Team USA?

DNFing later on in a race because you step in a hole or break your ankle or start vomiting or something like that... to me that's understandable. You started the race in race form and made a good faith effort to compete.

But being present in a kit, ready to take a couple steps, because you placed Top 3 a race 7 or 8 months ago and have been injured ever since... I dunno. It doesn't feel like that fits the definition of "competing at the Olympic Games." That's more like, "Qualifying for the Olympic Games and showing up."

I'm not sure who suggested the idea of the Team Camp, but I don't hate it. Make sure everyone is at the location early. Have the alternate come. Let the Team USA coaches evaluate who is healthy and able to run.

AnonWhilstAtWork wrote:

I appreciate this thread has been going for a couple days now so some new information has developed/come out during that time, but I feel like this has been so focused on O'Keefe's 20s OLY appearance, that many have buried the real question(s).

1) How is it that the Craggs managed to field 2x athletes both with stress fractures?
2) Why have both athletes independently made comments to the the effect of 'my coach still encouraged me to try and run it'?

This is the issue here. The poor training methodology and questionable coaching philosophy that delivers injured athletes, and seemingly pressures them into racing on said injuries. Luckily because this has effected multiple nations (US + GB) there is some hope that we are twice as likely to get an investigation, however Rose thanking and celebrating the Craggs in her IG post doesn't help.

I would point out however that I follow on Strava the guys that she was doing her build-up with, and every. single. damn. workout. I was thinking 'these guys are so much fitter than her, she's either going to come out of this in monster shape or completely broken' and I cant have been the only person in the world to notice the mis-match (FWIW one of the guys is also injured now). I have no insight as to how present the Craggs were physically/geographically for this build up, but there seems to have been a massive lapse in proper coaching practises here.

None of this is to take any responsibility away from O'Keefe's decision (anyone in the world could've known it was a bad idea to try 26.2Miles on that injury, let alone on one of the hilliest courses we have ever seen, anywhere), I'm just saying there's a larger shadow hanging over this situation that I think needs addressing properly.

She cant be serious wrote:

I’m going to try and summarize this quickly because there is a lot of talk about nonsense.

1. USATF flew Jess McClain Monday because they knew Fiona couldn’t walk. USATF wants a full roster on the start line and knew Jess was their best shot. They are probably sick of athletes DNF’ing because it’s their right and intended to force Fiona into doing what is right for the team or show her true colors. She chose the latter.

2. Jess has been killing races all summer and would have likely been right there with Dakota.

3. Des and Kara likely knew about the situation being Brooks athletes. Chose not to report about it because Des did it. Didn’t want to bring it back up and continue to hurt the brand. If NBC sports cared about marathons like they cared about other sports, Kara would be fired for not reporting it.

4. You don’t get paid for starting and DNF. Fiona might get paid on the back end for being an “Olympian” but no one is hiring her to speak to their company now.

5. Allstar had several athletes with the same injury. Jess McClain doesn’t have an agent so Allstar is incentivized to keep the money close. He also use to rep her so he’s probably not pleased.

6. des and Fiona can call themselves olympians all they want but they won’t be proud of themselves.

7. This wouldn’t be the most popular thread on let’s run if the running world had some actual reporting and if we believed anything Fiona has said about the situation. No athlete will make this same mistake again.

8. David monti said it best -

“Doing the right thing can be hard:
. It can cost you money
. It can cost you friendships
. It can be humiliating
. It can be painful
But, it allows a for a clear conscience and the knowledge that the world is just slightly better because of what you did. That's worth a lot.”

Link:x.com/d9monti?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7...

Jose Jimenez wrote:

I think, in general, the US needs to severely re-evaluate how they do marathon training. We really stink as a country at the marathon right now outside of runners trained by Ed Eyestone. For women in particular, the concept of running significant mileage (100+ mpw or more) while maintaining a thin frame just doesn't work. We've seen Jordan Hassay, Molly Seidel, Emma Bates, and now Fiona O'Keeffe all breakdown doing this training (although Emma is probably actually a healthy weight). The only marathoner we have with any modicum of consistent health is Emily Sisson, and she's 5'2" and (what I've seen listed) 105 lbs, so she's naturally tiny and also has enough talent that she was the national HS record holder in the 5,000 meters. I will also give Dakotah Lindwurm credit for her Olympic performance. 12th place is very solid! She also happens to be naturally rail-thin and only 5'1", and, frankly, her listed weight of 105 lbs seems to be very healthy for her height and frame. Should taller or broader framed women just be avoiding the marathon? It doesn't appear any of them can get to the level they need without getting way too thin, which is clearly unhealthy and helps lead to injuries.

badform wrote:

Jose Jimenez wrote:

I think, in general, the US needs to severely re-evaluate how they do marathon training. We really stink as a country at the marathon right now outside of runners trained by Ed Eyestone. For women in particular, the concept of running significant mileage (100+ mpw or more) while maintaining a thin frame just doesn't work. We've seen Jordan Hassay, Molly Seidel, Emma Bates, and now Fiona O'Keeffe all breakdown doing this training (although Emma is probably actually a healthy weight). The only marathoner we have with any modicum of consistent health is Emily Sisson, and she's 5'2" and (what I've seen listed) 105 lbs, so she's naturally tiny and also has enough talent that she was the national HS record holder in the 5,000 meters. I will also give Dakotah Lindwurm credit for her Olympic performance. 12th place is very solid! She also happens to be naturally rail-thin and only 5'1", and, frankly, her listed weight of 105 lbs seems to be very healthy for her height and frame. Should taller or broader framed women just be avoiding the marathon? It doesn't appear any of them can get to the level they need without getting way too thin, which is clearly unhealthy and helps lead to injuries.

Did Bates break down, or did she tear her plantar stepping in a hole during a race? I thought it was the latter.

Get with the times wrote:

Jose Jimenez wrote:.

I think, in general, the US needs to severely re-evaluate how they do marathon training. We really stink as a country at the marathon right now outside of runners trained by Ed Eyestone. For women in particular, the concept of running significant mileage (100+ mpw or more) while maintaining a thin frame just doesn't work. We've seen Jordan Hassay, Molly Seidel, Emma Bates, and now Fiona O'Keeffe all breakdown doing this training (although Emma is probably actually a healthy weight). The only marathoner we have with any modicum of consistent health is Emily Sisson, and she's 5'2" and (what I've seen listed) 105 lbs, so she's naturally tiny and also has enough talent that she was the national HS record holder in the 5,000 meters. I will also give Dakotah Lindwurm credit for her Olympic performance. 12th place is very solid!

The outdated emphasis on high, intense mileage with redlined training monotony has been a big problem for a while, and it probably has a lot to do with the high profile breakdowns and injuries we're seeing more of.

No one's saying cross train every single day and only do 1-2 workouts every 2 weeks. Be we also don't see many trying to train seriously with 50-70 mile weeks. Some like Laura Muir have consistently done that.

But still too many hardheaded coaches and runners insist on stuffing their logs with 100+ mile weeks under the old notion that more mileage is better period.

Recovery matters just as much as volume, and yes doping has helped mask that by allowing a lot of athletes to repeat those 100+ mile weeks and 12 mile interval workouts without proper recovery, then hammer races and win... at least for a while.

The first coach to risk career suicide by reducing his/her elite athletes' volume to a more reasonable 50-70ish, and then end up winning that way, will turn everything as upside down as Lydiard did when he ran his athletes to Olympic glory before running them into the ground a few years later. But until then....

runnerdoc wrote:

Get with the times wrote:

The outdated emphasis on high, intense mileage with redlined training monotony has been a big problem for a while, and it probably has a lot to do with the high profile breakdowns and injuries we're seeing more of.

No one's saying cross train every single day and only do 1-2 workouts every 2 weeks. Be we also don't see many trying to train seriously with 50-70 mile weeks. Some like Laura Muir have consistently done that.

But still too many hardheaded coaches and runners insist on stuffing their logs with 100+ mile weeks under the old notion that more mileage is better period.

Recovery matters just as much as volume, and yes doping has helped mask that by allowing a lot of athletes to repeat those 100+ mile weeks and 12 mile interval workouts without proper recovery, then hammer races and win... at least for a while.

The first coach to risk career suicide by reducing his/her elite athletes' volume to a more reasonable 50-70ish, and then end up winning that way, will turn everything as upside down as Lydiard did when he ran his athletes to Olympic glory before running them into the ground a few years later. But until then....

70 miles a week for the marathon at the elite level? It won't happen, as it won't work. Not close.