What is the biggest difference between elites and non-elites?

This debate is going to go on and on with no resolution until we define the mythical words:

"form", "talent" and "fitness".

I often think of elites having something it takes in 3 categories:

1) V02, threshold, etc, which are the born in attributes of talent

2) Desire/Will/Mind to do what it takes

3) Often overlooked is being fortunate enough to have a body that can absorb the training level needed without injury/overtraining

About 15 seconds for a mile, 10 minutes for a marathon

Don’t be wedded to biometric form tho

There are lots of elites who have some biomechicsl glitch (bill Rodgers arm flick hails g croked arm from carrying books to school)

a dogmatic coach would try to correct those (unnecessarily imho) cause it doesn’t look like the text book they have

a wiser coach would say bill you won Boston /nyc 4 x each let’s leave alone

The difference is talent.

I believe many Kenyans do form drills. That's good enough for me!

Yes. Mainly I'd say.

My freshman year in high school I was the "top freshman" at state in the largest school division in Oregon. I was a low 16-min 5km runner already, but I had to work pretty hard for it and I had some sort of "talent." The next year this soccer player named Galen Rupp decided to dabble in cross country. He naturally had pretty good form already. Our sophomore year he was already one of the best in the state and I was basically a mid-packer (getting passed by more sophomores and guys I beat the year before). Obviously our paths diverged quite a bit since then as I only became a sub-elite/national class kind of marathoner (and many, many guys in my high school alone were more "talented" than me).

Talent, or genetics is going to determine running form, musculature, height/weight and even running economy to a large degree. It is also going to determine Vo2max potential. Now of course to pull off fast running times you have to have the Running Economy to realize that Vo2max potential.....which can be another talent or something that improves with consistent high mileage. On top of that your environment (diet, support system with sponsors and family, work/school stress) can influence how those genetics play out. The old "nature vs nurture" debate....

Then also of course then you have to train really hard, be dedicated and then be mentally tough. Some pros take PEDs no doubt as well, but even without them they'd run circles around those less talented/non-elites.

When I ran at Hansons after college I was fortunate to get some runs in with 2:10 marathoner Brian Sell. He was fresh off of making the 2008 Olympic Team. He worked super hard and ran 160-170 miles per week...his "Easy Day" pace was 5:40/mile. He probably had more grit than anyone I'd ever seen. Still he was like a 29:00 and 13:50s guy out of college..so pretty speedy. He was mentally tough and he believed he could be pro and make the Olympic Team. But maybe his biggest talent was that he could survive the high mileage and not get hurt or over-trained. Other guys on the team would get injured all the time. And we certainly didn't have fancy equipment back then at Hansons. I believe he was actually working at Home Depot as well during around the time he made the Olympics.

Some guys are "late bloomers" and make big jumps at certain mileage points and under certain training programs. Sometimes the talent/genetics are hard to predict and durability is certainly a big factor for trying to reach max potential and have longevity.

Speed.

Your average elite long distance runner can run faster at any distance than nearly any non elite runner.

You must be new on LRC.

Tons of recreational runners who join a club or get a coach spend like half their training time doing drills and caring about running form. Running 40-50 miles a week is considered high mileage and runners by that

At the same time stronger amateur runners who have a day job just don't have time to do lots of drills and such as it's hard to fit 10 or more hours of running in your schedule as it is. More common marathon goals would be sub-245, sub-240, sub-230 (aka the quest for amateur glory). More talented and dedicated can win local races, OTQ and be considered sub-elite.

This picture can, of course, be challenged, but that's just an illustration. Research has shown that higher mileage correlates with faster race times. And there is afaik no research and hardly even anecdotal evidence of someone running faster because they changed their stride, cadence, did a lot of drills, etc. Especially if they reduced running time to do that.

Sorry, cut the 1st paragraph, should be

Running 40-50 miles a week is considered high mileage and runners like that generally have a hard time qualifying for Boston, some even have to spend a few years training before they break 4, not 3, hours in the marathon or 20 min in 5K.

Biggest difference? Doping.