This thread's title is completely meaningless.
Tribute to a train wreck would be more suitable. Or Tribute to JS's crap coaching.
This thread's title is completely meaningless.
Tribute to a train wreck would be more suitable. Or Tribute to JS's crap coaching.
Your magic wizard coach wrote:
Of course I use the basics in my DANCAN -system for every runner I coach, but for every individual and every special distance I tailor and adapt the system to the needs of the individual runner.
Give us ONE example that you can show evidence of, where you coached someone to the times/goals you agreed upon when your coach/athlete relationship started.
ONE! And don't give me that crap about Phil's 10 mile PR. That was not the distance you were coaching him for and you totally ruined his chances at a good marathon time.
Canefis wrote:
All my foot injuries happened in the places that I once injured on windsurfing due to waveriding and the development of hydrofoil. Therefore, it is impossible to say unequivocally that it is the coach's fault.... or anyone else. I will say this, Yes, my feet as a runner are weak and there are many reasons for this: short life as a runner (I run for 1 year, and this is not enough); various microtraumas in the past; very fast progress in terms of setting the pace, weak points do not have time to adapt, it is difficult to control, since the pulse, rest and self-feeling are all super and the recovery is excellent, and then, BAM, the bundle came out the next day... Friends, not the fact that the other coach didn't come to my sores... Conclusion: we will continue to work, strengthen weaknesses, as you noted, there are abilities, and we will select appropriate approaches and methods ?
If you can’t see the correlation between your 3 (already) injuries and the training that is way to hard for your ability, it’s never gonna happen.
You have such wise words to everyone else, yet you can’t figure out your own problem. Like the guy posted on your strava said
Quite right, your training result is the result of an ordinary workout and with such a result it is unrealistic to pull out before the competition at the level of a sports category. You promised to show the result this winter race (marathon at a pace of 3:27) ?. I have nothing against your lofty goals, but you have written so many words about how I should not train that I decided to check your progress out of sports curiosity. Your result is obviously not nearly as high as you promised. Just for the future, before you write any sports wisdom to other athletes on their page, show first a serious official result
It's always like this at LRC when the road to success goes the normal way with some ups and some downs, the vultures flock in some case of adversity. And as if by magic, they are plastered away at
the ascent.
Vultures? No, we want to see an intelligent progression of training. We don't want JS spamming the boards with his delusional obsessions and narcissism.
20 x 400 @ 5k pace is not a super hard sessionand only requires short recoveries. During true base training you could do that session and recover in a day no problem.
Going by 120 bpm recovery but running much faster than 5k pace is just plain stupid training.
Vultures? No, we want to see an intelligent progression of training. We don't want JS spamming the boards with his delusional obsessions and narcissism.
20 x 400 @ 5k pace is not a super hard sessionand only requires short recoveries. During true base training you could do that session and recover in a day no problem.
Going by 120 bpm recovery but running much faster than 5k pace is just plain stupid training.
umm, what? wrote:
Vultures? No, we want to see an intelligent progression of training. We don't want JS spamming the boards with his delusional obsessions and narcissism.
20 x 400 @ 5k pace is not a super hard sessionand only requires short recoveries. During true base training you could do that session and recover in a day no problem.
Going by 120 bpm recovery but running much faster than 5k pace is just plain stupid training.
+1
No one here has ever wished Slava to fail.
mjmjmj wrote:
Your magic wizard coach wrote:
Of course I use the basics in my DANCAN -system for every runner I coach, but for every individual and every special distance I tailor and adapt the system to the needs of the individual runner.
Give us ONE example that you can show evidence of, where you coached someone to the times/goals you agreed upon when your coach/athlete relationship started.
ONE! And don't give me that crap about Phil's 10 mile PR. That was not the distance you were coaching him for and you totally ruined his chances at a good marathon time.
Give me ONE coach name who agreed and promised a special time result when took on to coach a new runner?( Then I mean in relatively short time) Elisha Rotich sent me a message back in year 2016 and asked what to do to run 2:09 marathon ( then his pb was just sub2:14). I told him it depends on talent, age and former time results.He then won the Nice-Cannes marathon in 2:10:45 after three months in my coaching. I didn`t tell him an exact time he would reach of course. The very good coaches just improves the runner........you can check what Rene writes about my coaching at my site ; coachjs.se
If you are such a good coach, as you keep telling us again and again and again, how come you are doing such a bad job on this thread?
If Elisha improved so much after a few months, why did he leave you?
His new coach has him running 2:05!
Because Rosa management didn`t like that a freelance online coach did a better job with their runner than themselves. I guess Rotich got " cold feet" so to speak , lol .
The purpose of an agent is to make money. If your marathoner improved so much, he’d make his agents more money, so they’d keep you.
Does Elisha admit you coached him?
doesnt make sense wrote:
The purpose of an agent is to make money. If your marathoner improved so much, he’d make his agents more money, so they’d keep you.
That expected logic even I thought was prevalent in the bigger managements in Kenya in the beginning of my coaching career. But it`s not like that in practice I have learned.....
umm, what? wrote:
20 x 400 @ 5k pace is not a super hard sessionand only requires short recoveries. During true base training you could do that session and recover in a day no problem.
8km of repetition volume w/short-recovery at 5km pace? <<<Seems high.
If one is going for that volume, I would suggest first trying them at LT pace, which is 1.075 * 5k pace.
Since it is the Christmas Season, I'm going to drop a tidbit:
hr measurement wrote:
8km of repetition volume w/short-recovery at 5km pace? <<<Seems high.
If one is going for that volume, I would suggest first trying them at LT pace, which is 1.075 * 5k pace.
Rather than run them at LT pace, run them at LT Heart Rate. Doing them according to Heart Rate rather than a set pace allows one's training to adapt to their body's physical condition on that day, in that day's environmental conditions (accounting for wind, temperature, shoes, clothes, etc., etc.). (One caveat is if the athlete is taking a drug, like caffeine, which can affect HR, and thus make Heart Rate training more complex.)
That is the tidbit, and it is huge, for those ready to accept it.
Boom!
Merry Christmas.
doesnt make sense wrote:
Does Elisha admit you coached him?
I don`t know . I have never chat with him after the day when he won Nice - Cannes marathon 2016. But for sure I coached him during those months. I wrote the weekly training programs and sent to him and we chat about the workouts done and so on at least a couple of times every week.
Does it make sense he first asked me to coach him and I sent him the weekly programs and we chat about the training done with times at the intervals he did and so on , and then in fact he didn`t do the program and the times he told me and then won Nice -Cannes with a personal best of 3 min after just 3 months ??
hr measurement wrote:
Since it is the Christmas Season, I'm going to drop a tidbit:
hr measurement wrote:
8km of repetition volume w/short-recovery at 5km pace? <<<Seems high.
If one is going for that volume, I would suggest first trying them at LT pace, which is 1.075 * 5k pace.
Rather than run them at LT pace, run them at LT Heart Rate. Doing them according to Heart Rate rather than a set pace allows one's training to adapt to their body's physical condition on that day, in that day's environmental conditions (accounting for wind, temperature, shoes, clothes, etc., etc.). (One caveat is if the athlete is taking a drug, like caffeine, which can affect HR, and thus make Heart Rate training more complex.)
That is the tidbit, and it is huge, for those ready to accept it.
Boom!
Merry Christmas.
The main point I wanted to make was to consider the advantages of training by Heart-Rate rather than by Pace.
But getting back to the original point as to what Pace/Heart-Rate one should do 20 x 400 on short-recovery: performing the reps at LT-Pace/Heart-Rate may be too conservative, in lieu of instead running a 30min tempo at LT-Pace/Heart-Rate. If they want to break it up into reps, then they might do the 20x400 w/short-recoveries at 10k-Pace/Heart-Rate. But my original point, to do that much volume on short -recoveries, at 5k-Race-Pace, seems excessive.
hr measurement wrote:
Since it is the Christmas Season, I'm going to drop a tidbit:
hr measurement wrote:
8km of repetition volume w/short-recovery at 5km pace? <<<Seems high.
If one is going for that volume, I would suggest first trying them at LT pace, which is 1.075 * 5k pace.
Rather than run them at LT pace, run them at LT Heart Rate. Doing them according to Heart Rate rather than a set pace allows one's training to adapt to their body's physical condition on that day, in that day's environmental conditions (accounting for wind, temperature, shoes, clothes, etc., etc.). (One caveat is if the athlete is taking a drug, like caffeine, which can affect HR, and thus make Heart Rate training more complex.)
That is the tidbit, and it is huge, for those ready to accept it.
Boom!
Merry Christmas.
The 20 x 400s maxVO2 reps must be at 5 k race pace . The purpose is to make the energy process at that pace more effective . Then it must be frequently repeated and one session almost every week is just perfect.The individual "automatic" best rest for the day is taken care of the easy walk rest back to 120 bpm ( or roughly 60% of MHR )
Two things:
(1) he said on "short recovery"
(2) Even waiting for 120bpm, running 20 of them may be excessive. Gershler said to bail on the reps once the HR took an excessive amount of time to get to 120bpm. You seem to have neglected that point.
hr measurement wrote:
Two things:
(1) he said on "short recovery"
(2) Even waiting for 120bpm, running 20 of them may be excessive. Gershler said to bail on the reps once the HR took an excessive amount of time to get to 120bpm. You seem to have neglected that point.
I haven't neglected anything.Gershler ( and of course Ph Reindel) had their runners to reach about 180 bpm ( or roughly 90 % of MHR) and the pace wouldn`t be faster than the runner returned back to 120 bpm in max 90 sec, if the rest took longer the pace (effort) was too fast.
I have taken this old knowledge by Gershler and Reindel even further and let the heartrate reach more than 180 bpm ( or more than 90 % of MHR ) and then use 5 k race pace instead that gives a heartrate of about 190-195 bpm ( or about 95-97 % of MHR) . Usually 5 k race pace at 20 x 400s gives around 60 sec easy walk rest back to 120 bpm ( or 60 % of MHR) , but it should not exceed more than 90 sec. If the resttime becomes more than 90 sec one must slow the pace. So to sum this up I have modified Gerschler ´s & Reindels version to be something more powerful and effective.