"You can't put in what God's left out."
Simple as that.
"You can't put in what God's left out."
Simple as that.
Fax wrote:
The times our men shoot for are considered beyond disastrous for African runners. We need to normalize better times instead of being satisfied eeking under 2:10.
Presumably you're American? Show them how it's done. No excuses. Do it.
colder and wiser wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
The best 5/10K runners are also very likely to be the best marathoners and there are hundreds of examples.
Maybe! That sounds quite reasonable.
Except that's not really how we approach any other distance. If we trained pro milers by picking only the very best 800 runners, we'd end up with a good set of milers, but we'd also miss out on some talent. Maybe a lot of talent, because at every level, the message we'd send them would be: You're second-rate. You can stick around if you want and see if you can move up to the mile as a pro. But isn't it about time for you to get a real job? And if we were consistent world-beaters in the 800 but eternal also-rans in the mile, it seems like one place we'd want to take a closer look at.
I keep coming back to this not because I have a lot of confidence in my take, but because there are only a few basic variables here. We're either training the wrong people for the marathon, or training them the wrong way. And there aren't any secrets about training anymore. If we can get top 5 finishes in the Olympic 5K and 10K, why isn't that successful talent identification translating anywhere as well to the marathon? For shorter distances, "immigration from East Africa" has been about half the answer to the U.S. being competitive at the international level, while the NCAA system is continuing to do a great job for its part. Except for the marathon.
Again, hundreds of examples of 5K/10K runners being good at the marathon is not really conclusive because in the U.S., it's the only game in town (and 5K/10K success is definitely not a guarantee of marathon success, as Mo Farah can tell you). African runners seem to have a model that's less dependent on early 5K/10K success, and their approach seems to be generating the kinds of fast times we can only dream of. If we reject the cynics who say it's all doping, the Darwinists who say it's all genes, and the crackpots who say it's their super training plans, what else are we left with?
The difference is the 10k and marathon use the same energy system with the added factor of fueling/pounding. 2:05 is 446 pace. Do you really think anyone who isn't a 1330/27:40 guy has a shot at those times. And yes the African model is still based on 5k/10k success. That is what they train with as kids before going for the money. A lot of guys wait too long but most seem to be moving quicker these days. Ritz and hall didn't wait. Mantz says he plans on on after xc. Hopefully guys like Brand, McMillian are right behind him. If they stick on the track they might become 13:10/27:00 guys but that isn't going to make you a contender in many global finals...
And we rarely have much success with non transplant 5k/10k guys. Count the 5k/10k medals since 1990 and compare. We have 2 or 3(let's not argue about meb) marathon medals and 1 track one.
American men regularly now run sub 13 5k and sun 27 10k but marathons stuck at 2:07. What gives?
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Gjert did it again - produces another Diamond League champ. Nordas over Lobalu and Grijalva 7:33.49
Nordas running 3:34 with one shoe is proof that supershoes don’t work