To Malmo, Hodgie, and the other "greats: a few words about talent

just say know say:

>very, very many more people than Malmo/Hodgie probably would like to admit have tried such an approach and failed (injured, burned out, just did not achieve anything great. One severe injury can hamper some for many, many years). The point: poor running is OFTEN not due to lack of TRYING higher mileage weeks and more intensity (as Malmo seems to suggest). Many try patiently to up the training, but can never get there (sickness/injury). Or, they get there, but?no super results occur. Why?<

Just say KNOW.

Most runners never get anywhere near their full potential and MOST often that is due to a less than full commitment to the activity.

If I go to a local track meet or road race I would be lucky to find even one person who is making that full commitment.

If you don't want to do what is necessary or fear it that's fine. Be a recreational runner like most everyone else.

malmo wrote:

I set the AR at Drake Stadium right there in Westwood. Probably way before your time.

Well that could explain it then.

I do remember Henry Marsh of course.

And I've read of Horace Ashenfelter but that was long before my time.

A little known fact..Malmo set the all time record for Pac-Man in the early 80's..at Lewis' in Newton Upper Falls, his middle finger is bent dramatically after years of joystick riding..

Mine was 6:32 wrote:

Jim Ryun ran 4:32 his first time in a race (age 16), but that was with some training.

Where you there too?

Exciting, amazing race. Charlie Harper had gotten second the year before in 4:48 (1st was 4:46, and his brother got first in the 880, don't recall their names), then at state upset the two favorites John Lawson and Gene McLain, all timed in 4:24 in a photo finish.

Now here is Harper leading all the way with this totally unknown (to me) guy hanging on to his heels all the way, last lap in 64 seconds and they battled all the way to the line. We were just visiting and I happened to catch the meet. Turned out Ryun had placed 6th at state cross country the fall before. The next meet Harper lead all the way again, was pulling away on the last backstretch, Ryun summoned a kick down the stretch and caught him before the link, time 4:26. At the state meet Ryun ran 4:16 with both Harper and Mclain in 4:19.

just say no:

Just to provide a little comfort, I must say that I agree pretty much entirely with what you're saying. It can get pretty annoying at times trying to argue that point, because there are so many Malmo/Hodge worshippers on this board to beat you down whenever you say anything that remotely disagrees with the running gods.

I think there are quite a few people out there who are willing to work as hard as there body will allow. People can smirk all they want, but I'll say with full confidence that I would happily run 200 miles a week with tons of hard workouts if the payoff was being competitive on the world stage, or even getting close. However, it's not going to happen. I'm not saying I've reached my absolute fullest potential (who can say that?), but I know I've come close. I'm fully confident that if you put Malmo/Hodge's soul in my body, they would not be able to push my body to the times they ran. This is not to take anything away from them. I know it didn't come easy for them, that they busted their asses to get where they did. On the other hand, sometimes they seem to want to rest on their laurels and not allow anyone else into their club of runners who really had what it takes, and anything anyone says counter to their opinions gets rebutted with a catchy one-line response which has their adoring fans salivating all over themselves. I'm sure they have something to contribute in the way of advice, memories, training ideas, etc., but insulting everyone with any comment they don't like is not the best way to go about it.

TomM, you and Just say no have a very distorted view of anything that either Hodgie or I have said on this matter. You simply refuse to hear what we have to say. Neither of us has disagreed with you, EXCEPT on this one irrefutable point: AS A GENERALIZATION, most of you haven't even approached your potential. How many times do I have to say it? You only need to go to any track meet, road race or XC race in the country to observe it. I see the great majority under-trained butterball runners attempting to do something they're simply unprepared for.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

I find it incredibly annoying that you, who clearly has an axe to grind, distorts every I say, and grossly mischaracterizes my motivations by projecting your solipsistic view into my words. Stop it! It's downright obsessive!

Santiago wrote:

A little known fact..Malmo set the all time record for Pac-Man in the early 80's..at Lewis' in Newton Upper Falls, his middle finger is bent dramatically after years of joystick riding..

I believe you are Miguel? No. I came up less than a hundred thousand short of the record, and it was at Cappuccino's.

How do you know that you reached your potential??

Yes, you are significantly faster most people here, and have trained more, but you had the potential to be faster. As sad as this will sound, nobody reaches 100% of their potential.

How does anyone really know what they are truly capable of, and how varied this is from person to person??

It's impossible to truly understand or feel what is going on physically or mentally in another person's body. Case in point, it is hard enough to know what your own body is capable of.

That's why running is so great because it brings us closer to understanding our potential than almost any activity in the world. But it's impossible for one to generalize or claim the extent to which they have reached their potential in relation to others.

Who said anything about reaching my potential? I know I never said that. My career was slowed when I stepped in a hole and tore the plantar fascia while training for the World XCs and would bother me for five full years.

Yours is precisely the point I always make: set high goals and achieve. Once you get there set the bar higher and go after it. I've said many times before, the human body, that includes each one of yours, can do amazing things. Lead with your head and heart and your lungs and legs will surely follow.

[quote]TomM wrote:

People can smirk all they want, but I'll say with full confidence that I would happily run 200 miles a week with tons of hard workouts if the payoff was being competitive on the world stage, or even getting close. However, it's not going to happen.

The thing is, you're willing to do that sort of work IF there is a guaranteed payoff. Otherwise, you've dedcided it's not worth doing that amount of work. You're not willing to work to reach your full potential. you'd be willing to work if the reward seems worthwhile. But that attitude virtually eliminates the possibility of reaching your full potential, whatever that may be. On the other hand, doing that level of work with a goal of seeing what will happen if you do it, whether that means being competitive on the world stage or just at the Maude's Funeral Home and Brothel 8k means that you've done what guys like Hodgie-san and Malmo did.

Read any quotes from Shorter about his motivation for all the miles he ran. You'll never see any comments about doing it to win medals or make Olympic teams. He always talked in terms of finding out what he could do and of not wanting to be 40 and wondering how good he could have been if he'd focused on it.

"i was there": No I wasn't, I was very young and living thousands of miles awy at the time. It must have been an exciting experience to see the beginning of a great career.

"Mt. Man": I realize he ran 5:35 on the first day of CC turnout, age 15. In the next six months Jim was to dramatically mature physically. This is why I use the age 16 benchmark. At 14-17, most boys are rapidly changing physically. 18 would be a much better benchmark, but by that age most have run at least a year of serious training.

My point is that what is a significant barrier for most young runners (5:00 mile), is barely even a starting point for those who go on to break 4:00.

HRE:

I knew somebody would say that. That's the way it goes with this little argument: no matter what you say, somebody will pick something and tell you "see, here's your shortcoming, you really could have run world class times except for this fatal flaw in your attitude." Don't you understand that a lot of us long-time competitive runners have thought these things through? I would say that most long-time competitors have probably approached trying to get better from all sorts of angles, so you're not introducing anything that everybody else hasn't already thought of. The fact remains, you're wrong. If I tried to run 200 miles a week WITHOUT any guaranteed payoff, just to give it a try, it still won't make me world class. I'll just get injured. One point that "just say no" was trying to make was that different individuals hit a point of diminishing returns in their training at different points. For some people it might be 80 miles per week, some 100, some 40, and so on. I know that for me, whenever I go much above 100mpw for an extended period, I start getting sick and I always have tendinitis in various places, among other things. But having said that, somebody will be quick to say "well, you need to build up more slowly, and run your miles more slowly" etc.

A simple request "just say no" was making is would you just accept that some people will never be able to train like Hodge and Malmo apparently did, so you can't uniformly say to every runner who didn't achieve world-class times "you didn't train hard enough, or else you would have been faster". It's possible that someone who ran a 30:00 for 10k, or a 36:00 10k, or a 46:00 10k, ran as well as they were ever going to run with what they had.

TomM wrote:

That's the way it goes with this little argument: no matter what you say, somebody will pick something and tell you "see, here's your shortcoming, you really could have run world class times except for this fatal flaw in your attitude." Don't you understand that a lot of us long-time competitive runners have thought these things through? I would say that most long-time competitors have probably approached trying to get better from all sorts of angles, so you're not introducing anything that everybody else hasn't already thought of. The fact remains, you're wrong..

TOM. JEEZUSFREAKINCHRIST! DO YOU EVER READ WHAT'S BEEN SAID?

You keep repeating the same bullshit over and over, just hoping something will stick! NO ONE HERE, or in any other thread has said, OR EVEN HINTED THAT "you really could have run world class times"

STOP THE INSANITY! You are truly a work of art.

malmo, "co-god of the message board" i know pronounce you 'co-god of the written word" I dont laugh at the computer screen often but some of your comments are just too much. Keep it up.

TomM, Just say no and who ever else out there, ask yourself a question: What is the most important thing in my life? If you don't answer "Running", then you will not reach your full potential. I think it is absolute bullshit that people dont think they can increase thier mileage, if it means doing all the little exercises to strengthen supporting muscles DO IT, " but but but i get injured whenever i go over 50mpw :( " Cut the crap you arent training smart, if you get a twinge, 10+ reps of ice IMMEDIATELY, Cold baths every night injured or not! EAT PROPERLY! RUNNING IS HALF THE WORK, making running your number one priority means doing the training and just as much recovery MAYBE MORE BECAUSE YOU ARE INJURY PRONE/LESS RESILIENT. Furthermore you may be interested to know that eventhough people hit greater diminishing returns at different points they also reach a threshold if you will where your body becomes more lean-biomechanically efficient-and YES a POINT WHERE (to comment on an earlier thread) 6 MIN MILES ARE EASY!!!!!

If you and hodgie worked so hard for so long why are you not Frank Shorters and Alberto Salazars instead of being letsrun.com info gurus? What was your excuse in the end? Should you two have run more? Run faster or slower in training or maybe just wore a heart rate monitor once in a while? Why was Will Rogers better then you two manly men in this distance game?

I hate the word 'talent' to begin with. How can we judge how hard someone works, etc? But one of the great things about distance running is if you don't put in the work you won't be good. Sure there is some sort of genetic component involved, but I think people focus on it too much.I think my case is a perfect example. Am I hugely talented? Who knows, I would argue not (wait till what you see I run 10k for next week). But then again I look at myself and I am super skinny (thank you mom and rojo) naturally and sometime pride myself on being a white Ethiopians (my brother and I were called Ethis in grade school during the Ethiopian famine). Obviously, I have some advantages over most runners. The starter of this thread would say my high school times weren't fast but I can handle "hard, heavy training, and come back for more". I would argue that I don't do a hard, heavy training. Most of my training is very relaxed. Come run with me most days. My roommate is a 16:30 5k guy and he can runs with me on almost all my easy days. And he's at times done almost the same amount of volume. I would argue that most reasonably fit competitive runners at some point can run 90 miles a week. I'm can hear people start to disagree with this, saying they've tried it. As my coach would says, "Slow down" if you're getting injured. A friend of mine ran 1 track race in 4 years of college because he was constantly injured and was an 800 guy. I tried to sell him on higher mileage once he got out. He said he couldn't do it his body would break down. I told him he could if he ran slower. Within a few months he was running 70 miles a week and couldn't believe it. But in addition to slowing down, take your time, so many people want to be good in 6 weeks or 6 months. Come talk to me in 6 years. I really didn't start running the mileage I'm running now until 4 years after I was out of college. I could have done it sooner I think but my coach always held me back.As for my talent level, tons of guys beat me in high school, tons more kicked my ass in college, tons more kicked my ass for the next 4 years out of college, but I slowly had a plan and stuck with it, and now I'm 4th in the country. So just because I'm good do I automatically have tons of talent? Obviously, I have some but I think it's a stupid concept to try and measure. At the level I'm at now, just measure us across the finish line. I don't think too much about how much talent I don't or do have. There is always the personal satisfaction I get from pushing myself to do things I didn't imagine myself being able to do. I'm not saying everyone has the ability I have to reach the level I have in the sport, but I think with proper training and perseverance they can accomplish a lot more than most people think.Sure guys who are good perhaps think the sport is too easy. (The faster I get, running becomes so simple). And perhaps we give ourselves too much credit for the work we put in. But then again, I want to give myself some credit for what I've done because I'm proud of it and running is the most mentally demanding thing I do (forget about the physical part). But I wouldn't argue that my body is naturally gifted to handle the load I do. My identical twin brother is constantly injured and every day I ran in high school and college I was icing a different part of my body. But things are constantly popping up, am I constantly assessing them, thinking about them, figuring out what I need to do. Injuries are the worst part of the sport, but there are a lot of things people can do to try and overcome them. I'm not saying you won't be injured but i'm saying most people can run a fair amount of mileage if they slow down most days.I credit most of my success to perseverance, training smart, and my mental focus. My mantra this past spring to my coach was "I've got no business running sub 28". Nothing seemed to go how I wanted it, but he knew what I was saying and that was "g** damnit I'm going to find a way to run 28 minutes this year". And come nationals I was pretty damn close to 28 minutes. I may have pulled one out of my ass but when I heard that some guys out on Boulder were complimenting me for performing well when it counts it was the ultimate compliment.I hope I'm not coming across as an arrogant prick but I think if you focus on how much talent you don't have, you're just limiting how much you can improve in the sport. Ultimately, we all have one of the same main goals, and that is to see how fast we can each be. I replied to the post below because in skimming this thread it says best what I'm trying to say:

I'll have to read that Derek Clayton thread tomorrow. Man you guys are posting too much. Too 100+ post threads I hadn't even seen.

malmo wrote:

Who said anything about reaching my potential? I know I never said that. My career was slowed when I stepped in a hole and tore the plantar fascia while training for the World XCs and would bother me for five full years.

If you were not running so much, maybe you would not have stepped in that hole. You were probably asleep at the wheel while on your 942'nd 15 miler.

I have a very similar story to Guest. My HS cross PR was right at 18:00. On the track, my times were even less spectacular. I ran at a D-III college and was the 8th runner my frosh year. Slowly and consistently I increased training, and was a decent D-III runner (25:45 cross) when I graduated. Since college (2.5 years out), I have kept up the consistent increases in training, and have continued to improve--recently running 24:57 on a fairly tough cross course.

The thing is, I know I can do more in terms of training. I've never finished a race/workout/etc...and said that's it, I can't go faster. Even in my best races, I always think I could have been faster.

It's funny because in HS, nobody said I was talented.

In college, I had a bit of talent.

Now, people think I am very talented.

Talent is a silly thing to talk about. It gives you your starting point, and then you go from there.