Time for complete overhaul of 'how to train' US elite distance runners: the system is broken

yes the likes of Dave Bedford,Eammon Martin,Steve Jones ,Ian Thomson,Steve Ovett, Brenden Foster were the great names of UK distance running. They were produced by putting in hours and miles of training with little science and technology to help them. They were true grit and totally dedicated and committed to running at any cost.No fuss or pandering - just hard work and patience!

....what happened over in Great Britain?

so... wrote:

....what happened over in Great Britain?

Again, great ideas -- in a perfect world. It is an encouraging sign that track and cc are as popular as ever on the scholastic level, despite the scourge of wii and satellite teevee, and that there is a really solid and widespread level of performance showing up again after the drought of the '90s. Again, though, where will the funding come from? Entities with sufficiently deep pockets (outside of the shoe companies) are not engaging in bidding wars to support t&f on the whole (incl. the glamorous and sexy sprints), let alone the distance running niche. If I were to see a sensible fund-raising plan I, for one, would get completely behind it. I imagine a lot of other people would, too. This money is not going to materialize out of thin air or fall from the trees. This worsening economy certainly does not help in attracting support for anything other than a sure thing. It would take a lot of money just to set up even five of those proposed training centers with medical, gear, stipends, and coaching for 10 athletes per center, let alone continue to maintain them for 4+ years and let alone for 25+ training centers.

HRE I suggest you read the entire thread by John Hadd and Antonio Cabral. I think there are one or two things you could learn from them.

coacht wrote:

Need more pop and spring wrote:

Because my feet spend more time on the ground than the faster guys.

BINGO!!!! The best athletes, whether sprinters or distance runners, are quick and light on their feet. Few coaches start with how to run and spend their energy on what to run. Absolutely backwards.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Right, someone who actually gets it. The fastest distance runners are more economical because they have a better running action.

HRE, you are missing the point, I'm not arguing about mileage, and anyways I run plenty mileage. The fastest distance runners have better power and efficiency in their stride.

SO:

Better stride power and efficiency at race paces= less oxygen cost at race paces.

no excuses..... wrote:

this disgraceful and embarassing showing by the US, the richest country in the world, with the best training facilities and opportunities to succeed in the world is BROKEN. Time for a completely new system. Any ideas?

Uh.......when's the last time we won an olympic medal in the middle distances. It's been broken for a LLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG time.

I believe 1972 to be exact.

I hate to admit it but when it comes down to it he's right. Outside of a few freaks (Hall, Webb, Flanagan - most AR holders or near it) our top athletes are either African imports or also rans.

Team B Africans run all over our top guys and they have been continually doing this since emerging into the scene. Look at the main pack of championship finals and the gap between them and non-Africans. It's crazy.

[quote]666 wrote:

The only way an American will ever compete with the Africans is to either a: hope that a rare genetic talent tries out and trains properly, or b: institute a national long distance talent search.

[quote]

I say we do it like American Idle.

I have and didn't learn anything I didn't already know.

Of course it does. All training systems aim to enhance those sorts of things. So what's your point?

Mine is that we need to get moer people running a lot more miles as a starting point. Once they've done that they're better equipped to do the sorts of work that enhances efficiency and stride power.

Diemer got bronze in '84.

ChiTown Hustler wrote:

no excuses..... wrote:

this disgraceful and embarassing showing by the US, the richest country in the world, with the best training facilities and opportunities to succeed in the world is BROKEN. Time for a completely new system. Any ideas?

Uh.......when's the last time we won an olympic medal in the middle distances. It's been broken for a LLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG time.

I believe 1972 to be exact.

U.S. Population = 305,000,000

World Population = 6,684,000,000

U.S. Population as a % of World Population = 1/22

# of Medals in Distance Events:

1,500M x 6 Medals (M/W)

3,000MSC x 6 Medals (M/W)

5,000M x 6 Medals (M/W)

10,000 x 6 Medals (M/W)

Maratahon 6 Medals (M/W)

__________________________

30 Medals for Men & Women's Distance Events

Given the U.S. % of the World Population we should be winning, on average, ONE medal in the distance events each Olympics. Want to factor in technology, civilization, training advances, etc? Maybe that gets you another medal or two, but how about some realistic expectations? American ethnocentrism knows no bounds, does it?

..........

Using that same logic the United States should be winning a Basketball and Beach Volleyball medal every 120 years. Nice logic.

BULLSHIT! if you knew about different types of runners; than you wouldn't insist on Lydiard's training cycle and High Mileage. Instead you come in here to preach high mileage and all the wonders it has done to you and to Lydiard's Olympians.

Apparently that was Bekele's progression. He moved up one step at a time when he began losing the 100, then the 200,....

I would believe that but I find it hard to believe he was losing when running the 1500m. Maybe he got lazy after moving up to the 800 and said, "Screw it I am going right to the 10" followed by "This jogging for 24 laps and then putting in some weak sprints is way too easy. Why make the effort to be good in the 15"?:)

yum wrote:

Apparently that was Bekele's progression. He moved up one step at a time when he began losing the 100, then the 200,....

bullll wrote:

BULLSHIT! if you knew about different types of runners; than you wouldn't insist on Lydiard's training cycle and High Mileage. Instead you come in here to preach high mileage and all the wonders it has done to you and to Lydiard's Olympians.

even though I improved under a Lydiard based system in college, from 426 mile to a 407 mile, I would still be the 1st to say that "NOT ONE PROGRAM FITS ALL TYPES OF RUNNERS". We had a good percentage of guys who couldn't take the high mileage and broke down. I trained under the Igloi systeme for a few years after college and the same rule applies. Some people ran better under that system, some people ran worse. You just have to find what works best for YOU.

I do understand about different types of runners. The asme principles apply to all of them. It's the application that needs adjusting. Lydiard didn't have Snell doing the asme things as Magee or Richard Taylor did. But he did good volume relative to what he could do.