Doesn't sound like Track Star is a parent. If your kid has talent or a skill, you invest in it. Or at least you ought to. Does that investment sound excessive in this case? Sure does. Except when you weigh it against this year's results. You can't wish this sort of thing away until you're in the 1% of 1% in terms of talent or results. The only sad thing is that more people don't get the chance not just to start something, but to see it through.
Doesn't sound like Track Star is a parent. If your kid has talent or a skill, you invest in it. Or at least you ought to. Does that investment sound excessive in this case? Sure does. Except when you weigh it against this year's results. You can't wish this sort of thing away until you're in the 1% of 1% in terms of talent or results. The only sad thing is that more people don't get the chance not just to start something, but to see it through.
I’d argue successful and talented kids with psychotic parents make it despite their parents, not because of them
So just jumping to the last page of this thread, therefore, I don't know if this has been stated. But, of course I assume it has, possibly multiple times-
If the main reason for josh's giant improvement was PED's and bicarb, maybe the coach actually didn't have as much to do with his improvement as some suspect. Maybe it was the "regimen" instead.
If so, firing the coach might not be irrational as would appear. 🤷
If it was all drugs then I doubt 3 x 400 with 10 mind rest cooks him as much as it did and he would have continued rolling all summer with his hard training
If he was doped he’d be like Wanyonyi and his ability to run near a peak for 5-6 months. Wanyonyi’s coach is Claudio Berardelli, trainer of six suspended dopers and counting.
Doesn't sound like Track Star is a parent. If your kid has talent or a skill, you invest in it. Or at least you ought to. Does that investment sound excessive in this case? Sure does. Except when you weigh it against this year's results. You can't wish this sort of thing away until you're in the 1% of 1% in terms of talent or results. The only sad thing is that more people don't get the chance not just to start something, but to see it through.
I am a parent - of four. My youngest (twins) are graduating high school this year. My kids were all above average athletes, not stars. But I have seen a lot of stuff in youth sports over the past couple of decades. And I happened to have had a father who pushed me pretty hard in sports back in the day.
Here's the key question in this sort of situation - is this the kid's dream or the parent's? If it's the former, and the parent wants to support the kid, then great. Although it is pretty easy to overstep your bounds and put unnecessary pressure on the kid, even with the best of intentions.
If it's the parent's dream, and the kid is basically along for the ride, that is always problematic. As I said in my original post, there might be tangible successes - medals won, records broken, etc. - but you're really playing with fire in that scenario. Just Google Todd Marinovich. It seems to invariably become about the parent's ego gratification, at the kid's long-term expense. No one raises a red flag in the beginning because it all seems to be going so well - until it isn't.
I listen to a lot of podcast interviews of successful people, and I can't tell you how many of them say that they are thankful that their parents gave them space and were not overly interested in what they were doing all the time. They could explore their own interests and take ownership of whatever their passion was. But that style of parenting has largely gone out of style in favor of micromanaging.
I suppose it's a question of values or priorities. I want my children to be well-adjusted people who can chart their own course in life, not tools that I try to use to satisfy my own unfulfilled ambitions. But I suppose that's just me.