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

dunes runner do us all a favor, go back to dyestat.

well, my headache has cleared. i've looked back over the thread and note that several have said what i have to say in different ways. malmo, hodgie-san and many others on this board have all known college recruits that were state champs, stars in high school regularly fail to make it thru one week, one month or one season before giving it up.

at EMU, i started w/a couple guys that were top runners the year before and they didn't even make it thru the season. of the studs from my senior class in high school, only one, Doug Brown, prospered in college. this drop-out rate is an annual thing on campuses across the u.s. why is this?

the answer is easy and is contained in many of the posts on this thread: so much about success is between the ears. not enough runners look for ways to improve, implement and experiment. you've gotta think of ways to make things better. it's an ongoing process. if you're not doing this, you're selling yourself short.

this isn't about talent. it's about effectively busting ass.

if you're not learning as you're going, bad things will happen. again, if you're not looking for ways to get better, you won't. don't wait around for outside sources of motivation or encouragement to log the miles. seek your own sources of motivation. make your own breaks.

scott you are so right. i coach a d1. we get top runners from high school every year and most all of them quit. i keep telling them to bust ass but they get worn out injured can't run and give up. it's because they don't listen to me and bust ass like you said. you and i know this because this happens over and over. that's what we need is more advice like this to keep busting ass and doing it the same way. too bad they don't listen to us.

Can somebody define bustin' ass for me? Because this guy is saying that his runners are worn out, injured, can't run... I thought they GOT that way from "bustin' ass". Is he really saying that they need to keep doing the thing that got them injured?!?

Scotth alright: I understood he's saying keep working and keep learning/refining till you find what works for you... I got that. But this last poster...

scott you are so right. i coach a d1. we get top runners from high school every year and most all of them quit. i keep telling them to bust ass but they get worn out injured can't run and give up. it's because they don't listen to me and bust ass like you said. you and i know this because this happens over and over. that's what we need is more advice like this to keep busting ass and doing it the same way. too bad they don't listen to us. >>

The real problem in the US is a lack of consistent coaching. The HS star graduates from a system that he/she had much success in and right when their career is going strong, is forced to switch from the coach who was involved heavily in their success. Contrast that with Paula Radcliffe who's had the same coach since she was very young.

There are no easy answers to this problem. There are those who would say that a club-based program rather than a school-based program in the US would work better, but you would be lucky to get 10% (if that many) of the involvement in such a program as you presently do working through the schools. I can't see parents making the committment to involve their kids in running that they do in, say soccer or swimming, nor would I want to at a pre-high school age.

too many seasons, x-c, indoor, outdoor, summer build-up, start over. I know I was toast after 2 years of this cycle.

dunes runner wrote:

I know of two runners who trained together every day (long ago), one of them averaging 170 per week for two years, the other 190 per week for two years. And another who ran 500 miles on his vacation week, then a 2:19 at the Boston marathon. I think his fastest 10k was 31 or 32 minutes.

Did one of your doctors stop your Haldol or did you just quit taking it on your own? Bad move either way. That you would say these things perfectly fits the persona (and the psychopathology) of someone who really seems to think he's right even though 99 percent of the people in any given thread - and that's a conservative estimate - are against him.

At least your confabulating hcarries some entertainment value, unlike all of the other grating, baiting fecoverbiage you spew volcanically out of your ass and onto this beleaguered board.

Usher wrote:

The real problem in the US is a lack of consistent coaching. The HS star graduates from a system that he/she had much success in and right when their career is going strong, is forced to switch from the coach who was involved heavily in their success.

There are no easy answers to this problem.

Usher, there's something to what you say but, friend, the current hi school to college 'system' ain't gonna change any time soon. We can't babysit these kids. Their hi school coaches would be doing them a favor by fostering a learning environment, exposing them to differing training systems and psychological methods.

Of course, we know hi school coaches won't, on the whole, be able, willing or capable of the things I suggest above. So that puts the burden on the kid to seek improvement initially in college. There are many fine college coaches that know getting ready for racing involves the kids bodies AND mind. Even w/that, as you note, there are no easy answers to this problem.

It does help if the athlete is surrounded by encouraging, nurturing adults. The athlete does need to want to do what they're doing, regularly seek ways to improve or they'll get discouraged and distracted by other real-life demands (academics, new freedom, social atmosphere, etc).

My son will be in college next year and I hope his coach and parents have prepared him well. He's talented. Hopefully he's kept his eyes open and continues to seek improvement.

As a veteran HS coach, perhaps I see things somewhat differently. How do you propose that a HS coach (who teaches 5-6 classes a day usually in a field with nothing to do with athletics) find the time to "expose the athletes to different training systems"? I've had many athletes go on to college; about 1/3 DI and 2/3 DII, DIII, Juco or NAIA.

The ones who have had the best experience are the ones who run at the lower collegiate levels. I would say that a majority of the runners who've gone DI have been damaged beyond repair by the demands of the collegiate system. Too often at DI I see coaches who think of the runner as a finished product and not as a talent to be developed. Again, I understand that Title IX has created a monster where "roster management" is a concern and there may not be time for development; for that reason I'm glad that my one-time dream of college coaching never came to pass.

As a good friend of mine often says, it's a mucked-up fess.

English as a foreign language wrote:

Can somebody define bustin' ass for me? Because this guy is saying that his runners are worn out, injured, can't run... I thought they GOT that way from "bustin' ass". Is he really saying that they need to keep doing the thing that got them injured?!?

Scotth alright: I understood he's saying keep working and keep learning/refining till you find what works for you... I got that. But this last poster...

I think the wording of 'busting ass' refers to training through the discomfort...continuing on with the training even though it seems like your times aren't improving. You have a choice...to back off of the training or to keep going and get through this 'breakdown' zone. There are times when it might be appropriate to back off (especially if you're injury prone) and other times when it's gut check time and you need to have faith that your body/mind is going to make it through these rough stretches. Just my opinion & interpretation though...take it for what it's worth.

Drunk N. Hyena

Usher wrote:

As a veteran HS coach, perhaps I see things somewhat differently. .... I've had many athletes go on to college; about 1/3 DI and 2/3 DII, DIII, Juco or NAIA.

The ones who have had the best experience are the ones who run at the lower collegiate levels. I would say that a majority of the runners who've gone DI have been damaged beyond repair by the demands of the collegiate system.

Obviously, it all depends on what kind of program you were exposed to. Division I has nothing to do with it. I went to a Division I school, a highly successful program at that. Ran the same three seasons a year that many of you claim to be what's wrong with our system, and never seemed to get burned out. Neither did any of my teammates. Good coaching does that.

It's sad to see that some of your athletes didn't have a good college experience.

The more I ran the more I realized I didn't have talent.

You know there comes a point where running 100 to 140 miles a week isn't worth it to run a low 34 10k. To me it wasn't. I tried hard for a lot of years and it never paid off, not even a little bit. Running as hard as you did is great if there is some reward. Try running that hard and all you have to show for it is being the best runner you can be. Intrinsic rewards are not all theyr'e cracked up to be.

Just about the time I am ready to give up on this board and others, a thread like this comes along, or the one on the T&FN board that Spivey is posting on.

I have long contended that the talent required to be national or world class is much more common than people think. But most people never do enough to develop it to find out if it exists.

Ask yourself this: How many runners can each of you name that you know had a ton of talent that never lived up to it? Conversely, how many runners can each of you name that showed very little talent early in their careers, but achieved a ton because of their persistence?

Two examples of the latter that I trained with are (1) a guy that barely broke 10:00 for 2M in high school (and then only once) that would eventually run 2:11 for the marathon and (2) a guy that was so bad he had to run his intervals with the girls team as a freshman in high school but would run 9:12 as a senior, then win four Big 8 titles (two at 10,000, one at 2M indoor and one at 3M indoors), and got down to 4:01 for the mile.

You don't know how smart you are unless you try to learn, and you never know how much talent you have unless try to run fast.

Gelindo wrote:The more I ran the more I realized I didn't have talent.You know there comes a point where running 100 to 140 miles a week isn't worth it to run a low 34 10k. To me it wasn't. I tried hard for a lot of years and it never paid off, not even a little bit. Running as hard as you did is great if there is some reward. Try running that hard and all you have to show for it is being the best runner you can be. Intrinsic rewards are not all theyr'e cracked up to be.

Better to die knowing that than wondering "What if. . .?"

Gelindo wrote:

The more I ran the more I realized I didn't have talent.

You know there comes a point where running 100 to 140 miles a week isn't worth it to run a low 34 10k. To me it wasn't. I tried hard for a lot of years and it never paid off, not even a little bit. Running as hard as you did is great if there is some reward. Try running that hard and all you have to show for it is being the best runner you can be. Intrinsic rewards are not all theyr'e cracked up to be.

It absolutely paid off. You can sleep at night.

There is no Gold medal guaranteed to everyone that makes the sacrifice. But there is the satisfaction of knowing what could have been. Many are left wondering....you are not in that category.

Obviously, it all depends on what kind of program you were exposed to. Division I has nothing to do with it. I went to a Division I school, a highly successful program at that. Ran the same three seasons a year that many of you claim to be what's wrong with our system, and never seemed to get burned out. Neither did any of my teammates. Good coaching does that. >>

I've had several athletes have a wonderful experience at DI too. A very good point was brought up about the temporary feeling of going backwards when stepping up their training in a big way that many athletes seem to have a very tough time with with (mentally more than physicall, IMHO). Malmo, you mentioned that in your "summer of Malmo". And "Once a Runner" describes it as accurately as I've ever seen it in print when they talk about "breaking down". Is there more that we can be doing to nurture runners through this tough time, or are we doing what we can do and the runners are opting for a less demanding way of life?

Pampiniform Plexus wrote:

[quote]dunes runner wrote:

I know of two runners who trained together every day (long ago), one of them averaging 170 per week for two years, the other 190 per week for two years. And another who ran 500 miles on his vacation week, then a 2:19 at the Boston marathon. I think his fastest 10k was 31 or 32 minutes.

I met all three of them the same day, which might have been in San Fernando, March 6, 1976. I'm not sure of the date or the year. The first two were in "many" races for a few years and ran very well. I saw the one who'd run the high mileage week run a 10k on the track a few years after his marathon in something like 32:20 which looked like it was flat out all the way, hardly any knee lift at all, though he was probably not in the same fitness as before.

I don't know what is so unbelieveable about either of these things.

Yiannis Kouros, a 2:24 marathoner, has run 178 miles in ONE day.

I went through the same cycle in the same conference. If you can provide variety in the training and racing scheme, it can work. I will agree that it's not easy at all and the time between outdoor and cc as well as the time between cc and indoor really needs to be predominantly steady runs. We would probably benefit by not racing much at all during the indoor season, but for many that's a nice break from running in knee deep snow.

"You will never be a national-class marathoner on 90 miles a week; you may never be a national-class marathoner on 140 miles a week. But the only shot you have is to go the 140 route. When you're 40 years old and beaten up, you'll know something about yourself that [naysayers] won't. You'll know if you could have been a national-class marathoner."

-Mike Platt, 2:18 marathoner