We learned the details of "these methods" two days ago. Did you expect top pros to adopt them yesterday?
.
Perhaps they did.
So has cross-training only just been invented? Nurmi and, later, Zatopek and Elliott knew something about it. Triathletes have done it for decades. Arc trainers aren't new. Coaches have always been looking for better ways to train. What Valby says she is doing is hardly revolutionary.
This post was edited 6 minutes after it was posted.
If Parker Valby's secret were talent, when her creator handed out God given talent, he would have allowed her to be an elite swimmer. A mediocre youth swimmer, switches to running, has injury issues, is willing to cross train on aerobic equipment and is allowed to race while training on aerobic equipment. Most college runners who suffer injuries, train on aerobic equipment while stress fracture(s) heal then are expected to run 5 to 7 days a week once stress fractures heal. Read posts here on this site. How many runners get stress fractures, heal, start running again 5 to 7 days a week, get stress fractures again then often quit. What is unique: U of Florida are allowing Parker Valby to race while only running 3 or 4 days a week. There have been so many talented runners over the decades not allowed to do what Parker Valby is doing. It's not talent, it is smart coaching.
So if this is "smart coaching" it will be followed by most top distance runners. It has yet to catch on. That's probably because they still get better results from running.
However, since you appear to think it isn't her talent that's achieving results but coaching then we should see more athletes with modest ability breaking NCAA records on the same training.
"Did you hear about that small group of dummies down in New Zealand? Some strange old man has them running over 100 miles a week! Even their best 800 guy is doing a hilly 22 mile long run!!! It's madness! Name me one great track champion that doesn't do gut busting anerobic reps until they puke? You can't! The great Zatopek and those young guys out of Hungary ran intervals all day long. Long steady distance...pfft! I'll laugh my hairy butt off when those Kiwis take dead last in the Rome prelims!"
Time will tell if Valby's hybrid training method can work on the global elite level. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Someone has to be a pioneer and try something new. She may even adapt it to deal with the rigors of truly elite competition. In any case, sit back and enjoy the show. It seems kind of stupid to simply write off someone that recently ran 14:52/30:50 as peaked and to label their training "dumb". A lot of folks out there that followed high mileage orthodox training to the letter and haven't come anywhere near Ms. Valby's times.
That's really gotta' hurt some of your gentlemen. Maybe go hit a table in frustration and then find an ARC Trainer?
"Did you hear about that small group of dummies down in New Zealand? Some strange old man has them running over 100 miles a week! Even their best 800 guy is doing a hilly 22 mile long run!!! It's madness! Name me one great track champion that doesn't do gut busting anerobic reps until they puke? You can't! The great Zatopek and those young guys out of Hungary ran intervals all day long. Long steady distance...pfft! I'll laugh my hairy butt off when those Kiwis take dead last in the Rome prelims!"
Time will tell if Valby's hybrid training method can work on the global elite level. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Someone has to be a pioneer and try something new. She may even adapt it to deal with the rigors of truly elite competition. In any case, sit back and enjoy the show. It seems kind of stupid to simply write off someone that recently ran 14:52/30:50 as peaked and to label their training "dumb". A lot of folks out there that followed high mileage orthodox training to the letter and haven't come anywhere near Ms. Valby's times.
That's really gotta' hurt some of your gentlemen. Maybe go hit a table in frustration and then find an ARC Trainer?
You've missed the point that this kind of training isn't new. She isn't "pioneering" anything. She's just not training very hard.
True. But I think it can help maintain fitness at the very least. Meb used his Elliptigo a lot before his Boston win. Running will always be the best training for running because of specificity. But I do think that cross training can help bridge the gap that more fragile people have to more durable ones. However, the fragile runners still have to put in the hard work via running like speed work and intervals.
People with running talent who train like professional triathletes can run elite times, as long as they're doing some minimum amount of track/speed work. This is such a new and exciting discovery. (Not!)
Yes. Valby is more fragile than others which is why she cross trains. And she would be much better if she ran more and cross trained less. You finally see it.
"Did you hear about that small group of dummies down in New Zealand? Some strange old man has them running over 100 miles a week! Even their best 800 guy is doing a hilly 22 mile long run!!! It's madness! Name me one great track champion that doesn't do gut busting anerobic reps until they puke? You can't! The great Zatopek and those young guys out of Hungary ran intervals all day long. Long steady distance...pfft! I'll laugh my hairy butt off when those Kiwis take dead last in the Rome prelims!"
Time will tell if Valby's hybrid training method can work on the global elite level. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Someone has to be a pioneer and try something new. She may even adapt it to deal with the rigors of truly elite competition. In any case, sit back and enjoy the show. It seems kind of stupid to simply write off someone that recently ran 14:52/30:50 as peaked and to label their training "dumb". A lot of folks out there that followed high mileage orthodox training to the letter and haven't come anywhere near Ms. Valby's times.
That's really gotta' hurt some of your gentlemen. Maybe go hit a table in frustration and then find an ARC Trainer?
Yea, stupid, ortodox Sifan Hassan or Genzebe Dibaba who do 100% of their aerobic training as running (or lterally every world class runner the last 100 years).
The problem here is the obtuse that fail to understand the different nuances between even elite runners.
If running is the only way to build maximum aerobic fitness that is optimum for running, then why aren’t all elites running 250miles/week like the scrawny Gerry Lindgren?
^That question was never andequately answered on this forum, going clear back to the days when jtupper posted.
The answer lies in how catabolic distance running actually is to the human body, so one’s unique hormonal profiles obviously play into that.
It’s better to keep the ball rolling and actually show up to the start line.
People with running talent who train like professional triathletes can run elite times, as long as they're doing some minimum amount of track/speed work. This is such a new and exciting discovery. (Not!)
which one is with in 10s/mile of the WR? It is a really short list. The gap between being very good and elite is pretty big. It is like the guys who run 13:30 off 40mpw. It is really good. But it is far ways from what they could be.
Maybe you can be elite with say 5 hours running and 15 hours of cross training versus say 12 hours of running but the evidence for that is limited. I sort of expect you hit the same wall if the people trying to run 200mpw where the benefits may not be the cost.
At the sub elite level where people struggle to run 7 hours/week much less 10, it is pretty easy to justify cross training.
Yea, stupid, ortodox Sifan Hassan or Genzebe Dibaba who do 100% of their aerobic training as running (or lterally every world class runner the last 100 years).
Sifan Hassan is the gold standard of elite female distance running? Well here are Hassan’s and Valby’s PR’s at the age of 21:
Tens of thousands of people run 120MPW to race 17 minutes or 16 minutes or 15 minutes. Talent is what separates us.
Sure but training determines how much you get out of talent. Knight ran a 13:30 off one level of training and 12:5x off another. Talent don’t change. The ability to maximize it did. If suboptimal training costs you 2%, you will be 15s back in a 5k. The question is how little running you can do and still max out your talent. It isn’t remotely clear you can do that without getting in a lot of running…
Yea, stupid, ortodox Sifan Hassan or Genzebe Dibaba who do 100% of their aerobic training as running (or lterally every world class runner the last 100 years).
Sifan Hassan is the gold standard of elite female distance running? Well here are Hassan’s and Valby’s PR’s at the age of 21:
3000m Indoor
Hassan: 8:45.32; Valby: 8:41.50.
5000m
Hassan: 14:59.23; Valby: 14:52.79.
Sifan also had these PRs at the age of 21
800: 1:59.95 1500: 3:57.00
I'm fairly confident Valby doesn't have the same ceiling as Hassan due to the latter's superior speed
That said, I do believe Valby can make meaningful progress, but the chances of flirting with WRs like Hassan are virtually nil. Granted, that's also the case with the vast majority of professional runners and shouldn't be reason to not dedicate themselves to their craft.
If that is so then we should expect it will be the stock in trade for most top runners. But why isn't it? Maybe it doesn't give all the advantages of running training?
Most top runners have never tried, it's that simple. Most coaches either. In fact, most runners and coaches are unwilling to introduce crosstraining as a corner stone right from the start.
This needs some additional emphasis. The dogmas in running at the NCAA and Elite running are extremely deep-seated. I ran D1 at what used to be a top 5 distance program annually. I had a very poor experience despite being on a massive upward trajectory through high school. Proactively cross training was taboo, even running on treadmills was looked down upon. In retrospect the training was archaic, the injury rate was alarming. The limited success athletes had usually amounted to one season of somehow avoiding injury and relying on raw talent, there was zero long term development. In the past 15 years that program has become a shell of what it used to be.
Now, 10 years after graduating, I have had forays into XC skiing and cycling. Both of which value a much more sophisticated understanding of training compared to what I experienced in college or witnessed at a number of other top D1 programs my friends ran at. The NCAA is a meat grinder. Miles are not always the answer in the pursuit of long-term sustainable development.
I've recently returned to running as "cross training" for my other activities and off 2-3 days of week of running I'm running at a level comparable to what I was in college and suspect I'll surpass my 5k-10k level of performance later this year. Further, non-weight bearing or limited weight bearing cross training enabled me to become far more in tune with my heart rate zones, which I think is something many 18-22 year old athletes could really use.
Additionally, there's an interview with Sophia Laukli, US XC Ski Team member recently turned trail runner. Last year she won the Golden Trail World Series while roller skiing far more hours in the summer than she ran. I would suspect Ingrid Kristiansen also spent a considerable amount of time roller skiing. Henrik Ingebrigtsen brought his roller skis with him during his brief stint at Texas A&M. XC Ski training is extremely interesting when you consider how short the season is and how limited the opportunity for exact sport-specific training is.
True. But I think it can help maintain fitness at the very least. Meb used his Elliptigo a lot before his Boston win. Running will always be the best training for running because of specificity. But I do think that cross training can help bridge the gap that more fragile people have to more durable ones. However, the fragile runners still have to put in the hard work via running like speed work and intervals.
How can "more fragile" runners be better than those who aren't, especially when they can't train as hard?