What does Tinman thinks about the Ingebrigtsens' training?

drrt wrote:

On the contrary, velocity is a concept from physics. The word is then used, and misused, by people wanting to sound scientific.

I have a masters degree in physics and I can vouch that this is a purely linguistic matter. The science itself is independent of language, at least one would expect it to be. However Russian (and I studied physics in Moscow) doesn't have as much redundant synonyms, and there's only one word for speed, both used for scalar value and vector. Nobody thus thinks about them as separate concepts and the science doesn't fall apart.

Given it's a linguistic issue, I'd trust the dictionary about it.

Tinman being who he is and having to look different from everyone else just took a word which looks novel compared to commonly used 'pace' and 'speed' that's all.

The Dirty Duck wrote:

I'm pretty sure that nobody else is judging tinman based on his decision to call 35 minute race pace critical velocity instead of critical value or speed.

i will judge that this makes him pretentious. but I respect him as a coach. Though I have often wondered, as others in here have opined, whether he is best cut out for the high school level. Hard to say for sure.

drrt wrote:

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

The best part is that the defintion of velocity is just wrong. From webster

1a: quickness of motion

It is only in niche usage (i.e. physics) were velocity gets made into a vector. But lets say that you do want to call a velocity a vector. Does anyone really not know what the training direction is? Does anyone really think that anyone is suggesting running backwards?

On the contrary, velocity is a concept from physics. The word is then used, and misused, by people wanting to sound scientific.

Words and their usage is completely relevant based on culture and how society uses them.

regenz wrote:

I do think that is the other side of it - a lot of people hate on Tinman's training, but it is just about as good as anything out there if you are not at the elite level.

It's balanced, manageable, and well rounded. You could do a lot worse than mimicking what he does and I think you see real evidence of how well his Tinman Track Club runners do under his system. Most all have improved at most all distances.

But again, it's hard to keep the training and the man separate.

Can't agree with you. He has had a lot of runners injured last years. He is strongly overrated!

American Pie wrote:

regenz wrote:

I do think that is the other side of it - a lot of people hate on Tinman's training, but it is just about as good as anything out there if you are not at the elite level.

It's balanced, manageable, and well rounded. You could do a lot worse than mimicking what he does and I think you see real evidence of how well his Tinman Track Club runners do under his system. Most all have improved at most all distances.

But again, it's hard to keep the training and the man separate.

Can't agree with you. He has had a lot of runners injured last years. He is strongly overrated!

Tinman's philosophy of "keep the ball rolling" has been exposed as BS. Everyone is injured. He can't even keep post collegiate guys healthy at only 70-75 miles per week. He is clueless and is the most over-rated coach ever.

Elvin wrote:

He's also a big believer in misusing the word "velocity." Velocity is a vector. If you were to prescribe a critical velocity at which a runner should train, you would be prescribing both a pace and a direction.

I've long leveled the same criticism at his grandiloquent use of "velocity" (though perhaps it's to distinguish his use of the concept from the identical concept of critical speed that occurs in scientific journals).

However, this just occurred to me - perhaps it's an ingenious means to indicate not only the speed he wants his runners to move at, but also to indicate that he wants them to run forward (as opposed to running backwards). So it's a bit of a colloquial vector, if you will, to prescribe his runners to run a bit slower than 10K pace, forward.

Also, while the pedant hat is still on, you'd be prescribing a speed and a direction. Pace is, in the context of running mechanics, the inverse of speed, and would thus not give you your all-important critical velocity vector.

ingeman wrote:

Nope. More interested in hearing why Tinman believes his CV-focused training is superior.

You are wondering whose Kung Fu is best?

Just a clue for you. A good coach matches the coaching to the athlete. Otherwise there'd be a plethora of successful parent coaches who took a course or read a book

Someone here said that some coaches get the best talents of the US and then train them very hard and get away with it, because they are such big talents.

As Norway hardly excist (in terms of populus), the nation cannot afford that, and make the best out of every talent, no saying of what Gjert is thinking what he can afford when he is just one man and can foster only so many children and grandchildren.

canacowski? wrote:

ingeman wrote:

Nope. More interested in hearing why Tinman believes his CV-focused training is superior.

You are wondering whose Kung Fu is best?

Just a clue for you. A good coach matches the coaching to the athlete. Otherwise there'd be a plethora of successful parent coaches who took a course or read a book

Nope. More interested in hearing why Tinman believes his CV-focused training is superior.

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

u maddd wrote:

LOL for real, buncha science nerds here without the social awareness to know that they are embarrassing themselves. These guys and the grammar nazis here are competing for most out of touch rejects on this board. Pull the lightsabers out of your butts and breathe, dudettes

The best part is that the defintion of velocity is just wrong. From webster

1a: quickness of motion

It is only in niche usage (i.e. physics) were velocity gets made into a vector. But lets say that you do want to call a velocity a vector. Does anyone really not know what the training direction is? Does anyone really think that anyone is suggesting running backwards?

Exactly. The poster that started this thread bifurcation is a pedant who is citing beginning physics. In most cases the direction of velocity is implied. In running velocity is basically forward motion and wind resistance.

Where vector direction matters is in sailing, collisions, flight, skiing, or billiards etc where velocity (speed, acceleration, gravity) and direction are all variables.

Has Tinman improved upon Lydiard or Daniels? NO.

Lydiard and Daniels have linear approach as in they get you from point A (start of season) to B (championship race). Tinman gets you in roughly the same shape but doesn't seem to get specific about the championship race.

what is wrong with you tinman haters? How many active U.S. distance coaches at the professional level are significantly better than him? Can you name more than 8?

Ben Rosario, Lee Troop, Danny McKay, Jerry Schumacher, Chris Fox, Scott Simmons, Pete Julian, Mike Smith

I would also say 90% of college coaches are better than Tinman, too.

I don’t know if it’s that much, I would say that the top coaches are much better than the attention they receive. Besides Mike Smith, Ed eyestone, Andy Powell, Wetmore, Martin, Gulley, Ben Thomas, Rob Connor, Kevin Sullivan, Steve Gulley, Vin Lananna, Pete Watson to name a few.

The Ingebrigstens (or at least Jakob and Filip at this point) are in a different stratosphere than the Tinmen. Even Henrik is far better than all of them. Drew and Sam haven't even done anything this season and haven't even broken 13:20 yet. Not sure where Gusman has been and the other guys are pretty meh at this point. Those guys need to focus on themselves and being competitive in their own rights before even coming close to thinking about the Ingebrigstens.

Jerry Maguire wrote:

Comparing these groups is a bit ridiculous. You are comparing world class runners to more or less a fraternity of sorts. It's not even comparable.

The Ingebritsens are literally a fraternity, though. You can't draw conclusions from training that works well on 3 brothers.

They also get a huge benefit from competing for Norway, in that they don't really have to structure their training around qualifying for teams.

Yeah they're on another level from anyone else in Norway. The only other competitive Norgwegian dude on the world stage in Sondre Moen, and he hardly even runs track at this point (and complains that his feet hurt on the track if he doesn't have his beloved next %s).