Ron Warhurst > Tinman

creditwhereitsdue wrote:

Amazing to me how little recognition he gets. Just think it’s a shame credit isn’t given where it’s due in the coaching world and appreciated in the broader running world.

Ron Warhurst doesn't seek or need recognition. His resume speaks for itself. He's the real deal.

100% agreed.

For the sake of improving results on the world stage and moving the sport forward in this country though, would be nice if he did receive more attention.

Far more would be gained from picking his brain than coaches who thrive on self-marketing rather than result or those on suspension for doping violations.

If the guy ever wrote a book on his career and coaching it would be required for anyone with ambitions of success from mile-10k.

Old school...hard work...you’ll be good if you survive the training.

Tinman training isn't really anything special. The double workout days seem pretty stupid. I don't know if their team is so injured because of bad training, bad shoe contract, or both.

Started the thread mainly to point out that some of Tinman’s methods that he’s put fancy labels on, have been used by coaches long before him. It gives the false impression that he invented them. Nothing novel about them in reality.

“Multi-tier workouts” a Tinman term...sounds awful lot like “The Michigan” workout. Warhurst has done since the late-70’s.

“Critical velocity”... is just K’s at 10k pace.

I think it’s important to give credit where it’s actually due. And as I said earlier in the thread, for the sake of moving the sport forward and getting more results on the world stage, we’d all be better served learning from someone like Warhurst....who’s had endless athletes make finals on the world stage, top 10 XC teams, all Americans, etc.

Ingebretsen's do double threshold workout days and they've done okay

Why is this even a thread or discussion. At best Tinman has 1.5 good athletes. Warhurst has forgotten the names of more good athletes than Tinman will ever coach. Obviously Schwartz is reading this and making admin delete comments that hurt his fragile ego.

cramister wrote:

Ingebretsen's do double threshold workout days and they've done okay

The answer to what training is best can really be answered by who is the most talented athlete?

I wrote a letter to Ted Banks at UTEP in the summer of 1976 asking him what they do at UTEP to be so successful, he wrote me back (hand written) told me that they have a little bit of altitude which is a benefit and that they have great athletes, used the phrase below to best describe the success:

"Athletes make coaches look good"

It's like saying Cam Newton is better than Tom Brady. You'd have to be delusional to even compare the two.

He is coached by Warhurst and trains semi-regularly with the 3:57 kid, among others

creditwhereitsdue2 wrote:

, we’d all be better served learning from someone like Warhurst....who’s had endless athletes make finals on the world stage, top 10 XC teams, all Americans, etc.

Warhurst is free to write a book, film a talk, or whatever any time he wants to. Plenty of people would love to see it.

Nobody thinks Tinman's philosophy is some radical change other than his haters. Most people see it as a well designed program that you can criticize individual parts of but it is in the realm of reasonable. It is like Jack Daniels of the 2010's. It is far from perfect but it is better than like 95% of the stuff out there.

Seriously if you had the choice between every high school coach using a Tinman approach or using their own scheme, would anyone in the work prefer the using their own scheme? I am sure there are a dozen coaches out there who are better but their are thousands who are much worse.

It seems like people on here are saying Warhurst & Tinman have similar training plans, but Tinman has done a better job marketing himelf.

I have seen Tinman's system posted online, listened to podcasts, sat in conferences where he spoke, etc. And, of course, he has his Tinman Elite Team.

Can anyone post Warhurst's system or a sample Warhurst schedule? I'd be interested in seeing one.

H.S. Coach #675498 wrote:

It seems like people on here are saying Warhurst & Tinman have similar training plans, but Tinman has done a better job marketing himelf.

No, no, no... I did NOT mean to imply they have similar training plans. I don’t think they do. Rather, Tinman has taken some things that Warhurst has done for decades and rebranded them in a way to make it seem as if it’s his idea.

Notably, Tinman’s layered workouts consisting of hills, tempo work, and intervals in single sessions. This is NOT a new concept at all! I can tell you Warhurst has down hill&tempo, hill&interval, and “The Michigan” workout for much, much longer and far before Tinman coached.

Their training plans overall, and how they develop athletes, is MUCH different. Hence, Warhurst’s FAR greater success.

I really do think Warhurst is a coach that was way ahead of his time. You can find real old school training videos he did where he discusses the importance of running mechanics and arm carriage...something that didn’t really catch on much until ~2012 when Alberto starting taking about how he developed Mo & Galen to look for like sprinters in terms of their form and finishing speed.... Warhurst recognized long before many of his peers did.

"The Michigan" has nothing to do with the layered workouts Tinman is prescribing.

Tinman wants to combine threshold/CV stuff, followed by hills for strength and strides for speed. It's an aerobic session, with a slight to medium muscular stimulus.

"The Michigan" is a peaking workout, working on lactate tolerance and simulating the fatigue you will feel during and at the end of a race. It is extremely demanding aerobically, anaerobically and muscular-wise. The last 400 is literally all-out, as fast as you can go after already doing tons of work with the only rest being a 2k lap around the neighborhood at a tempo pace. In terms of effort, "The Michigan" is like a race, just structured differently.

Tinman also doesn't claim to have invented anything, he is just popularizing training methods that have been used successfully for decades and bringing them together in a system that's easy to understand for the average Joe runner.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

"The Michigan" has nothing to do with the layered workouts Tinman is prescribing.

Tinman wants to combine threshold/CV stuff, followed by hills for strength and strides for speed. It's an aerobic session, with a slight to medium muscular stimulus.

"The Michigan" is a peaking workout, working on lactate tolerance and simulating the fatigue you will feel during and at the end of a race. It is extremely demanding aerobically, anaerobically and muscular-wise.

The Michigan: 2k tempo’s, with some “VO2” intervals, and a fast 400...sounds like a “layer” workout.

Again, Warhurst has done tempo+hill and hill+interval workouts as well since the 70’s.

Tinman did a great job of capitalizing on coaching a sub-4 HS kid....but if you compare bodies of work over a 40 year period of time...Warhurst > Tinman.

I’d like to point out that a cost of self-promotion and social media presence is criticism.

The more you put yourself out there, the more you open yourself up for criticism. Nothing wrong with it. Don’t be a snowflake about it. It’s the price you pay.

We don’t all have to accept someone as god’s gift to coaching if we don’t believe he is.

Aaaand LateRunnerPhil rolls in and stans for Tinman even though he has no connection to him, as we all expected lol