Track is nothing but numbers,” he says. “A good mathematician probably could be a good track coach.” Robert Johnson Oregon Track coach.
Does this comment bother anyone else who is a coach?
Track is nothing but numbers,” he says. “A good mathematician probably could be a good track coach.” Robert Johnson Oregon Track coach.
Does this comment bother anyone else who is a coach?
A good mathematician is only part of being an experienced and knowledgable coach . But it`s a very important part.
Still a better coach than LRC's rojo. By the way, isn't LRC's rojo a math teacher?
Gentleman Savage wrote:
By the way, isn't LRC's rojo a math teacher?
I reckon he's a history major, at least according to a sprinter dude.
SUPERIOR COACH J.S 1 wrote:
A good mathematician is only part of being an experienced and knowledgable coach . But it`s a very important part.
Do you have a higher education in mathematics , JS ?
Would be really great to have multiple rojos on LRC staff
Just FYI this thread will be deleted shortly as there's another big thread about this article
It was a silly thing for him to say. I doubt that any successful athletes, coaches or mathematicians would agree with him.
We need to ask the OG rojo.
Einstein light wrote:
SUPERIOR COACH J.S 1 wrote:
A good mathematician is only part of being an experienced and knowledgable coach . But it`s a very important part.
Do you have a higher education in mathematics , JS ?
Yes I have. I have studied mathematical analysis at the well- rated Chamers University of Technology in Gothenburg , Sweden. Also I`m an educated data programmer at Gothenburg University. Mathematics has always been one of my favourite subjects in school.
This post was removed.
I don’t agree at all with that.
You need a high level of emotional intelligence in addition to a scientific approach to training.
If you don’t know how to motivate, deal with anxiety issues, etc. with each individual athlete as they are all different then you are not going to make a good coach unless you train athletes with no issues. But they all
Have them from the top down.
Natural talent does way more than a coach. Why do you think UTEP only has a few good Africans every so often and nobody else on the team would even make a high school JV team? And the many, many high school coaches with one good athlete in their career.
Coaching is just throwing spaghetti on the wall and hoping something sticks. Coaches make up all these fancy training strategies to justify why they are special. But you aren’t. You’re just lucky to get good athletes.
End of story.
Hot take it's true, well more about probability and statistics. Being a good coach is all about recruiting and not messing it up. Development and training philosophy is too overrated. The cream of the crop will rise to the top and pray they don't get injured. Look at Paul Chelimo, not saying he doesn't work hard. He absolutely does work his a$$ off. But with almost no training he ran a sub 15 5k at altitude. If I adopt a child with that natural ability and coach him intelligently I'd look like the second coming of Peter Coe.
Hmmm. Wouldn't a double major in exercise science and math make me a great coach? I wonder what J Taylor majored in?
Math in running is at an elementary level. Johnsons point is BS to try and escape the fat shaming scandal at Oregon.
A coach being excellent in both psychology and exercise science is what’s important. The mental aspect of an athlete is as important as the physical. Interestingly Mike Smith at NAU has a degree in psychology. He’s also the best coach in the country rate now.
The owners of this site run far from being good in psychology. If anything this place causes mental issues rather than helps with them.
That Robert Johnson...
Cat's got issues man.
The precise calculations needed to determine the most aesthetically pleasing geometry of line and form of a symmetrically balanced pair of bun huggers, may or may not, require an advanced degree in mathematics.
Salazar could tell just by looking.
"Mary, you've put on 3 pounds since this morning. Just what the hell have you been eating?"
Obamas Preacher wrote:
Math in running is at an elementary level.
Ironically true, considering the sport's profound ignorance of its own physics.
In cycling, there is no such BS. Too much money hinges on even slight details of engineering.
Yo everyone it is a numbers game I have five guys that can run 27:30 for a 10K I'm probably going to be your cross country team if you have five guys that can run 30 minutes for a 10K.
Question is how do you get your athletes down to 27:30. Train smart and use all your resources might be a good start