Anyone surprised at how much mileage Graham Blanks runs?

5:38 lol making me laugh wrote:

NERunner03533 wrote:

His Strava says 15 @ 6:05 the day after NCAAs with a 176 heart rate. Nothing slow race week. They seem to warm up slow before the races but the week leading in was a lot of 10 in 60 type stuff. Fartleks each of the 2 days before the race. Fine if you can handle it but I doubt it works for everyone on that team. Don't think this kind of training is realistic for the long term no matter how fast you are.

Yeah. He is winning NCAA so props to him, but the rest of Harvard are doing this training, where are they? Iverson getting worse year on year, and I don't even know who else is on the team...

Imo it's way too fast to do 100 mpw at 6 flat easy pace, I don't think it's sustainable long term at all. When I was hitting 100mpw, albeit my 5k PB is 30s slower than his, but I would be running 7 flat pace and splitting them up into doubles, because otherwise it's just not sustainable. Probably why the rest of Harvard are underperforming and/or burn out. Blanks is running amazing but surely he has to be a RARE anomaly for this type of training??? Wouldn't encourage anybody to train like this because you are more likely to get injured or burnt out than have success.

i failed doing this wrote:

I am not surprised at the volume at all. I am surprised at the WAY he trains: namely, singles and fast easy runs.

Let's take a look at a random, representative week of his pre-NCAA block from strava, Oct 2- Oct 8.

Monday, Oct 2: 13.4 miles, avg pace 5:55.

Tuesday, Oct 3: double

AM: 5 miles, pace 7:09

PM: 16 miles total. workout. 3 miles w/u, 5k, 2.5k, 5k reps.5 mile cooldown.

Wednesday, Oct 4: 16 miles, pace 6:02

Thursday: OFF

Friday, Oct 6: 17 miles total. Workout. 3 miles w/u, 2x800, 6x mile. 5 miles cooldown.

Saturday, Oct 7: 20 miles, pace: 6:05

Sunday, Oct 8: 13 miles, pace: 6:05

TOTAL: 100.5 miles. 7 runs. 6 running days, 1 day off.

The "easy" days usually start off with a 6:30 first mile or two and then quickly get under 6:00 for the rest of the distance.

It clearly works for him now. I'll be curious if it's a good long term plan. Didn't Josh McDougal similarly hammer big singles every day, win NCAA XC, and then blow up and disappear?

I think this type of training can work for a while for a very few talented, durable guys, but most will underperform, get injured, or both.

I ran for a top 20 d1 NCAA XC team, and we hammered everything, workouts as fast as possible, tempo runs a race, "easy" days 6:00 flat (We didn't do 100mpw though, more like 75-80mpw. Almost everyone underperformed and struggled with injuries. Blanks training is much more like our dumb 1990s --early 2000s training.

I'm a prime example--I had almost identical HS track PRs to Blanks--4:15, 9:10. But I sure wasn't running 13:27 a year later!! I was injured and underperforming, like the majority of my teammates, like I suspect most athletes training like this will be.

But again, it certainly works for Blanks, so kudos to him.

NCAAHSPRO wrote:

Harvard has gone from the laughing stock of the Ivy leagues to track powerhouse (for the Ivy Leagues) to consistent cross country qualifier (#2 in the region, ahead of Syracuse) and now a top 15 team with an individual NCAA cross champion and 1500 champ and people are criticizing?

Don't come back with the "but they have all the resources to be great". They did 10y ago and throughout time before that. Coach Gibby (and credit Coach Saretsky for hiring him and turning around the program) have done what few programs have ever done. Go back and look at the top 31 teams today vs the top 31 teams 15-20y ago. The same 18-20 teams are at nationals. Breaking into the top 31 is tough. Interestingly... Columbia and William and Mary are neither qualifiers (or even close) any longer... and that is where Saretsky and Gibby hail from respectively. Could be a coincdience or could be... maybe... they know what they're doing.

Respect to Vig as well. Same props go to him. Princeton has always been good but Vig just keeps turning out great team after great team.

Shame on Coach Ireland. Was not good at Yale and hasn't done anything at Columbia. They built something great there beginning late 1990s and continuing through Merber... sad to see where its gone from there.

And don't even get me started on Dartmouth. Should be a training mecca and have had great teams and individuals in the past. Abby, True, Sappienza, Kempainan... yet nothing in years.

NCAAHSPRO wrote:

Harvard has gone from the laughing stock of the Ivy leagues to track powerhouse (for the Ivy Leagues) to consistent cross country qualifier (#2 in the region, ahead of Syracuse) and now a top 15 team with an individual NCAA cross champion and 1500 champ and people are criticizing?

Don't come back with the "but they have all the resources to be great". They did 10y ago and throughout time before that. Coach Gibby (and credit Coach Saretsky for hiring him and turning around the program) have done what few programs have ever done. Go back and look at the top 31 teams today vs the top 31 teams 15-20y ago. The same 18-20 teams are at nationals. Breaking into the top 31 is tough. Interestingly... Columbia and William and Mary are neither qualifiers (or even close) any longer... and that is where Saretsky and Gibby hail from respectively. Could be a coincdience or could be... maybe... they know what they're doing.

Respect to Vig as well. Same props go to him. Princeton has always been good but Vig just keeps turning out great team after great team.

Shame on Coach Ireland. Was not good at Yale and hasn't done anything at Columbia. They built something great there beginning late 1990s and continuing through Merber... sad to see where its gone from there.

And don't even get me started on Dartmouth. Should be a training mecca and have had great teams and individuals in the past. Abby, True, Sappienza, Kempainan... yet nothing in years.

wolferines wrote:

NCAAHSPRO wrote:

Harvard has gone from the laughing stock of the Ivy leagues to track powerhouse (for the Ivy Leagues) to consistent cross country qualifier (#2 in the region, ahead of Syracuse) and now a top 15 team with an individual NCAA cross champion and 1500 champ and people are criticizing?

Don't come back with the "but they have all the resources to be great". They did 10y ago and throughout time before that. Coach Gibby (and credit Coach Saretsky for hiring him and turning around the program) have done what few programs have ever done. Go back and look at the top 31 teams today vs the top 31 teams 15-20y ago. The same 18-20 teams are at nationals. Breaking into the top 31 is tough. Interestingly... Columbia and William and Mary are neither qualifiers (or even close) any longer... and that is where Saretsky and Gibby hail from respectively. Could be a coincdience or could be... maybe... they know what they're doing.

Respect to Vig as well. Same props go to him. Princeton has always been good but Vig just keeps turning out great team after great team.

Shame on Coach Ireland. Was not good at Yale and hasn't done anything at Columbia. They built something great there beginning late 1990s and continuing through Merber... sad to see where its gone from there.

And don't even get me started on Dartmouth. Should be a training mecca and have had great teams and individuals in the past. Abby, True, Sappienza, Kempainan... yet nothing in years.

Gibby is a good coach. But don't ignore the facts.

Gibby by all metrics did POORLY at Michigan and got fired. His time at Charlotte was also not impressive. His only good athlete at Charlotte was a 25 year old Kenyan girl that he recruited (and we've seen 90% of this website insult Dave Smith of OSU for recruiting Kenyans).

William and Mary was a top program LONG BEFORE Gibby started coaching there. They qualified for NCAAs as a team in cross country for 6 consecutive years (and 8 times in 9 years dating back to 1994) BEFORE Gibby even started in 2003. Their finishes were high as well - 9th, 10th, 13th, 13th, 16th, 14th in the immediate years before Gibby. So don't act like Gibby built that on his own.

W&M's recent lack of success is because they no longer receive any support from the school. They've lost nearly all of their men's scholarships and they even tried to cut the track team entirely.

Harvard is clearly getting tremendous support from their admissions office. Many of their top athletes are international - such as their NCAA champion throwers. Even just 5 years ago it was UNHEARD OF for an Ivy League team to have so many international athletes. They have the ability to significantly lower their admissions standards for top athletes. Their financial aid packages are massive now because they have a $50 billion endowment. If your parents make less than $150k, you attend for FREE at one of the best academic schools in the world.

This means an 8:44 guy with a 3.8 GPA and 1300 on the SAT can get an admissions waiver from Gibby, and attend Harvard for free even if his parents make a combined $140k per year. All of their international athletes likely aren't paying a penny because of the financial aid.

It sounds like anything less than top 10 at NCAAs should be considered a failure with so much in their favor for recruiting.

wolferines wrote:

NCAAHSPRO wrote:

Harvard has gone from the laughing stock of the Ivy leagues to track powerhouse (for the Ivy Leagues) to consistent cross country qualifier (#2 in the region, ahead of Syracuse) and now a top 15 team with an individual NCAA cross champion and 1500 champ and people are criticizing?

Don't come back with the "but they have all the resources to be great". They did 10y ago and throughout time before that. Coach Gibby (and credit Coach Saretsky for hiring him and turning around the program) have done what few programs have ever done. Go back and look at the top 31 teams today vs the top 31 teams 15-20y ago. The same 18-20 teams are at nationals. Breaking into the top 31 is tough. Interestingly... Columbia and William and Mary are neither qualifiers (or even close) any longer... and that is where Saretsky and Gibby hail from respectively. Could be a coincdience or could be... maybe... they know what they're doing.

Respect to Vig as well. Same props go to him. Princeton has always been good but Vig just keeps turning out great team after great team.

Shame on Coach Ireland. Was not good at Yale and hasn't done anything at Columbia. They built something great there beginning late 1990s and continuing through Merber... sad to see where its gone from there.

And don't even get me started on Dartmouth. Should be a training mecca and have had great teams and individuals in the past. Abby, True, Sappienza, Kempainan... yet nothing in years.

Gibby is a good coach. But don't ignore the facts.

Gibby by all metrics did POORLY at Michigan and got fired. His time at Charlotte was also not impressive. His only good athlete at Charlotte was a 25 year old Kenyan girl that he recruited (and we've seen 90% of this website insult Dave Smith of OSU for recruiting Kenyans).

William and Mary was a top program LONG BEFORE Gibby started coaching there. They qualified for NCAAs as a team in cross country for 6 consecutive years (and 8 times in 9 years dating back to 1994) BEFORE Gibby even started in 2003. Their finishes were high as well - 9th, 10th, 13th, 13th, 16th, 14th in the immediate years before Gibby. So don't act like Gibby built that on his own.

W&M's recent lack of success is because they no longer receive any support from the school. They've lost nearly all of their men's scholarships and they even tried to cut the track team entirely.

Harvard is clearly getting tremendous support from their admissions office. Many of their top athletes are international - such as their NCAA champion throwers. Even just 5 years ago it was UNHEARD OF for an Ivy League team to have so many international athletes. They have the ability to significantly lower their admissions standards for top athletes. Their financial aid packages are massive now because they have a $50 billion endowment. If your parents make less than $150k, you attend for FREE at one of the best academic schools in the world.

This means an 8:44 guy with a 3.8 GPA and 1300 on the SAT can get an admissions waiver from Gibby, and attend Harvard for free even if his parents make a combined $140k per year. All of their international athletes likely aren't paying a penny because of the financial aid.

It sounds like anything less than top 10 at NCAAs should be considered a failure with so much in their favor for recruiting.

Jjjooppnm wrote:

wolferines wrote:

Gibby is a good coach. But don't ignore the facts.

Gibby by all metrics did POORLY at Michigan and got fired. His time at Charlotte was also not impressive. His only good athlete at Charlotte was a 25 year old Kenyan girl that he recruited (and we've seen 90% of this website insult Dave Smith of OSU for recruiting Kenyans).

William and Mary was a top program LONG BEFORE Gibby started coaching there. They qualified for NCAAs as a team in cross country for 6 consecutive years (and 8 times in 9 years dating back to 1994) BEFORE Gibby even started in 2003. Their finishes were high as well - 9th, 10th, 13th, 13th, 16th, 14th in the immediate years before Gibby. So don't act like Gibby built that on his own.

W&M's recent lack of success is because they no longer receive any support from the school. They've lost nearly all of their men's scholarships and they even tried to cut the track team entirely.

Harvard is clearly getting tremendous support from their admissions office. Many of their top athletes are international - such as their NCAA champion throwers. Even just 5 years ago it was UNHEARD OF for an Ivy League team to have so many international athletes. They have the ability to significantly lower their admissions standards for top athletes. Their financial aid packages are massive now because they have a $50 billion endowment. If your parents make less than $150k, you attend for FREE at one of the best academic schools in the world.

This means an 8:44 guy with a 3.8 GPA and 1300 on the SAT can get an admissions waiver from Gibby, and attend Harvard for free even if his parents make a combined $140k per year. All of their international athletes likely aren't paying a penny because of the financial aid.

It sounds like anything less than top 10 at NCAAs should be considered a failure with so much in their favor for recruiting.

This is very wrong