USA vs Great Britain - Distance Running

may wrote:

stop moaning about everything and just get out and train hard. Then we will catch up with yanks. Too much time spent on lets run and not enough time clocking up the miles me thinks.

Got to do something while I'm at "work"...

sits back and waits for the fire works :)

ghost wrote:

In the U.S. now there is a post collegiate system which takes care of elite level runners, and even runners who run around 29:00 for 10.000 - think of the Hanson outfit, the setup in Mammoth Lake for the endurance runners, and other setups in California and the East Coast, which take care of runners' basic needs.

In the U.S. it is not a federal system, but rather private sponsorship that foots the bill for most of these good level runners. Look at a guy like Carney, who ran 27:43 for the 10.000 at Stanford. At Millersville (Div. 2 PSAC)his best was 14:00, but then he was fortunate to get sponsorship from one of the shoe companies.

I'm curious to know how this sponsorship is obtained. What do the shoe companies feel they are getting by sponsoring a 29 minute 10k runner? I would be very hard pressed to come up with a business case for this, either in the UK or in the States. Does anyone have any insight into this? My own impression was that an athlete of this standard would receive less publicity if anything in the States than in the UK.

Ive heard the argument that its blairs "50% of people to have a university education" as one factor in the decline of British distance running. At 18 runners move away from there home town, leave there old training groups behind causing the break up of squads and join what is a crap university system for running.

You just need to look at the talent that goes into places like loughborough and the talent that comes out.

anti-uni wrote:

Ive heard the argument that its blairs "50% of people to have a university education" as one factor in the decline of British distance running. At 18 runners move away from there home town, leave there old training groups behind causing the break up of squads and join what is a crap university system for running.

You just need to look at the talent that goes into places like loughborough and the talent that comes out.

Don't buy it. If you look at the group of guys who are still running now in their mid-twenties to mid-thirties a very high proportion are just the ones that I know went to uni. I would suggest the continuation rate amongst grads is higher than the norm.

pro-uni wrote:

Don't buy it. If you look at the group of guys who are still running now in their mid-twenties to mid-thirties a very high proportion are just the ones that I know went to uni. I would suggest the continuation rate amongst grads is higher than the norm.

I'd agree with that but add that it's often those that went to Uni primarily to study (not for their running per se) that are still running now. I get the impression (no stats to back it up) that there's a much bigger drop-out rate among those that went to Uni as an athlete with studying coming second.

Of course I could be completely wrong :)

The typical student lifestyle doesnt suit athletics, To much of a drinking culture. Yes they may stay in the sport but most not as fully dedicated athletes.

I wonder if the higher drinking age in america has anything to do with there higher standars in athletics...

Some possible factors:

Strength in depth in the UK is lacking = less competition within races and less competition within training groups to improve relative to your muckers.

Across many sports there has been something of a cultural shift to training to complete rather than to compete.

TV and broadcast coverage might also play a role. When Grand Prix meets are televised (increasingly less often), the distance events do a lot to promote the image of an unbridgeable gap between Ethiopa, Kenya, Morocco and the rest of the world (save Buster and hopefully Mo this year).

Football (soccer) academies - trap the most talented athletes at an early age and encourage exclusivity. Football and its mega-wages dominates as thec aspirational goal for youngsters, and parents of youngsters, with athletic talent.

There are loads of sports competing for young people's attention.

Running = Forest Gump, 911 Got Your Number. Even Paula R I suspect is probably regarded as one short of the full six pack by most of the population for the obsessive traits that make her successful.

Tescos.

Health and Safety fascists.

Miss Millies.

Isostatic rebound.

Alcopops.

Honestly, I don't give a 2 bit damn about UK running. You guys could disappear entirely from running and it wouldn't put a dent in our emerging distance powerhouse in the US.

It just goes to show how great the US is and will continue to be in terms of facilitating good distance runners. All the great ones come here to race and train (think Boulder for location, and Chicago marathon as an example PR race, not to mention Stanford Invite and Pre Classic).

What do you guys have? One, maybe 2 big-time races that's worth mentioning that a person can PR in?

Also, if you think the Africans are the ones who you need to beat..think again..you'll now have the additional challenge of beating us "yanks," because we have tons of youngsters coming up the ranks and your #1 guy is probably #10 in our really deep rankings.

rip5000 wrote:

the point i'm making is that

you could get a 9-5 job live at home or share with other runners in a larger house

but you have chosen a different route

i'm not saying it's wrong , but it's different from someone whose life is athletics and nothing else, and that's what it takes to make world class

I think that the people who are fast tracked through at 20-21 do get that opportunity.

But its difficult for the people who don't get the help to make it through. To their credit some do - look at the world cross team for example. lads like Nicholls, Buckley, Skinner, Ward were all good (but not superstars) as Juniors and they have plugged away over the years and reached the level they have. Prob is that theres probably another 50 who gave up for some reason or other. Cash/life/houses/etc being one of them.

Unfortunately the different route isn't as readily available as it once was and its all too easy to get worried about the future. I worked 3 day weeks when I finished Uni and I lived cheaply in a student house with other runners but after a while you have to accept that the world unfortunately involves more that just running fast and, for me, securing my future was important. I'm bloody glad I did because I couldn't afford anywhere suitable around here now.

Like I say, I'm lucky (luckier than the southerners anyway) and can train as hard as my body will allow for the most part - the main barrier for me is basic talent and durability - but I'm only a sample of 1 and there's plenty more gifted runners who aren't as fortunate as me.

Unfortunately the "put off real life and run like f***" option carries a lot more risk than it once did.

Martinx wrote:

don't forget ... the US has a population of 300 million ... the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has a population of 60 million ...

Martin

And Kenya has a population of about 31 million.

It could be argued that financial reasons make it difficult for distance runners to succeed in Britain. However, I think the fundamental problem is one of training. The emphasis in the US seems to be very much based on building a good aerobic base ie. alot of milage and tempo runs. This approach is resulting in some very encouraging results for American athletes.

Unfortunatly, the prevailing attitude in the UK seems to be one of quality over quantity. How many times to we see a profile of a promising youngster emphasising that they are achieving whatever off only 20-30 miles a week. The athletes concerned normally then break down with injuries because their bodies can not take all the hard anaerobic type work that their coaches prescribe.

Back in the 70s and 80s when distance ruuning was a lot healthier in Britain, a typical club night, particularly in the winter, would involve a hard 10mile run. Quicker track sessions were then then introduced in the latter part of the winter in preparation for the big cross country events and the forthcoming track season. How many British distance runners,of all ages, are hammering out 3 hard sessions a week in october.

One only has to look at the relative success that a number of promising young Brits have had in the US recently compared to what there were achieving in the UK to see what can be achieved with the appropriate training. It might seem harsh to say but a lot of Uk coaches, and often those with 'reputations', do not really know what they are doing.

There are obviously issues of lifestyle (particularly at universities), of less talent coming into, and remaining, in the sport, the differences in financial support between the two countries. However, the biggest problem is one of coaching.

yepeprs!! wrote:

Honestly, I don't give a 2 bit damn about UK running. You guys could disappear entirely from running and it wouldn't put a dent in our emerging distance powerhouse in the US.

It just goes to show how great the US is and will continue to be in terms of facilitating good distance runners. All the great ones come here to race and train (think Boulder for location, and Chicago marathon as an example PR race, not to mention Stanford Invite and Pre Classic).

What do you guys have? One, maybe 2 big-time races that's worth mentioning that a person can PR in?

Also, if you think the Africans are the ones who you need to beat..think again..you'll now have the additional challenge of beating us "yanks," because we have tons of youngsters coming up the ranks and your #1 guy is probably #10 in our really deep rankings.

You are what us English would call a c***.

This means a well informed articulate commentator.

Thanks for your opinions.

"a lot of Uk coaches, and often those with 'reputations', do not really know what they are doing"

I don't disagree with what you say - other than the comment above. None of the coaching 'big hitters' i have spoken to/been advised by/seen present at seminars, and they include the usual names, mainly but not all either FT/PT or honorary roles with UKA, fall into the fault you describe, indeed they take pains to endorse the approach you support. They are also very helpful in spreading the word to other coaches and runners so, in theory at least, there should be an element of the good practice that you describe being passed down the system. I wonder who you have in mind who you think is so far off the mark.

whats all this rubbish about financial support. You want to try going for a hard 10 miler at 9pm after being on the tools all day. Lots of Brit runners are being gay. You want to toughen up. Quick.

So any medical back up needed by the USA speedsters is provided pronto, free at point of delivery by the , errrm, is there a USA National Health Service these days?

And you are the fine man responsible for the fine implementation of your MRSA ridden National Health Service are you? Well done!!

There are obviously some good coaches in the Uk but unfortunately they are in short supply. How many talented youngsters have we lost due to inappropriate training?? Recent results by Brits in the US clearly show that the 'American approach' is producing better performances than would otherwise have been achieved in the UK. To give just a couple of examples, Scott Overall made a massive improvement last year. Hardly gets any credit in Britain but Andrew Lemoncello is becoming a very decent athlete and looks like he could break 8.20 for the chase and 28mins for 10km over the next year. Also just seen that Dan Watts has just run 14mins dead.

Does anyone at the top of UKA have the bollocks, knowledge or willpower to bring about the radical change needed to halt our sorry decline in distance events.

For what its worth, I would introduce a talent identification scheme - looking at perhaps the top 40 u17s and top 30 u20s in each event. These athletes and their coaches would be congratulated on their performances and their training discussed. It might sound rather dictatorial but any athlete who is clearly talented but following the wrong path in his/her training should be directed towards a coaching set up that will allow them to fulfil their talent. Too many people are afraid about treading on other peoples toes and as a result we have lost our way in distance event

I am reading a lot of praise on here for the US college system, but for the last 3 decades (that's 30 years) there as all the bashing how US colleges were/would ruin promising young British runners. How times change.