If Deena Kastor was running 5:01 min/mile in 2004 for AT runs, Why hasn't she run 1:05 for the Half Marathon?

Avocados Number wrote:I'm a big fan of altitude training, by the way. And I think that Vigil is a truly great coach (although the few times that I talked to him did make me feel that there is a bit of a huckster in him). But his reasoning, in this case, just isn't what one would (and should) expect from a good scientist.

dfdsfsd wrote:

After heaving read that article, i wonder why people were posting that Kastor runs 120-140mpw.

There are 3 weeks above 120 and 11 of 100 or under, according to John Kellogg she was way undertrained.

WTF does John Kellogg know?

Jim Ryun trained at altitude, too, but he was a pretty successful runner before that.

How much altitude training did Seb Coe do? (Serious question. I don't know the answer. I just don't remember much talk about altitude training from Seb or his father.) Same question about guys like Ovett, Walker, Coghlan, Lopes, Treacy, Spedding, and Hiromi Taniguchi (I don't recall that many of the top Japanese male marathoners were high-altitude trainers). De Castella seemed to have more success (world record, world championship, etc.) before going to high altitude, after which he had some relatively disappointing results.

She owes all of her race tactic to Dr. Martin. Vigil wanted her to be more aggresive.

call me ishmael wrote:

You're right. He may not have meant it was a logical necessity, but I see what you're saying. I didn't know he was a scientist.

He has a Ph.D. in exercise physiology, which doesn't necessarily mean he's a scientist, but he is often described as one.

Um, Jennings lived and trained in Newmarket, NH. I think she spent a few winters in San Luis Obispo, CA which is not at altitude. So you're wrong on that one.

Goucher did live and train in Boulder. But it was a fairly long time from then until the medal. I think she did some training at altitude to prep for Japan but I think it's safe to say she is not currently an altitude-based runner.

If the qualification for altitude training is that they spent a few weeks there that's one thing. But that's not what Vigil is saying.

Not by other scientists. As a matter of fact, he is the only one that I have ever heard refer to himself as a scientist. Ask Dr. Martin if he considers Vigil a scientist. Ask Dr. Daniels if he considers Vigil a scientist.

57.9% of Olympic/WC medalists since 1968 were altitude born/trained. This breaks down to 53.9% of Olympic medals and 61.6% of WC medals.

This doesn't factor in the number of altitude born medalists who do most of their year-round training at sea level, otherwise the number would be closer to, or even below 50%.

Looking at the results of WC only proves that those body types that are most suited for running distances happen to occur in high percentages in East Africa. The altitude is a coincidence not a cause. Correlation does not equal causation.

By event, the % of altitude born/trained medalists since 1968.

41.2% 800

50.7% 1500

61.9% 3000 Sc

71.4% 5000

77.7% 10000

44.4% marathon

Vigil's talking about training at altitude some of the time. Even team USA doen't train at altitude all the time. Athletes not in that group might go there for a couple of days or a couple of weeks all the time and train there.

As for the previous post about the % of athletes who trained at altitude-How do you know. Do you have a total training history of everyone who has medaled?

That's exactly what Joe Vigil doesn't have. The man loves to talk in sweeping generalizations and metaphors. He has no idea what percentage of medalists at WC or Oly are altitude trained. What he loves is to pat himself on the back.

If anyone is going to pat themselves on the back, let it be Joe Vigil!

His sweeping comment on altitude is not correct and not scientific. He would do well with the the flying spaghetti monster logic: hurricanes have increased in number and pirates have decreased in number. Therefore: less pirates equals more storms. Solution: we need more pirates.

Having read Vigil's book, Road to the Top, it's clear he is very scientific with velocity at anaerobic theshold. Why hasn't Deena Kastor run 1:05 or faster in a half marathon race?

Allen, even if she winds down to 5:00 min/mile pace at the end of a 13 mile AT training run, shouldn't she be able to run 1:05 in a race?

You know it's letsrun when the posters can't focus on the question, but have to take advantage of the chance to anonymously bash one of the, if not THE best US running coach in American history. Go ahead, get him on the nit-picky things, but replicating his record of success isn't going to happen.

Malmo, a response to the OP?

uh...too funny how everyone thinks Deena is doing something wrong. Lets see...American record at 5K through marathon. Dominated everyone in cross country. Medaled at World Cross. Medaled at Olympics. I don't care if Vigil says Deena is running her tempo runs at 4 min mile pace, he has done something right...and Terrance coaches in a very similar style. Sheesh.

I know you're not asking me, but I thought the point of your original post was that Vigil could not possibly be correct. Deena is a fine runner, but there is no way that she will ever get close to a 1:05 half-marathon, and there is no way that she can run 5:01 pace for that distance (about 1:05:45 or so, I believe) in a training run unless she's running down a mountain.

You plug Deena's 2:19:36 marathon AR into McMillan's calculator and it predicts a 1:06:12 half M, so she's not far off a 1:05:xx half, and probably could run one at her peak if someone wanted to pay her enough appearance $ to do it.

Yes, I understand that some "equivalent performance" or even "predicted performance" estimating systems would lead one to believe that she might be able to do it. But those things don't work very well for some of the top female marathoners. (Take a look at what McMillan would predict for Paula R. in the half marathon. She could come close to that.) Deena could never run 1:05, and certainly wouldn't be doing a 1:05:45 in training.

Avocados Number wrote:

(Take a look at what McMillan would predict for Paula R. in the half marathon. She could come close to that.)

Sorry. I mean't, "She couldn't come close to that."

Avocados Number wrote:

I know you're not asking me, but I thought the point of your original post was that Vigil could not possibly be correct. Deena is a fine runner, but there is no way that she will ever get close to a 1:05 half-marathon, and there is no way that she can run 5:01 pace for that distance (about 1:05:45 or so, I believe) in a training run unless she's running down a mountain.

As others who have known Vigil have said, "take half of what he says with a shaker of salt." Whether it be the infamous yarn about Pat Porter's 4:00 mile in Alamosa, or the temperature at Athens, or the percentage of altitude trained Olympians, or Deena Kastors training paces, Vigil is oblivious to precision when it comes to the facts.

5:01 pace is

24:51 8k

31:04 10k

46:37 15k

50:01 10 mile

1:02:29 20k

1:05:334 HM

Deena Kastor's PRs are

24:36 8k

31:42 10k

47:15 15k

51:31 10 mile

1:04:07 20k

1:07:34 HM

I don't believe anyone takes him seriously at his word. He's an old guy who has a faulty memory when it comes to verifiable facts. He's still a good coach, teacher and mentor. Just let it go.

reservoir dogs wrote:

Goucher did live and train in Boulder. But it was a fairly long time from then until the medal. I think she did some training at altitude to prep for Japan but I think it's safe to say she is not currently an altitude-based runner.

Does sleeping in a tent count? Are Alberto's runners still doing that?

"Altitude trained" doesn't have to mean "living at high altitude" these days.

in the article is says her vV02 max was 427

how come she can't run a sub 9 two mile then?