Kevin and Keith and his training partners would both agree with you. It is Brian and no one else that thinks that he has limited talent.
Kevin and Keith and his training partners would both agree with you. It is Brian and no one else that thinks that he has limited talent.
Sell has talent wrote:
The fact that Biran can run that many miles per week on that consistent of a basis is a huge amount of talent in itself. Also that he qualified for the olympic marathon team in itself proves he has a great quanity of talent. Sure he didnt measure up to his peers in high school or college but the fact that he can sustain the amount of mileage he runs at the rate he does is where i would say 85% of his talent lies. I am not trying to rip him but the whole team atmosphere that surrounds him every day helps a great deal and is a big motivating factor on those real shitty days
This is exactly correct. Talent is as much about max VO2 and running economy as it is about possessing the ability to handle an inordinant amount of training stimulus and being able to still get a physiological response/adaptation from it rather than maladaptation. So Brian Sell didn't break 10:00 for the two-mile in high school? As far as I know, he didn't run much in high school either. Is somebody like Ken Cormier more talented because he ran 120 miles per week in high school and ran a fast two-mile versus the kid that runs a 9:30 off of 30 miles per week? And, frankly, talent is as much about putting in the training when the body is prepared to reach peak fitness in the late-20s. No reason to run 100 miles per week in high school, only to fall prey to the injury cycle or burnout, when an athlete only has so much "gas in the tank" and would do well to leverage the peak years between 25 and 30.
Sagarin wrote:
No reason to run 100 miles per week in high school, only to fall prey to the injury cycle or burnout, when an athlete only has so much "gas in the tank" and would do well to leverage the peak years between 25 and 30.
You mean like Hall and Ritz, who finished ahead of Sell? Do they seem like they are on the decline because of high school high mileage?
No slight against Sell, because he's awesome, but I don't think Sell's post-collegiate improvement is applicable to anybody but Brian Sell.
Kevin Hanson wrote:
Brian ran more mileage than this in 2006 as he recorded 6000 of his cheat miles that year (probably closer to 6500). He also had 26 scheduled days off that year.
That means that Sell ran 339 days and ran 6500 miles. That is an average of 19.17 miles per day run. THAT IS FRIGGIN INCREDIBLE. That also means that if Brian ran 8 miles on a day before a marathon and then a 2 mile warm up and the marathon, he would have run 36 miles over that 2 day period. That would be below his average 2 day period.
Not to take anything away from Brian. His dedication, determination, and work ethic are second to none. That said, didn't Shorter average 17 miles a day for the whole decade of 1970? (running with the legends, sandrock)
Kevin,A few years ago I started a thread questioning whether running a half-marathon race a month or so before a marathon--many guys were doing this--was the right strategy. I wondered whether it was too much. I was pummeled for such a view. I remember you chimed in saying you thought it was a good question, but more or less disagreeing that it was too much. However, at the OMT, neither Hall, nor Ritz, nor Sell raced in any close proximity to the marathon itself. And it looks as if you've substituted what I think you call a marathon simulator for it. If you don't mind sharing them, what are your current views of the subject?Thanks,SDW
Kevin Hanson wrote:
Those mileage amounts are what Brian recorded for 2007. Brian has a tendency to cheat on his mileage on a daily basis. The group will run a 12 mile run and Brian will record it as 11 or an afternoon run of 45 minutes as 6 miles which is probably 7 and half. Brian cheats by a minimum of 10 miles a week. It is just a weird motivating thing for Brian. I would roughly estimate Brian to have run an additional 10-15 miles a week or about 500-700 miles for the year. His total for 2007 was definitly over 6000. He also had scheduled downtime of 30 days during the year (an additional month) and a huge cut back in mileage in February due to sickness.
Brian ran more mileage than this in 2006 as he recorded 6000 of his cheat miles that year (probably closer to 6500). He also had 26 scheduled days off that year.
However, mileage is not the answer. It is simply one variable.
Brian works very hard but assumes that others are either working harder or are more talented. It is true that Brian feels like others are gaining strength on him if he runs less than 140 miles a week. He uses this drive as motivation to make him the athlete that he is. All of these little quirks help to prepare Brian mentally as well as physically.
I remember reading back long ago, so maybe I'm wrong that Rodgers had three straight years over 7000. There are guys that run even more than that. I'll have to dig it out but there was a RT article about some guy who had several straight years over 9,000 - I think they said he was also suffering nerve damage, though. Corbitt probably ran over 6,000 many many years in a row. Kevin is correct, though. I myself was over 6500 three straight years, but never broke 2:20. Don't get me wrong, I improved a ton through running high-mileage, but packing in the miles is not sufficient to be world class.
R.L. Scribner wrote:
You mean like Hall and Ritz, who finished ahead of Sell? Do they seem like they are on the decline because of high school high mileage?
No slight against Sell, because he's awesome, but I don't think Sell's post-collegiate improvement is applicable to anybody but Brian Sell.
I knew somebody would bring that up. Why not mention McDougal while you're at it? There are always exceptions to the rule, but not many. Plus, none of those guys has reached his peak years yet, and Ritz has shown how injury prone he is. I'm definitely not suggesting that no high school runners should run 100 miles per week (I thought Ritz was more like an 80 per week guy anyway and that Hall only ran like one 100-mile week?), but the risk-reward ratio goes way up in my opinion. I'd rather have them top out at around 70 or 75 in high school and build up to 120+ in college and thereafter.
escargot wrote:
I remember reading back long ago, so maybe I'm wrong that Rodgers had three straight years over 7000.
6,000 to 7,000+ mpw was commonplace back then. Rodgers really wasn't regarded as a super-hard-training runner. He just ran consistently around 140-150 mpw, with virtually no days off for injury or anything else. (I do remember one week when he only ran about 60-70 miles. As I recall, it was immediately following a marathon, and he was sick the whole time.)
For hard training, look at what Seko was doing back then under Coach Nakamura. Higher mileage, and much higher intensity.
I think Shorter said that he once calculated that he had averaged around 130 mpw during the entire decade of the '70s. Keep in mind that there was at least one stretch during that time, after he had foot surgery, when he wasn't running at all.
One observation about "cheating" miles: I have often noticed that good runners generally understate their training mileage, and mediocre to poor runners generally overstate their training mileage. In most cases, I don't think that it's because they're trying to mislead others. It's just a different mindset.
How does Sell work in 30 down days during the year? Is that completely off? 8 miles per day? From looking at athleticore it seems as if he has been struggling to get his training back going again after the Trials. I know it isn't necessarily important that he's banging it out on all gears right now but he'll have to get back up there soon enough workout wise. Any insight?
Where did these numbers come from?
10 days after every training block.
Sell and most of the Hanson boys, and a few ex hanson boys...and the women....can be found at
. They all take a week or two off after each "season".
Alan
future coach wrote:
As his coach, when you have 12 miles for him on the schedule and he runs a "true 13 or 14" for that run, what do you do? He isn't following the training plan you set up for him.
I remember reading an interview with you before the trials stating Brian had gone into Boston and Chicago overtrained because he had run more than the schedule. Isn't it your goal as a coach to make sure he actually listens to you. If not, why even have a coach?
It seems you commend him for doing more, but as a coach myself I would be upset that an athlete wasn't listening to me. I put mileage on the schedule for a reason, not because I just spew out random numbers. If an athlete wants to train harder they can talk to me so I at least know what they are doing. From your interview and post here it doesn't seem like you even know how much Brian is doing.
This is one of the worst posts I've ever read. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, and you obviously do not coach elite level athletes. Oh, everyone's a coach these days....