Here's some information on the summit in Charlotte that was posted yesterday. It's a little long but informative.
"Like the other posters, I too found the summit to be interesting. Vigil and Mahon were great presenters. Whether everyone bought in to everything they shared, or any of Simmons, Freeman or Danny Green (Woodlands High School) for that matter, leaves some room for doubt.
But I wanted to share a little on the Summit, beginning with Simmons. There's so much negative talk about Scott, that I believe many posters believe the main purpose of this site is to bash others. I've known a little about Scott for some time now, and I will agree he isn't the most outgoing guy in the world; hardly the type of guy you would invite over to watch a little football with. But, the guy's trying. He's attempting to pave the way. One would only have to look at his results to see his kids develop; they progress as the season progresses, and they progress as the years progress. If his theories can't be backed up with results, then we as coaches move on. But, you have to listen and consider what he's done. On the note of his altitude theory, again, if it doesn't work, then we look elsewhere, but it takes those that branch out to find other possibilities. The way I see it, we're getting rocked at the world level, and it doesn't hurt to try and seek alternative ways to pump more oxygen throughout our system. It'd be nice to just say, we need to work harder- but, I'm not sure if that's the only thing we can rely on anymore.
Further, I was impressed with Mahon's humility in opening up his lecture by saying he had NO coaching experience. Not in high school, college, ever. Vigil's faith in appointing/recommending him was because he was open to questioning everything. If we aren't getting it done with our population, with our financial backing, then we have to start thinking outside the box (with respect to what has already been tried, tested, and proven). I was there when one of the coaches next to me asked Vigil about his form of tapering, and how it differed from Simmon's philosophy. His precise response was, "I'm not sure why Scott does what he does... What I believe in has been proven through research." It's obvious that many of our top coaches are using a lot of what has already been "proven through research"- however, until we begin to take a little from this approach, and a little from that approach, and support other theories (ie altitude theories, peaking, tapering) we will all continue to scratch our heads.
Mahon's lectures were really insightful. What I found consistent between most of the speakers was the need to keep the race pace/goal pace intensities UP toward the championship phase. Fast running (ie fast 50-75 meters) throughout the year was also consistent. Obviously for the purpose of muscle recruitment. Vigil impressed again with his physiology-speak regarding fatigue and how it relates at the cellular level. One common theme was that "we don't run fast enough."
Vigil seemed to concentrate on asking coaches to find the vVo2/MaxVo2 of each athlete in order to individualize training paces. He recommended having them run/race a mile. With that information, we could then optimize training, especially lactate threshold (anaerobic threshold/tempo) runs- which I believe HE BELIEVES is the bread and butter of becoming a better runner. "Progression" was consistent between everyone. We have to give it time to take its effect.
Mahon's first lecture dealt a lot with our Olympic runners and how they prepared. A piece of his philosophy would be that we have to learn to change paces throughout races. Like another poster mentioned, a tipping point has been reached at the world stage. We have to learn how to run a 3:57 mile at the end of a 5K, or a 12:57 at the end of a 10K. His training plan had many of his runs almost look like a fartleks (ie 8 miles easy, 8 miles tempo, 8 easy= 24 mile total run) [this isn't exact, as I don't have my notes in front of me]. But, his need to change speeds and play with the rest in their recovery periods was repeated a few times.
I suppose that's all for now. I felt Mahon and Vigil were great. The other great thing I took from the summit was Will Freeman's perspective on coach-athlete relationship, of which all the others hardly touched on, if ever. At the high school or college level, the athlete has to be willing to run through a wall for the coach in order to allow the X's and O's to do their job.
My final thoughts: We are all seeking to help our athletes perform better. We should all agree that one plan doesn't fit every runner/team/coach, but we have to appreciate those that are out there putting their ideas and theories in public to be studied and evaluated. Together, we can continue to seek the podium at the world stage. Unfortunately, we can't change our lifestyle SO MUCH as to mirror our competitions' world/necessity (like walking to school, true physical education in schools, nutrition) so we have to do it with our work ethics, camaraderie, networking, and with each others support."