what are these twos training philosophys and whose are better?
what are these twos training philosophys and whose are better?
Tinman is miles, 2 solid workouts a week...www.therunzone.com has his charts, a lot of valuable postings, information
Tinman is the Jim Cramer of running.
I'd bet 100s that tinman made the first 2 posts. Amirite?
and JK is also miles and two high-end aerobic workouts a week. Just a whole hell of a lot less accessible---unless you slog through the letsrun archives...
Just something to whet your appetite:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&thread=2264858&id=2265853#2265853
actually im not tinman at all just curious, id like to hear from wejo and from anyone who trained with tinman
LOLOLOLOL wrote:
I'd bet 100s that tinman made the first 2 posts. Amirite?
If it wasn't him, it was his boyfriend trackhead.
who the hell is trackhead? i have no idea
tin wrote:
who the hell is trackhead? i have no idea
He is a massive tool who spent months here arguing everyone should wear Puma H streets and seemed to have a man thing for tinman.
Alright so which of these two guys u think is better?
If I have to choose, it´s Kellogg. I wouldn´t do what he says though. Tinman always preaches about "CV pace" (critical velocity), the pace between 10k-45min race pace. There´s nothing critical in that intensity.
What's jk s training then?
These threads about which "training system" or "coach" is better make me want to bang my head on a wall.It's not as simple as "A is better than B." When looking at the reasonable coaches, they all bring something to the table, and they all have shortcomings. I think that Tinman certainly has some validity in some of his ideas, but I think that if you believe "Tinman is the best running coach," you're nuts. That said, I think if you take Kellogg's word as gospel, you're nuts. My training philosophy is read what all the coaches (Lydiard, McMillan, Daniels, Kellogg, Tinman, Canova, Coe/Martin, etc) have to say, and create a unified training plan that works for YOU.
Tinman always preaches about "CV pace" (critical velocity), the pace between 10k-45min race pace. There´s nothing critical in that intensity.
I agree that the terminology "critical velocity" is almost more of a marketing term. That said, I disagree that there's nothing critical at that intensity. Tinman isn't the only guy who advocates running at that pace. The Daniels VDot charts and the McMillan calculator, for example, both advocate similar speeds for similar length intervals. In fact, I would question why you'd think that isn't a good pace to train at. Of course, it would be crazy to ONLY train at that pace, but I'm not advocating that, and for all of Tinman's talk about CV-this and CV-that, if you look at some of his actual workouts they tend to have a range of speeds.
AnEngineer wrote:
I agree that the terminology "critical velocity" is almost more of a marketing term. That said, I disagree that there's nothing critical at that intensity. Tinman isn't the only guy who advocates running at that pace. The Daniels VDot charts and the McMillan calculator, for example, both advocate similar speeds for similar length intervals. In fact, I would question why you'd think that isn't a good pace to train at. Of course, it would be crazy to ONLY train at that pace, but I'm not advocating that, and for all of Tinman's talk about CV-this and CV-that, if you look at some of his actual workouts they tend to have a range of speeds.
Sure there is programs that includes training at near 10k pace. That pace is good to train some of your FG and FOG muscle fibers, but that´s it, there´s nothing critical at it. You need a lot of intensities and those are as much critical as this "CV" pace is. I didn´t say that it isn´t a good pace to train at. You can do it but you can avoid it and get similar results by running a little bit slower and faster. You know, there´s no races either that are run at CV intensity. Why not to train at 10k pace instead of that CV bs pace, for example?
I did not start this thread.
I don't think there needs to be a contest, both Mr. Kellog and I try to help runners become better at what they love to do. We are passionate about running, want others to succeed, and try to find ways to help individuals optimize their preparations.
For the person saying I advocate a variety of training intensities/paces, that is correct. It is impossible to fully develop any runner without using a continuum of training intensities and tools. It comes down to basics: figuring out ways to optimize results, figuring out what intensities work for most people yet still figure out what works for each individual, and balancing preparation to ensure runners arrive at their goal event in top form; physically, mentally, and emotionally. Balance is the key; just as Lydiard said or Bowerman or any other great coach from the past. Flash in the pan success does not constitute a good method, no matter who applies it.
Take care,
Tinman
tinman, sorry im not trying to make it a contest just trying to find out more information on yours and mr. kellogs training. if you can help me out with yous thatd be fantastic. yet again sorry if im making this sound like a contest
What are you times on the road and track?
go to that website i provided, it explains a lot...and th edude above me, were you asking tinman his times or the OP?
my mile time is at 4:45 and a 2 mile at 10:16 and a 16:35 5k in cross country. ive been under a very stressed system of low miles or moderate with lots of intervals. the highest miles ive ever hit were 80 and my xc coach brought it down to 55 to 60 the week after and gave me 4 to 5 intervals. i hate that and really need something new
Tinman have one high school kid running 85 miles a week. The guy only run a 5:00 flat mile, and a 10:30 two mile. Tinman vs Jonh Kellogg.