Wow...........
Actually, I need to thank you Sergey. Why you ask?? Because I had been feeling a little bad about sort of "hijacking" this thread in the direction of one of my (obviously) favorite topics ( the genetic differences amongst peoples of the world, and specifically the now-proven-by-science genetic advantages that the East Africans have for distance running, which is the key to explaining their dominance). Even though I thought my contribution to the thread was useful, I did not want to dominate any portion of it, and so that is why I stopped posting on that topic and said to all: ok, take the thread in a new direction.
And now YOU segey have take it in an ABSURD direction. You really feel it is worth all this time discussing Antonio's use of the words "average and mediocre" ????
Give me a break. Lets end the debate THIS way:
YES, in the realm of the WHOLE WORLD of all people, 14:40 is better than "average" and 16:50 is better than "mediocre". In THAT sense, Antonio was wrong, and you were right (feel better now???). BUT.......
IN THE REALM OF COMPETITIVE DISTANCE RUNNERS, ie, distance runners who spend a reasonable amount of SERIOUS effort training, and do lots of racing (not just people who jog 3 or 4 times a week, and occasionally enter a 5k), 14:40 is average and 16:50 is mediocre.
See??? It simply depends on the context. Antionio was making his statement in the 2nd context, BECAUSE.....if you read the context of his statement, he was discussing(and comparing) runners who ask his advice, and who all want to go to the Olympics. See??? In the context of making to the OLYMPICS.....14:40 IS "average," and 16:50 IS "mediocre."
OK??? Great. Now lets move on......
(sorry to be the "thread police", but this fight over adjectives had gone too far. My next post will change the direction of this thread).
Mr. Renato Canova: Could You Please Answer a Question About Effective Ways to Improve the Lactate Threshold?
Report Thread
-
-
HERE's a topic for Renato and Antonio or whoever:
Why has only ONE person in nearly a quarter century beaten Seb Coe's WR time of 1:41.73??
Is it simply a testament to the greatness of Seb Coe (no matter what ANYone says to the contrary, one can not deny the brilliance of a time that is virutally unbeaten in 24 years) ??
Is it also due to lack of willingness of great 400 runners (especially from the USA) to move up to the 800 and try their fortunes there?
Is it due to the lack of Ethiopian focus on this event? Clearly their distance running ability is unquestioned, and Geb and Bekele have shown brilliant acceleration (speed potential), and lastly Kenyan runners have had GREAT success at 800 (I think that almost 1/2 of the top 20 and top 50 all-time performers are Kenyan), so.....couldn't the Ethiopians have great potential in this event? Is their heritage too firmly in distance running for them to think 800??
Is it poor training by many of the elites??? Are too many elites focusing too little on endurance, or on the flip side, too little on strength training/weights (which Coe did a lot of)??
What do people think about this lack of 800 WR improvement (which is ever MORE amazing in this age of steroids and EPO, which in combination should help an 800 runner tremendously), and where do you think the first sub 1:40 runners will come from?? -
I don't think it's for lack of speed (lots of 46.5 or better 400m runners have been running the 800m for some time)...
-
Lack of endurance, i.e. speed-stamina.
-
Sergey
Yesterday i didn´t sleep well in the night just by think how offensive i was for you and for all the runners that i consider mediocre and average runners according the olympic statuts. That upsets me a quite a lot. Then wake up and in a portuguese newspaper i read the news of a contest.
In a mathematics contest the question is
2+2=?
number 1 answers 2+2=4
number 2 answers 2+2=22
number 3 answers 2+2=4756.342671
number 4 answers 2+2= E=Mc2
number 5 that´s an advanced multivariable calculus expert said 2+2= the result of the operation that´s offensive. The figures they have emotions.
Of course that the jury experts they considers number 5 the one who wins that contest. They number 5 is the new Einstein. And the jury said that to consider a figure as - positive, negative, offensive, good, mediocre, an hard effort, bad, poor, low value - all that adjectives are deep inside a number, more than any quantification try.
Ufff...I was wrong, Sergey he is right. -
Average X doesn't mean everyone can acheive X. That's a fact, not an opinion.
-
Lancelot, you said it well.
I do dispute your definition of "hijacking" the thread.
It has evolved into a general discussion of high level running, so the topic certainly applies. -
Antonio Cabral wrote:
Sergey
Yesterday i didn´t sleep well in the night just by think how offensive i was for you and for all the runners that i consider mediocre and average runners according the olympic statuts. That upsets me a quite a lot. Then wake up and in a portuguese newspaper i read the news of a contest.
In a mathematics contest the question is
2+2=?
number 1 answers 2+2=4
number 2 answers 2+2=22
number 3 answers 2+2=4756.342671
number 4 answers 2+2= E=Mc2
number 5 that´s an advanced multivariable calculus expert said 2+2= the result of the operation that´s offensive. The figures they have emotions.
Of course that the jury experts they considers number 5 the one who wins that contest. They number 5 is the new Einstein. And the jury said that to consider a figure as - positive, negative, offensive, good, mediocre, an hard effort, bad, poor, low value - all that adjectives are deep inside a number, more than any quantification try.
Ufff...I was wrong, Sergey he is right.
Gee, Antonio, I nearly missed your sarcasm (not).
I would have been with dropping the topic and continuing on, but your insistence on prolonging the argument with petty insult merits pity.
Please cease once and for all. -
Sir Lance-alot wrote:
HERE's a topic for Renato and Antonio or whoever:
Why has only ONE person in nearly a quarter century beaten Seb Coe's WR time of 1:41.73??
You could also ask why only 2 people have bettered Pietro Mennea's prior WR for 200--in 36 years. Some records are much tougher than others, but also the financial realities of events are different. Just like the 200 is a weak cousin of the 100 when it comes to financial incentives, the 800 is a weak cousin of the 1500.
Is it simply a testament to the greatness of Seb Coe (no matter what ANYone says to the contrary, one can not deny the brilliance of a time that is virutally unbeaten in 24 years) ??
You have a guy with a VO2max of 82 (I believe; didn't look it up) and a 400 meter time of 46.5 or thereabouts. There aren't too many people like this. By comparison, a guy I know somewhat is Khadevis Robinson. He has run a 4X4 split of 44.8 or so, but his 5K PR is about 15:30, which should give some idea of the difficulty. Johnny Gray never ran a 4 minute mile.
Is it also due to lack of willingness of great 400 runners (especially from the USA) to move up to the 800 and try their fortunes there?
We have some of these. Jearl Miles-Clark (IAAF #4) right now, Mark Everett, Brandon Rock, Jonathan Johnson, Derrick Peterson. One that would have been very interesting would have been Quincy Watts, with a 43.5 400, but not blazing 100m speed (10.3, which is slow for a 43 guy). I would think that the 400 guys that have run close to 10.0 have too much FT muscle fiber to ever develop any aerobic capacity.
The US is probably as dominant in the men's 400 as any nation is in any olympic event. I would think that the #15 US 400 guy has every bit as much chance getting into European meets as the #15 Kenyan steeplechaser, and both would be better off switching events. There are probably all kinds of 400 guys who could do what Mark Everett did but choose not to (Trackhead, take note: It's not that they can't; The don't want to. Wariner was very clear on this recently).
My sense is that the problem is overemphasis of (non-specific) endurance training. Too much slow mileage. Get rid of the Lydiard talk, talk about developing specific endurance for 800 like Renato does, and it might be different.
Is it due to the lack of Ethiopian focus on this event? Clearly their distance running ability is unquestioned, and Geb and Bekele have shown brilliant acceleration (speed potential), and lastly Kenyan runners have had GREAT success at 800 (I think that almost 1/2 of the top 20 and top 50 all-time performers are Kenyan), so.....couldn't the Ethiopians have great potential in this event? Is their heritage too firmly in distance running for them to think 800??
I think your impression of dominance is somewhat off the mark. If you look at the 10 fastest male 800 runners of all time, 4 are Kenyan, 1 is American, 1 is Brazilian, and 4 are European. If you look at the top 20 times, 9 of those times are from just 1 man (Kipketer). If you look at the rest of the list, you have 3 times by Kenyans, 3 times by Europeans (2 by Coe) and 5 times by Joaquim Cruz. Yes, Kenya is the #1 nation in the 800, but they don't literally own the event. Look at who won the gold medals in Athens.
Geb would have ZERO chance in an open 400 against Wilson Kipketer. His 400 time is simply not fast enough. I think some of the Kenyan 800 guys are closer to sprinters, but they don't have the infrastructure in Kenya, so they move to 800 and such. Possibly there are specific adaptions to running at 10,000 feet compared to 5000-7000 feet that emphasizes 5000/10000/marathon at the expense of 800/1500?
Is it poor training by many of the elites??? Are too many elites focusing too little on endurance, or on the flip side, too little on strength training/weights (which Coe did a lot of)??
I wonder if there is an overemphasis away from Lactate tolerance work, which, like it or not, is an important part of training here. Coe did a lot of this. Now look at what David Krummenacker has written in some of his journals:
Long intervals (1000s or 16-12-8-4 breakdowns) maybe 2X/week
A long run of up to 60 minutes
Some shorter runs of 30 minutes or so and an occasional tempo run
Speed (100s and 200s) added as the season progresses
Time in the pool, weights, and such.
This reads very much like what Renato wrote previously in this thread. What's missing, though, is stuff like 6X300 and 3X4X200 with short rest. There was a time when there was certainly an overemphasis of this kind of training, and many people, myself included, have cut back on this.
But I wonder if we have an overreaction to an overreaction, and now maybe people don't do enough of the lactate tolerance work. More balance here might result in some improvements. -
Speed Kills,
A few points:
1) Agree on the incentive to run 100 rather than 200, 1500 rather than 800, etc.
2) Agree on the too much FT making it a problem for moving up
3) Agree that guys like Wariner don't want to move up for obvious reasons
4) Disagree in the mileage issue. Aerobic foundations are necessary and so often athletes of yesteryear/E Africa have established huge aerobic bases in their youth of off which they can build and sharpen. Americans often need to play catch up. How much is enough? Who can say? Guys like Gray and Cruz peaked their base training around the 70s, Coe is highly debatable, and Renato has said that guys like Mutua and Bungei run 90s in the offseason and drop it to 60s in season.
5) Geb and Kipketer are entirely different athletes. Take Tegegne BEZABEH against Wilson K. at 400m, and you've got a clear Ethiopian victory.
6) Part of Ethiopia's issue is that since the success of Abebe Bikila, emphasis has gone from the marathon down, so Ethiopia will consistently produce great runners as low as 3000m with some occasional 1500m success (Geb in 99, Dulecha, Telache RIP, Wondimu...)
very good discussion -
It was plenty enough evidence.
In addition to being hilariously stupid, your attempt to extrapolate my educational background based on the 10-15 sentences I wrote on a running message forum
As it happens, I wasn't telling you to do anything, just suggesting a milieu in which you might feel more comfortable.
Unless your name is Weldon or Robert Johnson, it is difficult to see what business you have telling me to exit the board.
I'm glad to see that I'm not wrong about you. -
Nobby Nomates wrote:
It was plenty enough evidence.
You just keep talking and maybe one day you will find someone who agrees.
I'm glad to see that I'm not wrong about you.
Mark Twain once said, "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
I guess it's too late for you. -
Good points, Trackhead!
I believe both East African nations would contiune to dominate in 800m, 1500m, 3K, 5K, 10K and Marathon for a long time. Like you pointed out, as in long distance, Ethiopia would even become an emerging nation in producing top runners in the 800 and 1500meters arena. This doesn't necessrly means other countries such as Russia, Morocco, France or our own the US would stop producing top runners. -
award for this week goes to sergey.
-
observer of taking up space wrote:
award for this week goes to sergey.
Why don't you explain what you are talking about. -
bump
-
Renato or Antonio What advice would you give to young coaches on how to learn about Distance running?
-
juilo
Remember this - a coach have 1 main mission. To look for the runner´s improvement, not to be famous or rich or popular. For that coach goal target you need 2 parallel works: to coach the runner and to feel like an apprentice – a student - along all your future coaching career.
LEARN THIS:
1/ Forget most of what they teach you about physiology. Analyse training from a physiology perspective only when - in the limit - you haven´t no way to understand what´s going on about a effort or a intensity.
2/Start to learn running training method history and training technique, and how the different training coaching methods are connect with a located culture etc.
3/Analyse all that is preconceived or that comes to you to an undeniable truth about training – most of the training concepts are wrong, or they tell you their versions of the story.
4/Be influenced by what you consider the best coaches – despite that they mightn’t be the most famous or the ones that have more popularity. But don´t copy – if your schedules that “smells” to anyone else they are no good.
5/Learn from the best runners – past and present – how they did to get to the top. You learn more with an analysis from a top class training method than from all world´s lab data.
USES THIS:
6/Preserve each runner individuality. That´s your training that may fit in the each runner individual and not the opposite that the runner needs to fit into your training concepts.
Besides a runner that´s a human being with the chance to fail, not perfect, only the schedules that you design is that what you think that are perfects.
7/Uses a your own training inner structure to classified most of the training variables.
(read above)
8/train in simplicity. I never saw a good training schedule that´s too much complex in it´s premises.
9/Every coach/runner relationship may starts in respect for each one individuality, in a master/pupil relalationship and with time and confidence that may end in friendship.
10/Remember that sport or running – besides that´s also an industry and a way of living, doesn´t mean that the life have only a meaning with sports. Life and life meaning goes beyond all sports, that´s a bit more than sports really. Thus live your life as a coach but also pay attention to all the rest human expressions: arts, sciences, politics, etc.
My training inner structure, or the way I try to understand all training goes like this:
TRAINING – TIME AND SPACE MATTER
Space (distance) – the exterior objective materialistc reality. The distance.
Time (duration) – the inner abstract/subjective reality.
The conjunction of time and space, the combination of both; the time it takes to cover a certain space, or vice-versa, the space you do in a certain time, that´s the PACE (intensity).
I myself use a training method that´s based in simplicity. I use SPACE (as seen as distance in perception reality) and TIME (seen as duration in the activity) and the result of product from time and space are PACE. All my training is based in this simple formula, and from there and according each individual talent there are different zones of intensity which the basic ones are race pace; the zones faster than race pace, and the zones in intensity but slower than race pace. With an analysis of that multitude of variants, I define volume, intensity, specific training formats (workouts) with some precision and I i´m able to characterise any training that exists, independently from the physiology.
Concretely training that´s a overcompensation target that deals adequate management of time and space (PACE).
Related to a target goal race, we have a PACE, the time you take to cover that distance.
The running pace we know all that´s slower for a longer distance and/or more time duration and faster for a short distance/duration.
Every training principle doesn´t go out of that equation, and in the limit, that´s a ordinary logic rule. The ultimate scientific discovers relate to running activity found in physiologic or biologic or any other subsidiary science department, in their simplicity that´s no more than the use of TIME AND DURATION, so a pace issue.
Everybody knows that in an effort the relation in between time duration and the distance that´s in the direct proportion. Intenser paces that one shall be able to cover – in the limit of speed, of it´s own maximum intensity that´s only possible if you cover a short distance/time duration. The opposite that´s also true – no one can run in a continuum a longer distance than his event run if not in a slower/less intense pace than Race Pace. -
Where is Renato Canova?
Does anybody have any inoformation about his trainingcamp and how they are doing in Iten?
Will any of his runners run the world cross?
Abdulla Hassan, Saaheen??
Please give us an update if you have some connection where you are Renato! -
Renato, I am also curious what you think of Athletics Kenya's actions in forcing its best runners to abandon their training plans in the weeks before the World Championships to train (and race in training with other top athletes) under complete strangers?
