Tim Danielson-New York Times extensive article

here's what it takes to break 4:

His workouts would become known for their volume and ferocity. In high school, he trained twice a day, sometimes even three times. He recalled his weekly speed work during the track season: Monday, eight repeats of 440 yards; Tuesday, 20x220 yards (in 24 seconds); Wednesday, 40x110 yards; Thursday, a warm-up and strides; Friday, meet day; Saturday and Sunday, a 15-mile run.

I have talked to a couple of old coaches and runners in the past about him and they all described him doing exactly those kinds of workouts in high school. I can't imagine very many runners who wouldn't get injured by that kind of training.

old guy in San Diego wrote:

I have talked to a couple of old coaches and runners in the past about him and they all described him doing exactly those kinds of workouts in high school. I can't imagine very many runners who wouldn't get injured by that kind of training.

It was also notorious in the day for runners to exaggerate their workouts in order to freak out their opponents and encourage other coaches to over train their athletes.

I don't believe he ran 20 220's in 24. I don't care what he ran in the mile. Not buying it. Not with the work he did the day before.

A Duck wrote:

old guy in San Diego wrote:

I have talked to a couple of old coaches and runners in the past about him and they all described him doing exactly those kinds of workouts in high school. I can't imagine very many runners who wouldn't get injured by that kind of training.

It was also notorious in the day for runners to exaggerate their workouts in order to freak out their opponents and encourage other coaches to over train their athletes.

I don't believe he ran 20 220's in 24. I don't care what he ran in the mile. Not buying it. Not with the work he did the day before.

Probably a minor exaggeration on his times. 24-high with a rolling start in workout doesn't sound unreasonable for a guy at the level he was at. I was never even vaguely close to that level of fitness and I could roll 16x220 in the high 26s and 220 jog recovery without much strain.

Anybody else surprised that he could jump 20'6'' in the long jump?

Unless he had a heck of a lot of rest between repeats, I don't know how he could do that 20X220 workout and "only" run 3:59. I know that sub 4 is incredible, but the workout described sounds more like something a world class miler would run.

A Duck wrote:

old guy in San Diego wrote:

I have talked to a couple of old coaches and runners in the past about him and they all described him doing exactly those kinds of workouts in high school. I can't imagine very many runners who wouldn't get injured by that kind of training.

It was also notorious in the day for runners to exaggerate their workouts in order to freak out their opponents and encourage other coaches to over train their athletes.

I don't believe he ran 20 220's in 24. I don't care what he ran in the mile. Not buying it. Not with the work he did the day before.

I don't doubt he did 20 x 440 yds but no way in 24 secs...think about what kind of 880 yd run that would yield if you could do 20 x 440 yds in 24 secs...no way!!!!

Track and Field News did an article 10 years ago on the decline of the mile in the United States. Danielson was interviewed and stated that high school kids weren't training hard enough and took too much recovery in their 200 sessions (a 200 jog is an incredibly long recovery, 2-2 and a half minutes). He went on to say he did a lot of workouts of 200's with 30 seconds to a minute and yes there is now way he could do 20 in 24, maybe 28 with that short of recovery. When I was running 3:45 for the 1500 I couldn't probably do 20 in 28-29 with 2 minutes rest but I was a 5000 guy.

He probably ran 200 sessions in 24 many times but definitely not 20 in a row. I've seen enough training sessions of 3:55 collegiate milers and 6-10 at that pace with a minute-90 second rest was common.

old guy in San Diego wrote:

A Duck wrote:

It was also notorious in the day for runners to exaggerate their workouts in order to freak out their opponents and encourage other coaches to over train their athletes.

I don't believe he ran 20 220's in 24. I don't care what he ran in the mile. Not buying it. Not with the work he did the day before.

Probably a minor exaggeration on his times. 24-high with a rolling start in workout doesn't sound unreasonable for a guy at the level he was at. I was never even vaguely close to that level of fitness and I could roll 16x220 in the high 26s and 220 jog recovery without much strain.

Yeah, that is what I was thinking, very liberal rolling start, maybe 24 highs, and maybe the track was 390, lol.

Doesn't pass the sniff test, and I saw some GREATS workout, do monster workouts. Jim Ryun, Gerry Lindgren etc.

break it up wrote:

Track and Field News did an article 10 years ago on the decline of the mile in the United States. Danielson was interviewed and stated that high school kids weren't training hard enough and took too much recovery in their 200 sessions (a 200 jog is an incredibly long recovery, 2-2 and a half minutes). He went on to say he did a lot of workouts of 200's with 30 seconds to a minute and yes there is now way he could do 20 in 24, maybe 28 with that short of recovery. When I was running 3:45 for the 1500 I couldn't probably do 20 in 28-29 with 2 minutes rest but I was a 5000 guy.

He probably ran 200 sessions in 24 many times but definitely not 20 in a row. I've seen enough training sessions of 3:55 collegiate milers and 6-10 at that pace with a minute-90 second rest was common.

I've heard of monster workouts by J. Cruz.

I once, ONCE did 6x200 with 30 seconds rest, and hit all but one under 23.5. I thought that was pretty studly.

A Duck wrote:

I've heard of monster workouts by J. Cruz.

There's a lot of difference between a 1:41.77 800 guy and a 3:59 miler.

I know you're somewhat (in?)famous on this board, but I don't know who you are or what your PRs are - how fast were you? That's got to be like 1:50 for an 800 or 4:05 for a mile.

A Duck wrote:

I've heard of monster workouts by J. Cruz.

I once, ONCE did 6x200 with 30 seconds rest, and hit all but one under 23.5. I thought that was pretty studly.

Here's a great video of his 4:07 win in the 1966 CA State Meet. I had never seen any recording of him before and was amazed at how similar his physique, running form, and stride were to Pre.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-RImae6ftA

What was his 2nd best mile? 4:07?

Having read the article, it didn't seem that his 880 & 2 mile times were anywhere close to 4:00 in comparison. Weren't they 8:55 & 1:56. Either he rarely ran them or things don't add up.

I found it interesting that he gave advice to high school kids to "train harder than what their coach tells them", yet he did little beyond high school.

He ran a 4:00.X which was his second fastest time.

Also the fact that he did what only a handful of kids have ever done, at a time when it was 3:59 was world class (1966?) means any advice on training he gives should be taken seriously.

Thanks.

I didn't see the 4:00, but assumed there must've been some progression between 4:07 & 3:59.

I was not suggesting his advice was wrong, just interesting provided it "may" have stunted his long-term progression. Everyhone who knew or saw him him run seem to have glowing things about his talent yet he was done shortly after high school graduation.

Never knew of the Chantix issue before, I can see a reduced sentence coming.

A few observations, which may not be as informed as they should be, but nevertheless I think reflect intuitions of many:

1. I detect a life of frustration in his never being able to replicate the magic of his high school years. The comment from his first wife in 1974 that he was unduly devoted to running speaks volumes. Running by necessity requires a good dose of self-centeredness, but keeping the self-centeredness is balance and having expressions outside of running which are just as fulfilling seem essential.

2. Substance abuse addiction may well be the result of a poor genetic luck of the draw. I was not a Danielson caliber runner in high school, but did manage a 4:08 mile. I could only attend school on a track scholarship, and the one thing that helped me "make it" to a world of success beyond track was that I, through frankly dumb luck, just had no interest in alcohol or drugs (and was too shy around women to date anyone who would lead me astray). I have empathy for those stuck in this trap, but at the same time, we all need humility to understand that the addiction trap can snare us all.

3. I did not run 20 x 220 in 24 sec in high school. But I did do a lot of speed work - in retrospect - way too much.

It is possible to get high school runners to run fast times with intense speedwork, however, it is often the case that it does not help in long term, incremental development. (My high school coach ran for Igloi and it was remarkable what 30 days of that speedwork could do in a high school athlete). From looking at the tape of Danielson posted here, I can see why he so readily took to speedwork and likely became obsessed by it. He was a very, very strong high school runner who took to heavy speedwork easily, and like most of us, we become drawn to what we are good at.

4. The Times reporting so often centers on a narrative rather than hard facts and a coherent theme. This article about Danielson, however, is excellent, and reflects the Times at its best. I think most everyone reading it walks away with a sense of tragedy, and if thoughtful, we all should feel a greater sense of tragedy for the victim than for Danielson. But it is an awful situation all around.