Disastrous Development Amongst Pro Women this year

Tommy Jasper wrote:

And what about Sheila Reid?

I believe Reid was training by herself pretty much and has made the move to Oregon to run with OTC.

This is an inflammatory, illogical post. I can't understand why it would be promoted to the homepage. Oh wait, I just spent 10 minutes responding to it. Nice job, editors.

'Disastrous' implies a disaster

'Development' implies, in this context, someone improving as a runner (*later in the post, author uses 'our development' which I interpret as referring to the ability of US coaches and organizations and female athletes to run faster times as young professionals. I'm assuming the author is not a coach or athlete of any great significance, but uses 'our' to refer to everyone that lives in the United States)

'Amongst Pro Women' implies, in this context, US women who are just past their amateur (HS or NCAA) eligibility and have run pro-caliber times

'This Year' means either 'late-2013 - present' or '2014'.

The subject title, 'Disastrous Development... ' doesn't really match the post, which is a written statement about a few females, along with a very debatable generalized statement 'all of these women appeared to be "The Future" of the sport'. This statement indicates serious failures in reality testing of the author, because it would be hard to find any evidence that this particular group of women were some sort of publicly agreed-upon 'dream team' future of US distance running... especially when not a single individual among them had run a time indicating they would definitely challenge some of the veteran or young pros currently serving as the face of their event (such as Jenny Simpson in the 1500, or Shalane Flanagan at the 10,000 or marathon) in the sport. Sure, each could have some success in an event, like Neely Spence in XC or half-marathon, but if we're calling Spence, a great NCAA runner who has represented the US at some international competitions, the 'future of the sport', we need to realize that statement could be said about any group of stand-out amateurs in any year.

I've been following the sport, and quite frankly, none of these women appeared, to any significant audience, to be "The Future". Therefore, the author is over-stating his personal opinion and generalizing it as if it's a popularly held belief (not to mention he capitalizes The Future, another interesting form of special emphasis). He then makes a statement in the form of a question ("What is wrong in our development?" = "I assert something's wrong with our development, so please prove to me why I'm wrong"), based upon originally faulty over-generalization (these female athletes are "The Future" of the sport).

Sir (I'm assuming you're a sir), you're wrong because in order for "our development" to be a "disaster", when in reality US women's distance running has never been, on the whole, better and healthier, you need to provide some evidence.

What's most likely, is that YOU think those handful of runners are extra-important, and therefore they should be running faster times this year, because that's what runners should do when they've caught your eye: get faster every year. But, unfortunately for you, there are other runners from roughly the same era who ARE improving, such as Mary Cain, Jordan Hasay, and Emma Coburn, and who do indeed look to be the future of the uber-high-end of the US sport. Their improvement (and therefore their 'development') has been, in fact, the exact opposite of disastrous. 'Promising', or 'Indicative of some systemic health' might be appropriate and conservative adjectives to describe 'their development' that would be backed by the logic of many people observing the sport.

Other young female competitors at USAs who seem to be 'developing' quite well:

Ajee Wilson

Laura Roesler

I am totally on board with Inflamory post. Very few make the next level. It's natural. I bet all these girls plus dozens of others were awesome in high school. Then the pyramid steepens. A small group succeed in College. Then a much smaller group makes the pro level. Coburn and Hasay were the class of 2013. Cain and Abbey are class of 2014.

They are awesome and join a great group of slightly older distance women, who are making a big impact on the Global scene. FYI, I also bet this group get paid PLENTY. The sport is thriving so just get happy and get behind those that make it.

Connections wrote:

Hberkley wrote:

I was super excited about a group of woman that all looked to have promising careers last year. This year they are non existent.

Neely Spence

Tara Erdmann

Deborah Maier

Emily Infeld

Chelsea Reilly

Lisa Uhl

In 2012 and 2013 all of these women appeared to be "The Future" of the sport and I am not sure any of them achieved anything in 2014.

What is wrong with our development?

If you knew Neely personally you would understand why she's nowhere to be seen, and why she was NEVER going to succeed at the professional level.

What the hell is this all about. Seriously, man.

Development is a 5 year process so judging these ladies now is a little premature. However most of these women have had a rough go of things in 2014.

Neely was 13th in WXC and nothing since

Tara was awesome at USATF last year and nothing

Deborah was lights out in the 10000 her senior year in College and nothing since

Emily ran great last fall at Providence 5k, Tufts 10k, and the NYRR 5k and nothing since

Chelsea was Indoor National 3k champ in 2012 and not much since

Lisa was an Olympian in 2012 and most recently ran 1:16 HM

Jordan Hasay rules all.

Hasay has watched them all come and go. I doubt she'll get quite to Rupp's level, but she will have a similar, inexorable upwards progression, maybe to AR level at 10000. I'm not convinced AlSal can lead her to marathon glory, which is where her genetics seems to want to go.

There is very little career potential in track. Perhaps a few years of modest income. Look at the Sacramento stands. That says it all. The running shoe industry has become the apparel and fashion industry. ESPN almost never covers running. No one except us knows who Mary Cain is. Go to a local race and try to find anyone who knows what "B-Mart" means. Here's an idea: Stage a season of The Bachelor with running girls. That might help.

Well why don't you share with us why Neely will not make it as a pro runner. Please.

anyone else think this was going to be another thread lamenting the demise of bun huggers?

Tommy Jasper wrote:

And what about Sheila Reid?

she's Canadian

Most believe success looks like this:

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

When in reality it looks more like this:

/

\

/

/

\

\

/

/

Judgments need to be made on a longer term basis than just 1-2 years.

It is frustrating that a simple question about some talented ladies many of us root for can't simply be informational, rather than a degeneration into nastiness. rearrange the letters in LETS RUN and you get NET SLUR

I can't believe Hasay is only 22. It seems like she's been running forever, yet she's just starting her career. :O

No ones mentioned Rachel Ward. 5th in the 10k at Nats, coming off a PR at Payton Jordan, 24 years old. No college career to speak of, apparently she was injured. Has only started racing recently as seems to be headed in the right direction.

Information sharing is the problem. You'd be surprised at how many coaches tightly guard their information out of some misplaced suspicion that there job will be in jeopardy. Its because of the damn egos, the egos that need to be stroked and looked upon as some kind of coaching guru. The best coaches historically were ones that loved to teach anyone, not just people in line with their interests. Take the egos out and lets figure out the next evolution in human performance.

inflamer wrote:

The subject title, 'Disastrous Development... ' doesn't really match the post, which is a written statement about a few females, along with a very debatable generalized statement 'all of these women appeared to be "The Future" of the sport'. This statement indicates serious failures in reality testing of the author, because it would be hard to find any evidence that this particular group of women were some sort of publicly agreed-upon 'dream team' future of US distance running... especially when not a single individual among them had run a time indicating they would definitely challenge some of the veteran or young pros currently serving as the face of their event (such as Jenny Simpson in the 1500, or Shalane Flanagan at the 10,000 or marathon) in the sport.

I would say you are wrong. Lisa Uhl ran a solo 31:17 as a senior, which is the still standing NCAA record. That summer she also ran 14:55 for 5,000m, which at present puts her ahead of jenny simpson and less than a second behind kara goucher on the American all time list, before she even started her career as a pro. She subsequently lowered her 10,000m PR to 31:12, which is 25 seconds faster than hasay's

She left Schumacher because she only improved 5 seconds in two years, which is negligible. Went back to Iowa and her college coach and hasn't been seen since. Running mediocre times in road races.