True or False? Colorado's Theroux: "We train harder than anyone in this country."

True- harder and smarter.

It could be argued that regardless of whether they do train harder than anyone or not, the belief that they do, and their belief in what they are doing is clearly good enough.

A lot of college kids (myself included) LOVE(d) to complain about their coaching for one reason or another. Whether it's too much, too little, too much emphasis on this or that... However, I always observed that the most successful runners do what they're told, don't over think it, and believe that they will win on Saturday. IMO, as many successful coaches have been quoted as saying in the past (I remember seeing this quote from Peter Coe in particular) 'belief in your training is as important as what that training consists of'

To use one of the most prevalent, yet true, cliches in sports: Races are won between the ears, not with the legs.

False. Everyone trains about the same.

I think he is correct, but there are caveats.

There are individual runners who train as hard and as focused as Colorado. As a group, Colorado does it better, and with American high school runners the program develops.

This is little different than Arkansas back in the 80's and 90's. Arkansas had talent, of course, but they trained harder than we did (I was on a decent Division 1 squad with lots of focus on high level academics, and knew darn well that 60 miles a week was not up to par, even if it was fine for my team). Arkansas had a few more foreign athletes than Colorado, but their guys were developed well, too.

I note that Theroux mentions how early in the year they start and how well prepared they are. Performing insane workouts and hitting high mileage starting in September doesn't cut it, as it leads to fatigue, injury, and a lack of performance in November. Consistency is important - what you time on the time away from campus really matters. The mental aspect matters, but let's face it, if you can run 18 miles at altitude at good pace and be relaxed and controlled, well, it is no accident that Colorado finishes their races so well.

I am not sure if Division 1 running makes sense for those with significant academic aspirations. It is a different world today, with a much earlier race for internships, the right professional focus and the right credentials - a shame, really. But make no mistake about it, I admire the guys at Colorado tremendously. As with the Arkansas teams, they deserve the accolades thrown their way.

mcdougall789 wrote:

It could be argued that regardless of whether they do train harder than anyone or not, the belief that they do, and their belief in what they are doing is clearly good enough.

A lot of college kids (myself included) LOVE(d) to complain about their coaching for one reason or another. Whether it's too much, too little, too much emphasis on this or that... However, I always observed that the most successful runners do what they're told, don't over think it, and believe that they will win on Saturday. IMO, as many successful coaches have been quoted as saying in the past (I remember seeing this quote from Peter Coe in particular) 'belief in your training is as important as what that training consists of'

To use one of the most prevalent, yet true, cliches in sports: Races are won between the ears, not with the legs.

I'm sorry. This sounds good, but

1. It's not prevelant

2. It's not true.

Dennis Kimetto could experience one of the most terrible crises of confidence ever, and, he'd still beat me in a marathon - for one, I don't think that right now, I could/would finish a marathon.

What you mean is that if two competitors are otherwise closely matched, then, the mentally stronger one will usually win. The question to consider here is whether UC and, say UO or Stanford were closely matched. I would say no. In particular, UO's coach inspired enough confidence for their guys to go 1-2. If the other guys were training much the same, they should have had the same mental confidence and been just as successful.

Mental toughness is important, and, these days, too often overlooked, but, though it plays a role in the ultimate outcome of a race, it's still less important than other things. Many other things.

Brian Shrader, NAU, just ran 7.5 miles @ 4:35 for an American record. Are

they training harder than that?

Shrader was on a training run?

False. Oregon individuals went 1-2. The problem is the rest of Oregon's team train too hard trying to stay with Oregon's top 2.

I have found the secret!!! They start on June 1st at Colorado. The only way you do that is by not making NCAA outdoors. That's the key - suck outdoors so you can train for xc! Spank of the monkey is the man!

Spank of the monkey wrote:

I have found the secret!!! They start on June 1st at Colorado. The only way you do that is by not making NCAA outdoors. That's the key - suck outdoors so you can train for xc! Spank of the monkey is the man!

I think you are kidding but I hear far too often things like this from people who are actually serious. Somehow people think that training for 10k is far different than training for 5k/10k.

I'm sure you're aware that they all broke 14 for 5k. Saarel even ran 3:41.

Goucher won track titles too.

Track usually rewards talent more than cross country does. You can finesse your way through a track 5k, but not a cross country 10k. You have to be super fit to run 10k.

No, no no. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Cross country 10k rewards a different KIND of talent is all. Yes, no one is successful without working and putting in the miles. On the other hand, some people have a physiology that benefits more from hard training than others. That's TALENT, no two ways about it.

Everyone likes to brag that their success is the product of nothing but hard work, while the competition is made of talented, but lazy athletes. That's just horse-shyte. Some people get more benefit out of aerobic training than others do. Some people's bodies can't take the miles, others can. Guess what you call the difference between the two? Talent.

doo doo wrote:

Spank of the monkey wrote:

I have found the secret!!! They start on June 1st at Colorado. The only way you do that is by not making NCAA outdoors. That's the key - suck outdoors so you can train for xc! Spank of the monkey is the man!

I think you are kidding but I hear far too often things like this from people who are actually serious. Somehow people think that training for 10k is far different than training for 5k/10k.

I'm sure you're aware that they all broke 14 for 5k. Saarel even ran 3:41.

Goucher won track titles too.

Track usually rewards talent more than cross country does. You can finesse your way through a track 5k, but not a cross country 10k. You have to be super fit to run 10k.

But no one from the team that won yesterday made an NCAA outdoor final in '14. Either they're putting all their eggs into the XC basket, or Wetmore isn't as good at coaching 15/5 as he is cross. Maybe a combo of the two.

Yea coaching the #1 1500m runner in the world makes him a bad 1500m coach....

have you ever heard a guy on a championship-winning team say immeditely afterwards "nah man we are a pretty chill crew. other teams definitely outwork us."?

theroux (sp?), saarel, hurysz all made NCAAs, possibly more i'm forgetting. so, you're wrong.

Spank of the monkey wrote:

I have found the secret!!! They start on June 1st at Colorado. The only way you do that is by not making NCAA outdoors. That's the key - suck outdoors so you can train for xc! Spank of the monkey is the man!

How can he possibly know how hard everyone else in the nation trains? Just because you train hard it doesn't mean you're training the hardest. What a self centered jerk. He needs to understand that they won because yes, they may have trained very hard but also because their team is loaded with talent. Some of the best runners in the nation do go to Colorado. Check the roster, it's loaded with foot locker and Nike finalists, state champions and record holders. There could have been other individuals who train harder but because they don't possess the natural talent didn't even make NCAA's. Quit being a jerk, just be happy you have many things going for you and that's why you won, not just because you trained hard and you probably definitely don't train the hardest out of all the athletes in the US.

I'm guessing that they train consistently a little bit harder than everyone else and they have a higher number of highly goal-focused guys who work really well together. But Theroux kinda bothers me in general. He's a really good, consistent runner but he acts super cocky and isn't very humble. You really don't need personalities like that on an ensemble cast like they have. Everyone else is super humble and focused on the work they're doing, but Theroux is saying things like "Other teams should be afraid of us", "This was our easiest win by far, by far!", "We're bulletproof!" throughout the season. Talk like that comes off as obnoxious and it should be left for individual sports. But what surprised me from the article is that Ben Saarel only gets 4 or 5 hours of sleep on average. How much do you think that really affects him? And would he have placed even higher if he was getting consistent 8 hours?

So you agree with the quote.

Maybe he's just been quoted more often than his teammates because he's a captain and has usually been their top runner, and the rest of the CU guys would say exactly the same things about the team if asked.

Whereas Theroux isn't focused at all, he just spends his time thinking of trash-talk to offer to reporters.

And how wrong he turned out to be. Ruined the Buffs' title hopes.

Thanks for being the arbiter of which athletes get to come across as obnoxious.

Sounds like a cocky thing to say, actually. What he meant was, "I'm great, but could do even better if I got a few more winks. Suck it."

Congrats Moma Theroux! Your son won the big one again! Have a great thanksgiving!