TINMAN BASHES WEJO's COACH

lefty wrote:

i'm not sure what tinman's agenda was bashing kellogg. Was JK taking credit for everything he writes? I don't remember him saying he invented the wheel. This sounds like an attmept to get us talking about tinman and his "contributions" to running. The only thing that comes to mind is "who the f*** is tinman"?

He starred in the Wizard of Oz.

"Harrumph," he harrumphed, aware that he had never used such a stodgy, archaic word in his life, much less twice in the same sentence. "All I can say is that I'm pretty sure John Kellogg wrote a chapter for a soon-to-be-published book that addresses much of this stuff. Rumor has it that he not only credits references where needed (and sometimes not), but makes no claims - overt or veiled - of inventiveness. Just shows where and why the principles he discusses have worked."

He thought back to the not-so-distant days before the Internet became clogged with f***ups like himself, who, despite knowing better, preferred hamming it up and rabble-rousing to the actual exchanging of ideas about training and racing. "You have to admit," he intoned solemnly, "that the guy does have a way of writing things in a clear, often clever way. If he wanted to, he could probably write a training-related stage play in which every 'actor' is a Simpsons character."

He idly fingered the tangerine-sized ball of hashish next to his computer mouse and smiled warmly. "Maybe someday."

The thing about Tinman is, who gives a f*** what he thinks? Tinman is a douche.

Kemibe, I always get a good laugh from your posts.

Is this real about Kellogg writing a book (I ask this with childlike hope)?

Strawman wrote:

The thing about Tinman is, who gives a f*** what he thinks? Tinman is a douche.

Agreed. The disturbing thing is all of the people on the other board licking his boots. I wonder if Tinman is answering his own posts. A kind of message board jerk off.

Strunk wrote:

ESL PhD wrote:

high-school and college wannabes.

high school is correct.

No it's not. Compound adjectives should be hyphenated. I can't believe I let you co-author a book on writing with me, you f***ing ding-a-ling.

E. B. White wrote:

I can't believe I let you co-author a book on writing with me, you f***ing ding-a-ling.

I hate to break it to you, Mr. White, but everyone knows that you were named as co-author just to increase sales, and that Mr. Strunk did all the writing on that little book.

Rochester wrote:

PAnache:

Didn't you say JK was writing a book?

"No," he said solemnly. "Noooooooo. Noooooooooooooooo...NO!-NO!-NO!-NO!-NO!-NO!-NO!-NO!" He was having fun with the word because he was speaking through the back of an oscillating fan set on "HIGH" - always a treat to pre-schoolers, the mentally challenged, and those with the good fortune to be stoned to the gills on a Tuesday afternoon. The codpiece had given way to a pair of buttless riding chaps.

"What I did say," he allowed, "is that he wrote a chapter for a book. Chaaaaaaaaap-terrrrrrrrrrrr..." The fan hijinks, though still far from stale, were starting to unnerve him because the reverb was setting off unmanageable sepia-toned echoes in his head, or so it seemed.

"Give it eight weeks," he predicted, "and I'm sure you'll be able to find this book. But I'm not here to shill for the f***er, so I'll say no more." With that, he wandered into the kitchen area to take apart the dishwasher, confident that he had just boldly lied to a great many people who would be as unable as he was to separate truth from fiction.

Rochester wrote:

So I propose you learn your stuff before speaking. It does a world of good in helping to prevent you from looking like a mindless fool.

"Rule number one of the Internet!" he brayed, mindless of the fact that he'd used this term in reference to at least forty-six different "rules" over the years. With his jaw thrust forward and both arms extended far over his head, he'd assumed a charismatic and authoritarian stance, albeit one not visible to others. "People who post anonymously on the Web under names like 'dipshit stick,'" he went on, "aren't terribly concerned about how mindless or foolish they might look!"

Moments before, he'd been somewhat unsettled to learn that he'd evidently ordered an anatomically correct inflatable Rosie O'Donnell doll, a shoehorn, a case of Bactine, and a dozen black roses from three different vendors on EBay during the previous night's brownout, but for the most he part remained unperturbed. To prove this, he inserted a large hoop earring into his left tragus and tied a bandana around his head, thereby projecting (he believed) a veneer of swashbuckler toughness to anyone who might be spying on him. Then he lowered his voice and resumed his sermon.

"My dear f***ing Christ in heaven!" he blasphemed. An immense lightning bolt from God, Zeus or some other annoyed deity zoomed into his apartment and nailed him square in the forehead, leaving an ugly, dark smudge that oozed smoke and blood; he shrugged it off. "Can't you see? The very purpose of this place is to serve as a locus for tearing people auxiliary assholes without fear of retribution! Just check out the loopy stuff that's gone up on the front page just since this morning and see if you don't agree!" With this he made a grand, sweeping gesture at his monitor, spilling the contents of a half-full gallon bottle of Bacardi smack onto his keyboard and leaving him suddenly unable to continue typing words and phra

The following what Tinman had to say about Kellog on run-insight.com:

First of all, Kellog has borrowed all of his recent "genius" concepts from others. He is not original. Second, I feel like you are trying to pit me against him. Is that necessary? You can bet if I say something, it is true. I don't think about Kellog unless people bring him up in conversation or prose.

I have looked at the research in the science community. I have read the articles by scientists. I have thought about them intensely. I have not distorted them. I have only clarified them for the masses so that genius can be utilized by the particpants of sport. Simple as that. I give credit to those who worked hard on reserch, unlike Kellog who never cites references. (To be fair, a lot of others don't credit originators and authors credit either).

The very first line of the first paragraph of Kellog's rip-off info. is wrong. VO2 max training does not improve aerobic endurance. In volume, it does just the opposite. It erodes aerobic endurance. It does raise power. Try doing low mileage with an emphasis on VO2 max training and you will get your butt kicked by someone else doing higher mileage, tempo runs plus a modest amount of VO2 max work, normally. It is the old Lydiard argument of speed vs endurance concept all over again. Lydiard was right 50 years ago and his wisdom is still right now. VO2 max rep training will improve aerobic instantaneous speed, but it will not extend endurance.

Kellog's descriptions of VO2 max is from a combination of Amby Burfoot's article written in about 1985 with the help of Thiebault and Perronet of Canada, also clearly shown on Roy Benson's website's and books - which Benson took from Burfoot, et al, with approval. Kellog borrows all the velocity of Vo2 max information from Dr. Daniels, which is fine, but Kellog doesn't give Daniels credit, not once.

Kellog's comment in the first paragraph stating "...maximum oxygen uptake itself can only be sustained for around 3 minutes before the "lactate system" generates most of the energy." is stupid, to say the least. What is he smoking, anyway?

The first and second sentences of the second paragraph are both right and wrong. The wrong part is his statement "What training mainly accomplishes is improving the speed at VO2 max." Absurd. VO2 max can improve up to 30-40% in most people. Even the renowned researcher Dr. David L. Costill in his writings gave an example of a 40 year old runner who started with a 43 for max VO2 (the runner did no training for a year, at all). (see Inside Running: The Basics of Sports Physiology for an explanation) Then, the subject ran 25 miles per week and for a few months, and his VO2 max increased 28%. The same runner increased his mileage to 50 miles per week for a few more months and he rose to 63 mls per kg per minute, a total of 44% increase over his original value. According to Kellog, it is only speed at VO2 max that improves. Uh, then why did the subject improve VO2 max by 44%? Yeah, Kellog thought about that one closely! Not!

Kellog just copies down what he reads without thinking about the topic, or he doesn't have the ability to discern reality because he hasn't developed science-knowledge nor an analytical agility remotely close to people like Daniels or Vigil.

Sure I am angry, but if I have to be pitted against people like Kellog who displays little to no integrity in his writings, then my temperature will start rising without intent. This won't happen too much more because I simply won't reply much to comparisons or people trying to discredit what I say. I said it before and I will say it again, if I write it down or say it, you can bet it is true. You can also bet if I took and idea from someone, I am going to give them the credit they are due.

If you are going to admire and quote someone, use Dr.Daniels and Dr. Vigil as your source, not Kellog. They are the real-deal, Kellog is not. Tinman

I don't want to go any further. I get tired of people like Kellog who don't fully understand stuff and at the same time steal information from others and pretend it is theirs. There is little information that has not been written about out there by someone else. Even the greats like Vigil and Daniels cite references when they write. They don't pretend to be the orignators of everything. They have integrity. I can not say the same for Kellog.

__________________

I smell a battle of semi-biblical proportions brewing.

if it is posted on another site, why did you post it in here?

who likes gossip? wrote:

if it is posted on another site, why did you post it in here?

the same reason you posted (and me). to bump up the thread and contribute to the cat fight

Not sure if this is a hoax, but the above quotes are shite.

Of course we should all be training to improve our VVO2 Max. If this was Tinman, then i am dissapointed.

Most coaches are not sports scientists, they just have a great knowledge of what works and what does not. They often rely on the work of others to explain/understand why this is so. They are still the best guys to do the job of coaching, as most sports scientists do not have enough personality to coach effectively. They have great knowledge and resources, but do not have the flair required to get your point across whilst making it interesting for the athlete. Sure, they could coach via a computer terminal, but interaction via the power of speech in too difficult for them....this is what Tinman is perhaps becoming? A closet sportsci internet coaching geek? Please Tinman say it aint so!!!

All this (and I'll ignore the merits or lack thereof of that above-quoted material) from a guy who is hesistant to even give his real name? Whom has "tinman" coached? What has he had published? It's kind of hard to know these things when his entire persona rests on a message-board handle, isn't it?

And none of this "I have e-mailed back and forth with him, I know his name, he knows his stuff" bullshit either. Nothing "tinman" says is as meaningful as it could be until he establishes that he has a role in the running community. He may have something to contrinute, but being an anonymous dissident on the Internet doesn't mean a damn thing.

Tinman, once again, is just some dude who got his rocks off by all the attention the high schoolers who frequent this site heaped upon him. It's ironic that he blasts Kellogg for being un-original. He's an arrogant wanna be hiding behind his made up name. He can blast other coaches, but is unwilling to even say who he is. Pathetic. And the only thing more pathetic than Tinman is anyone who lifts him up as if he were a genius, much less an honorable man. Get a life Tinman.

heir heir

But when the subject's VO2max increased, did not his VVO2max not also increase? Don't we measure VO2max because it is a good indicator of top sustainable velocity?

College Guy wrote:

But when the subject's VO2max increased, did not his VVO2max not also increase?

Certainly somewhere there is a prize awarded to he who most abuses the word "not."