It is my understanding that Tom Schwartz coached at the collegiate level for a short time...
It is my understanding that Tom Schwartz coached at the collegiate level for a short time...
Old Man By the Sea wrote:
I dont have a dog in this fight but why does Tinman not go by his real name..?...
I don't have a dog in this fight either, but why doesn't Old Man By the Sea go by his real name?
I'm wondering, did Kellog ever say anything critical about Tinman on this board or anywhere else? It might shed light on causation relative to Tinman's diatribe.
We're 50 posts in on this thread and I'm surprised Tinman is not getting a little more support, so allow me to lend it.
Essentially we've got a guy who we'd all agree is well read in exercise science and has some coaching background with athletes of varying abilities. He is taking time to share his knowledge/ideas/opinions with strangers, many of whom are quite abrasive, knowing he'll likely never meet any of them or have any future gratification or knowledge of their future successes or failures; not to mention there is zero compensation for him other than an occasional emailed thank you. Tinman does not hide behind an anonymous handle; his email is posted on many threads in the archives of this site. Email him with a sincere comment or request, and he'll likely respond in kind. Not too many coaches make themselves accessible in that fashion...whether the man has a negative opinion on the side about someone else or not is really beside the point of what he is willing to offer you.
Anyone on this board looking to improve their running (most of us) and berating others should ask themselves where they gather the training and direction for their running. It is gained from those willing to share. We learn from the likes of Peter Coe, Jack Daniels, John Kellogg, Steve Bennett, Renato Canova, Joe Rubio, Luis Olivera, Arthur Lydiard, Marius Bakken, AND TINMAN, and even Charlie Francis, though that's an arguement for another day (He has as much good advice on his site as anyone). We don't learn from the Slawomir Nowak's of the world (Kipketer's coach) "I keep the training in my heart" or the Jos Hermens's, etc. Be thankful for what we get, don't tear it down.
I talked to tinman and he definitely isn't Tom Schwarts!!!!! So keep trying
jdb071374 wrote:
I talked to tinman and he definitely isn't Tom Schwarts!!!!! So keep trying
He's Tom Schwartz, not Tom Schwarts
Not that it matters... wrote:
It is my understanding that Tom Schwartz coached at the collegiate level for a short time...
Where? When? I doubt it's true.
Concordia College - DIII school
K
A college Coach wrote:
My feeling has always been that MR. Kellogg’s approach to coaching as a business and his self promotion – or rather Weldon’s promotion of him, has been a bit oily and I would say along the line of cereal box religion (philosophy). However, I recognize this, as a “gut” reaction, because of my own particular sense of how a coach should behave which I must confess is a rather vague notion at best.J
I have to respond to this one.
I am very defensive of my coach.
But obviously from this post, you do not know my coach. To call him "oily" or insinuate he his about self promotion or is like a used car salesman is a real stretch.
Kellogg is a very very unique individual. Very quarky. Doesn't really operate in the same world that you and I do. But he is not about self promotion. I am the one who has promoted Kellogg. I wanted to start this website to spread his training philosophies (when I was a 29:49 10ker i might add) because I knew that he would not do any self promotion on his own. He is very confident in his abilities as a coach and the very few of us elites who have trained under him (some of who have trained under other "prominent" coaches), all say he's the best out there, but he's not about self promotion.
I beg him to post on here more often about training. I beg him to write articles for the website. He doesn't do it. I may be able to get this to change but he is not about self promotion.
I'm trying to get him to write more stuff, do more things, at least to get a few $$$ in the bank. But he's content literally to live with the shirt on his back and a roof over his head. Hopefully, that will change.
Not that it matters... wrote:
Concordia College - DIII school
Which one? There are like thirty of them. And when?
master man of track wrote:
This is not cruel. He deserves every bit of the crap he(Tinman) gets from us. This guy named Tom from Oregon comes on a message board and talks trash about a great coach like John Kellog. I would like to hear from WeJo or RoJo on the matter.
Your post is absolutely devoid of any valuable information.
Take another try to write something reasonable and meaningful.
Tinman is no dummy. From what I've read of him over several years I'd say that he's extremely well read and percetive. Not everyone has an opportunity to pursue the luxury of being a track coach, so saying he's a bum because he doesn't coach is off the mark considerably.
Distance running is not an EXACT science anyway. Great athletes make great coaches.
Runningart2004 wrote:
STAMINA is the ability to go long distances. ENDURANCE is the ability to cover a certain distance in a faster time. One day a runner runs 5 miles in 28:00. A few months later the same runner runs 5 miles in 26:00. He has increased his endurance though his stamina is likely to remain unchanged.
By standard running vernacular you have your definitions criss-crossed.
>>> Great athletes make great coaches.
Won't get into the debate because I'm from another country and don't know enough about these guys. But in reference to this above statement talent doesn't=knowledge. Talented runner are fast because they are talented doesn't mean they are knowlegable. Average athletes can and do many times make good coaches as they need to expand their thoughts to maximaise their potential to be competitive with better athletes. This occurs in any sport.
Sorry for the diversion...back to the debate!
i love it when people do that. except when they do it to me :(
ESL PhD wrote:
But in a twisted way, your contribution is perfect for this thread.
ESL PhD:
Its nenverhteless amazindga thatw wee alle hade noo ddifciltuly underassataning thises pposeter's pointe.
"But in a twisted way, your contribution is perfect for this thread."
This is why. Your criticism is all poor form. It contains nothing of substance -- no ideas, and no argument. And you pompously attack others without revealing your identity. I suggest you shove your grammar book up your ...
As for Tinman, I agree he was too harsh to Kellogg. He'll probably agree with that when all the emotions settle down. Tinman has helped a lot of B+ runners to improve (including me). So what if he isn't an "elite" coach? He is taking his time to help others by his own best lights. Defend Kellogg if you like, but leave the personal attacks (his wife!) out of it.
JB
>>> Because of the sheer number of screw-ups in your post, I let a number of mistakes that would ordinarily stand out like zits on a supermodel's nose slide. The point is that only the most credulous of sad sacks could possibly believe that you have a bachelor's degree in English, much less a master's. But in a twisted way, your contribution is perfect for this thread.
You're kidding aren't you. Like....who cares! Is this really necessary...adds nothing to the post but a bit of technical bullshit we don't need to hear. Obviously got nothing of intelligence to add to the debate, so, what's the next best thing, try to drag someone else down to you're level with this kind of crap.
police chief wrote:
I'm wondering, did Kellog ever say anything critical about Tinman on this board or anywhere else? It might shed light on causation relative to Tinman's diatribe.
Yes, he did ! in the pseudonimous of Hadd he did several rubish posts with personal offenses. also as "stop the pingeon" and many other nicknames.
Let me say that i consider JK writings that´s genial - a great coach really. His last net article "maximizing oxygen uptake" that´s brillant. Unhappily i didn´t saw no great enthousiam or positive reactions about that article. I believe that one day the science willl prove that Kellog is is right and in advance from most of the coaches while promoting the benefits of very slow aerobic runs in the process of training that we don´t know yet their physical effects in their total extend.
Now about Tinman versus JK. That´s not uncommon among great minds and people that suport their ideas in physiology, and most of you that are americans you need to know that in physiology science ther´s no a unique opinion and never will. Sometimes they discuss hardy and for longer periods some issues and they disagree one with each other, and then you simply go to a track or an outdoor esay that and you see instantanly if that fits or doesn´t fit in your training regime, but they keep on going they are still discussing for years and years.
One more point. The fact that you train or don´t train olympic runners that shows nothing about your training talent. Once for all don´t be primitive about coaching consideration. JK is a good coach by training Wejo and also by training "that" unknown 17:30 5000mm runner that he amde improve to 15:50. Tinman he is a good coach even if he trains just averege runners. Both are much better than most of the scholl and high scholl american coaches - no doubt really.
I hate when ppl cut n paste and don't link to the source.
Here is the complete thread, it's pretty good.
http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/thee/vpost?id=243132&highlight
Antonio Cabral wrote:Yes, he did ! in the pseudonimous of Hadd he did several rubish posts with personal offenses.
Hahahahahaha!
Speaking of smoking dope. Antonio, show me where "Hadd" (aka JK, boohahaha - that's a good one!) posted a "personal offense" against tinman in a "rubish" post. I offer that to you as a personal challenge.
This is a very humorous thread. This place offers all sorts of insight into the minds of men and boys.
OK kids, back to the character bashing.