I know most kids won't ever need to worry, they join the teams to have fun and graduate with a (male) 4:30-5ish mile, 10-10:30ish 2mile and 16-17ish 5k. What I'm concerned with is when those 10% show up who have talent and want to find their potential. As a coach what should I look for in a runner to discern their talent, as to never confuse a great miler for a sprinter in disguise and vice versa. Thanks for reading.
I am assuming this is for very young kids, early middle school.
Build. Body structure. Vertical. 40 yard dash.
Have all your kids run a cross country run. If there is one runner who is significantly slower than all the other kids but is not overweight or obviously out of shape he or she probably has a very high percentage of fast twitch fibers.
Another High School Coach wrote:
As a coach what should I look for in a runner to discern their talent, as to never confuse a great miler for a sprinter in disguise and vice versa. Thanks for reading.
You don't look for anything. There is no such thing as "disguise". Train them to be milers and they will be milers. Train them to be sprinters and they will be sprinters. Your best event is determined by the training that you do.
I suppose it's the event/training they'll enjoy most? If the question's to discern a sprinter from a miler, then I guess it's a matter of if the kid plays football during the off season, or if the kid has a great deal of speed and happens to enjoy getting miles in too.
Something that equates to about 12.5 for 100m, like 8 sec for 60 or 5 sec for 30. My experience is that most distance people cannot break 5 for 30m no matter what they do because they don't have the leg strength. So just do a 30m or 50m and the slow ones are distance runners.
What no one seems to realize is that actual running per-requisites barely factor into the equation of talent.
How strong the mind is is far more of a determining factor than what someone can run in the 200 or the 1600 their first try.
coach d wrote:
Something that equates to about 12.5 for 100m, like 8 sec for 60 or 5 sec for 30. My experience is that most distance people cannot break 5 for 30m no matter what they do because they don't have the leg strength. So just do a 30m or 50m and the slow ones are distance runners.
You know leg strength can be increased, right?
At maximum effort, a sprinter reaches 90% of maximum velocity in 4 seconds. It doesn't matter what's in your mind--either you have the muscular strength to get there or you don't--and telling a distance runner to lift heavy weights is basically an exercise in futility. It would probably take Rupp, Farah, and Willis combined to budge Gatlin's weight stack. You are not going to see Farah even approach the 200kg a typical sprinter can squat, and that's why distance people get blown away right at the start if they attempt to sprint
It\'s a little different telling a 400 specialist from an 800 specialist. But for someone with the capability to become a pure sprinter, just accelerating to 30m tells you most of what you need to know.
coach d wrote:
Something that equates to about 12.5 for 100m, like 8 sec for 60 or 5 sec for 30. My experience is that most distance people cannot break 5 for 30m no matter what they do because they don't have the leg strength. So just do a 30m or 50m and the slow ones are distance runners.
So, let's say you have a 14-year old who can run 11.9 for 100m. Does that indicate sprinting potential?
That 10% will probably be the easiest to discern, particularly those with natural speed as most popular sports require some speed and that kid will probably have played sports at some point prior to high school. Distance runners are by default those that don't possess competitive speed. Milers will have good speed but not the best. Once you separate those with speed from those without, the talented distance runners will separate themselves from the less talented just by watching practice results.
Here's how you identify talent. Have them try different events and different things in practice.
Speed means they will be fast. Just because someone has speed doesn't lock them into sprints. Elite distance runners also have speed.
Occam's Razor wrote:
Here's how you identify talent. Have them try different events and different things in practice.
Speed means they will be fast. Just because someone has speed doesn't lock them into sprints. Elite distance runners also have speed.
^This
If a kid is fast but not winning 100s...I advocate moving up. 11.7, let's say, won't get you squat around here in the 100 but it might take you far if you're willing to try the 800.
hypotheticus wrote:
So, let's say you have a 14-year old who can run 11.9 for 100m. Does that indicate sprinting potential?
Not helpful to look at one factor in isolation...can that kid also run a 1:54 800? Then no, probably not a sprinter. Just because someone is pretty fast does not mean they are not capable or indeed even better at the distance events. Yes, a 10.x 100m runner is not going to be a great distance runner, but just because a kid can score at your conference meet in a sprint event does not mean that is going to be his ultimate BEST event.
It's more useful to look at a runner's index of resistance—how much they slow down comparing, say, 200 to 400, 400 to 800, 800 to mile. DO NOT make the mistake of comparing this to equivalence charts. All (almost all) high schoolers will convert up poorly because they are aerobically underdeveloped. Compare a given runner's index of resistance to data from his coevals on your team, and runners of his age historically at your program (or others if you're a new coach). If you have a fast kid who is unusually resistant, question whether he is really a sprinter.
First, I'd like to say thanks SO much for all the great and insightful responses! This insight will help with America having one less ignorant coach. Now then. I have a question, could you elaborate further as too what exactly index of resistance is? The lack of aerobic capacity and companions are great considerable variables. I just want to make sure I don't misinterpret this info. Thanks once again everyone :)
EDIT: "The lack of aerobic capacity and companions are great considerable variables... I remember running a 59 400m in high school, and a 2:30 800m, 5:30 mile, 12:low-mid 2 mile, and 19ish 5k my freshman year XD"
Okay. So, the Assistant Coach and I actually tested the team's 30m speed today post-session. A lot of 5 flats, a 4.25, a 4.19, a couple 4.30s and 4.40s, some 4.8x, and some 5+s. The Assistant and I went to each of the athletes after this test and told them their results, and explained to them that the exercise was to assess their pure speed.
When I informed the 4.19 and 4.25, I asked why they haven't tried for football, as I put it, "y'all had the fastest 30s here". They both replied with something explaining how the footballers had big egos/not nice people and how they enjoyed getting miles in and attacking the XC courses. Of course I complimented all the athletes and explained to the 5+ers that their strength lies in their endurance and stamina.
Anyone use multi jump tests, standing long jumps, etc?
orir wrote:
Another High School Coach wrote:As a coach what should I look for in a runner to discern their talent, as to never confuse a great miler for a sprinter in disguise and vice versa. Thanks for reading.
You don't look for anything. There is no such thing as "disguise". Train them to be milers and they will be milers. Train them to be sprinters and they will be sprinters. Your best event is determined by the training that you do.
Wow! Just wow...