Why does this seem to happen so often? Plenty of talent in the 800 and 1600 in highschool seems to get moved up to 90-100 mpw in college and then they either get injured and/or quit. I know you can always build fitness which always helps with a longer distance but is there something else that determines which kids get moved out of there potential forte?
Their* please spare my grammer
To be very honest, OP: a lot of kids get moved up because college coaches aren't confident that they can help them improve in their HS signature events.
In particular, getting a kid to PR in his main HS events as a college freshman is a tall order. So you give the kid new events to do, so that he at least sees progress in *something*.
I was lucky: as a young coach, I worked with a major-college coach who had won a state mile title in high school, then went on to win his (major D1) conference meet in the 400. Showed me that moving a kid up is not always necessary.
lease wrote:
To be very honest, OP: a lot of kids get moved up because college coaches aren't confident that they can help them improve in their HS signature events.
In particular, getting a kid to PR in his main HS events as a college freshman is a tall order. So you give the kid new events to do, so that he at least sees progress in *something*.
I was lucky: as a young coach, I worked with a major-college coach who had won a state mile title in high school, then went on to win his (major D1) conference meet in the 400. Showed me that moving a kid up is not always necessary.
If you are worried about matching a kid's high school PRs as a college coach, you shouldn't be a college coach.
Sure there are specific examples like the girl with an 17:45 5k pr she set as a 80 pound 14 year old, who's now a (healthy) 125 pound woman, where that PR may be a serious stretch,
I move athletes' event focus all the time, certainly the more common trend is to move them up, but its not what always happens. If I have a kid who went 1:58 in high school, we consistently work true speed development over the course of a year, and he goes from a 53.8 relay split, to a 53.4 relay split, I'm probably going to try moving him up in distance, unless I think it will push them off the team/out of the sport. On the other hand, if I have a 3k/5k indoor runner, who after several seasons of consistent true speed development workouts can start splitting 51s in the relay while only being a 16:00ish guy, I'm probably going to test out moving them down. This is a rough example of how you look at where you think you can make improvements in an athlete's performance, and maximize your return on investment. I notice a lot more athletes in high school focus on distances shorter than what their body is best suited for, or their body adapts to training the best from. I've heard things like "we always had a podium 4x8 team at states, so thats why coach had me focus on that event" more than I'm comfortable with as well.
I think as a profession, coaches tend to move athletes up in distance before adequately exploring their potential speed and speed endurance potential, but I also think for a higher percentage of the college track/XC population, their developmental potential, especially long term, is usually higher in longer distances and longer distance training.
Worst nightmare wrote:
Why does this seem to happen so often? Plenty of talent in the 800 and 1600 in highschool seems to get moved up to 90-100 mpw in college and then they either get injured and/or quit. I know you can always build fitness which always helps with a longer distance but is there something else that determines which kids get moved out of there potential forte?
Speed, foot speed. A lot of HS guys can run good times and not be able to run a 50s 400. If you are going to be a D-I mid-distance runner, you better be able to throw down a 50 in the 400.
If you can't, you move up in distance to where you can compete foot speed-wise.
Many/most ~18 year old guys are basically tapped out in terms of mid-distance speed and have nowhere left to go. Most are not going to improve very much in terms of speed. Most of the top 800m guys in college were 400m runners in HS. Speed is speed, and it is a relatively easier path to reach your potential in shorter events. "Slow" 400m runners have plenty of speed for the 800 ... the same goes for 800m runners.
Short answer:
Speed is hard to develop. Strength is.
Most people will be lucky if they can take a couple seconds off their 400. You focus on being able to maintain that speed for longer.
High school 800m runners who are somewhere around 50 or 51, 400m should do everything they can to: 1) get a college cross-country exemption or 2) get a modified cross-country schedule. College coaches have different standards. My college coach had sub-48 400m runners on a modified cross-country schedule. If you want the Boris Berian/Donavan Brazier treatment in college, get your 400m time as fast as possible in high school. If you show up on college campus a sub-48 person, no 100 miles per week.