If you agree or disagree=====Please explain why you feel the way you do!
If you agree or disagree=====Please explain why you feel the way you do!
I have had both a great male distance coach as well as a a great female distance coach. But I’ve also had a sucky female and male distance coach. It’s not really about gender, it’s about personality/knowledge/communication skills/leadership
Most men are aholes.
Women coaches motivate men to run better. Just take a gander at Wayde van Niekerk’s relationship with his coach. The tension drives performance.
Male coaches motivate females. Bill Aris and the FM girls, Alberto Salazar with Hasay, and other examples are out there. Probably the two most notable examples are Kim Conley/husband and Joe Bosshard and his trio of protégés Emma, Kayla, and Aisha.
A commonly known principle in college running is “the hunt.” Men run really well when they’re pursuing a relationship with a woman, but stagnate when it gets stable. Women run poorly while in the dating scene, but thrive when they are in a stable relationship.
All of the great names in coaching are male.
Who is a good distance coach? Almost all of them are merely managers who apply standard training methods. Some of the well-known ones reveal their shallow understanding of ex phys and biology on this message board. Others are famous for throwing megacorporate money at training. Others get lucky and coach a great runner or two and take credit.
Probably the vast majority of coaches out there still think long distance is "aerobic" compared to middle distance. If you need me to explain, that's the whole point, your coaches failed to explain one of the most basic things.
Yeah dude all the great coaches without phys backgrounds suck lol. Scientists and the lab always produce the best results. Just ask them!
Bad Wigins wrote:
Who is a good distance coach? Almost all of them are merely managers who apply standard training methods. Some of the well-known ones reveal their shallow understanding of ex phys and biology on this message board. Others are famous for throwing megacorporate money at training. Others get lucky and coach a great runner or two and take credit.
Probably the vast majority of coaches out there still think long distance is "aerobic" compared to middle distance. If you need me to explain, that's the whole point, your coaches failed to explain one of the most basic things.
Coaching predates any sort of physiology science.
Milo and his Bull wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:
Who is a good distance coach? Almost all of them are merely managers who apply standard training methods. Some of the well-known ones reveal their shallow understanding of ex phys and biology on this message board. Others are famous for throwing megacorporate money at training. Others get lucky and coach a great runner or two and take credit.
Probably the vast majority of coaches out there still think long distance is "aerobic" compared to middle distance. If you need me to explain, that's the whole point, your coaches failed to explain one of the most basic things.
Coaching predates any sort of physiology science.
Predates it in the sense that it hasn't happened yet, to their knowledge.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Milo and his Bull wrote:
Coaching predates any sort of physiology science.
Predates it in the sense that it hasn't happened yet, to their knowledge.
Nope. They knew there was something there but they didn't really need to know what in order to coach effectively.
Most coaches ruin their athletes. Especially with an individual sport (and distance running is perhaps the most individual), no one knows your body better than you. With team sports, personalities play a huge role, and that often triggers a downward slide.