Chick is deep. But, done has a runner.
Chick is deep. But, done has a runner.
And the volcano of High School girl flame-outs is fed again.
Are you that naive? Harvard is in trouble for having different admission standards for different races so they are very interested in how people look. Their pricing structure is set up to only really be affordable for the wealthy and the poor so they also care about how much you make. Middle class white kids are what they try to eliminate from their student body/ Kids with alumni parents are more likely to be admitted because they know that here is more likelihood of large donations from legacy admissions.
Sliding Scale wrote:
oldtimecoach wrote:
One of the problems with both running websites, and social media is that these young kids feel the pressure from all of their success. Before all of these things you may have been a local star, but in general no one really knew who you were. Now it is all around them. I am sure it is difficult to stay away from letrun and all of the other sites. We all have a desire of belonging, and wanting to be accepted.
I get the pros it is there choice to do this for a living. But as far as both high school and college athletes go these sites should do all they can to keep the negative post off of the site.
Does this site and other media outlets negatively impact some high profile high school seniors? Yes, most definitely. But is it any different in any other sport? I imagine the media and social pressure are way worse for HS basketball/football stars.
You can not have it both ways. You can not cry over lack of exposure and then bemoan how some HS athletes fail under pressure. Good athletes have a thick skin, and either avoid or ignore negative boards.
She isn't being paid millions of $ to run; she is just a girl in HS. I'm a Red Sox fan and will insult Pablo Sandoval all day long, but Lane is not fair game. I hope she can learn to ignore criticism from morans who don't know anything about her. For me, I would like for her to get healthy again and maybe challenge Touhy.
That's because you like to focus more on the negative rather than the positive. Get a life loser.
But done as a runner? Wow, you really went out on a limb with that. Punk.
When the wind id blowing in your face all the time it's not fun. I agree that he best days are behind her.
runnerexpert wrote:
You failed to mention the most important thing that allowed her to get into Dartmouth..Brains. Ivies don't look at financials or looks when admitting kids.
When you see a top runner headed to a good school you know they are the whole package. At the end of the day you still have to get through admissions no matter how fast you are.
This is incorrect. Sure, you still have to be academically successful...but as long they want you, the coach will make sure you get in. The same kid without the athletic preference doesn't get in most of the time...
And Caroline Pietrzyk's coach isn't at Malibu High School anymore, had nothing to do with Claudia.
History wrote:
When the wind id blowing in your face all the time it's not fun. I agree that he best days are behind her.
Best days are in front of her, she is striking a balance of running and everything else that works for her including getting a very good education. For some people the running is everything works, not working for her and she is coming to terms with that idea.
Just another rich kid who bought her way into an Ivy. Family makes a large donation as part of a building expansion. Kid magically gets into school. I don't think we will be talking about her in the future.
"At 38 colleges in America, including five in the Ivy League — Dartmouth, Princeton, Yale, Penn and Brown — more students came from the top one percent of the income scale than from the entire bottom 60 percent," reports The New York Times. It also points out that, at every one of the top 65 U.S. universities, the median parent income is over $100,000. That figure ranges from $272,000 at Washington University in St. Louis to $104,900 at UCLA."
Rich kid poor kid wrote:
Just another rich kid who bought her way into an Ivy. Family makes a large donation as part of a building expansion. Kid magically gets into school. I don't think we will be talking about her in the future.
Um she got in because she's a two-time footlocker champion & a sub 10 two-miler. And she did very well in school.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
oldtimecoach wrote:
One of the problems with both running websites, and social media is that these young kids feel the pressure from all of their success. Before all of these things you may have been a local star, but in general no one really knew who you were. Now it is all around them. I am sure it is difficult to stay away from letrun and all of the other sites. We all have a desire of belonging, and wanting to be accepted.
I get the pros it is there choice to do this for a living. But as far as both high school and college athletes go these sites should do all they can to keep the negative post off of the site.
It is a lot of drama, but she isn't the first runner to experience a series of injuries. She is also a talented runner, is attractive and comes from a wealthy family. She is extremely blessed.
I doubt if any criticism comes from her classmates, but is only from social media, including morans that post on LR. I'm an old guy and can't understand the obsession with social media. From her perspective, if she didn't read it, it wouldn't exist.
just saying
how obvious wrote:
It's a shame the Malibu coach didn't figure it out when they tried the same tactic with Caroline Pietrzyk. Most of you may not be aware of her, but Claudia Lane has followed nearly the same path. Caroline was extremely lean just like Claudia. Caroline was 14th at Footlocker her senior year. Just like Caroline, Claudia is now working with a different body or however the euphemism went that was used in the article.
Here's the bottom line: you don't let high school phenoms stay ultra lean year round. That's it. That's all that's going on here. Claudia is not having injury problems, she's having power to weight problems because she was so extremely lean for 2 years and now her body has responded to that with a vengeance just as happened to Caroline. Same thing happened to Lauren Peurifoy. It's not rocket science.
Can you elaborate more? What's exactly causing this massive decline? I don't get it. What is her body doing in response? -thanks
Your power to weight ratio affects how fast you can run.
Note that I said "affects," not "determines absolutely." Also, many people interpret this as "thinner = better." This is also not true. Generating power requires a degree of muscle mass, so if you are stick thin, you will be limited in your power and running efficiency. I'm sure you have all seen the kids on JV XC who don't have any muscle whatsoever...if "thinner = better" they should be leading the way at state.
For women (and I am a woman, for the record), there is an extra variable you have to include, which is estrogen levels and bone density. To oversimplify a complicated process, heavy training and inadequate food intake can result in changes to hormone levels, which in turn can decrease bone density. This leads to the female athlete triad, stress fractures, and is generally no fun whatsoever.
So to be fast, you've got to land in the sweet spot of lean enough to have a good power to weight ratio, but not so lean that you break down. This does not look like any one body type. In fact, if you look at the US's most successful distance runners, you see a decent range of body types. There are genetic factors which obviously can affect this, with some people able to maintain lower BF % than others. In my opinion, the best thing to do as a young runner is fuel your body, train hard, and let the chips fall where they may.
turtle friend wrote:
Your power to weight ratio affects how fast you can run.
Note that I said "affects," not "determines absolutely." Also, many people interpret this as "thinner = better." This is also not true. Generating power requires a degree of muscle mass, so if you are stick thin, you will be limited in your power and running efficiency. I'm sure you have all seen the kids on JV XC who don't have any muscle whatsoever...if "thinner = better" they should be leading the way at state.
For women (and I am a woman, for the record), there is an extra variable you have to include, which is estrogen levels and bone density. To oversimplify a complicated process, heavy training and inadequate food intake can result in changes to hormone levels, which in turn can decrease bone density. This leads to the female athlete triad, stress fractures, and is generally no fun whatsoever.
So to be fast, you've got to land in the sweet spot of lean enough to have a good power to weight ratio, but not so lean that you break down. This does not look like any one body type. In fact, if you look at the US's most successful distance runners, you see a decent range of body types. There are genetic factors which obviously can affect this, with some people able to maintain lower BF % than others. In my opinion, the best thing to do as a young runner is fuel your body, train hard, and let the chips fall where they may.
Great post! Right on and very helpful.
turtle friend wrote:
In fact, if you look at the US's most successful distance runners, you see a decent range of body types. There are genetic factors which obviously can affect this, with some people able to maintain lower BF % than others. In my opinion, the best thing to do as a young runner is fuel your body, train hard, and let the chips fall where they may.
This is true, to some extent. Compare Evan Jager and Craig Mottram - both are 6 ft 2 in, but Mottram is much heavier (165 lbs vs 145 lbs). Nonetheless, both ran exactly 7:30 flat for 3k and 14 flat for 5k. Mottrams optimal weight was at 165 lbs, whereas Jager's was at 145 lbs - it is unlikely Mottram would have been able to break 14 flat at 145 lbs, like Jager wouldn't be at his best with 165 lbs.
However, the caveat is that over huge distances, like in a marathon, the heavier runners always struggle more. Mottram and Solinsky were never able to run a great marathon, despite absolutely crushing the 5k and 10k's with their big, heavy bodies (for endurance runners).
While there still is a decent number of successful "heavy" runners in 3k-10k, at marathon they are much more rare.
*meant 13 flat of course for the 5k times
Well, that was a long, ridiculous self-serving whinefest!
Poor little Claudia...
Maybe she is better suited to write romance novels or possibly children's books where ponies and butterflies rule the day. No one forced her to run. She never ran away from interviews or complained about the comments when she was crushing it, but now wants to play that victim card.
Give me a *%#!ing break.
runnerexpert wrote:
History wrote:
When the wind id blowing in your face all the time it's not fun. I agree that he best days are behind her.
Best days are in front of her, she is striking a balance of running and everything else that works for her including getting a very good education. For some people the running is everything works, not working for her and she is coming to terms with that idea.
Maybe it has to do that she comes from a very rich family. She doesn't have the same motivation as runners from poor families where running is literally their only way into a college. The runners from poor families do ANYTHING to make their dreams happen, including core work, tons of cross-training, stretching etc.
Claudia never worked on her running form or did much strengthening. She was blessed with an incredible VO2MAX but didn't have the same motivation as others to make most out of it and dedicate her life to running, which makes sense for her at least.
