ThatAverageRunner wrote:
Most of the runners who he coaches were either stagnant or getting worse before coming to him. Basically every runner has had improvements, whether gradual or huge, under his tutelage
prove it. Post exactly who you are referring to, and their PRs before tinman and their current PRs.
tiny improvements wrote:
. A 13:45 guy should be able to run 1:02 no problem. .
Stick to your day job.
Good Question wrote:
"could Tinman build an NCAA dynasty if given a head coaching job?"
My answer is that he may be able to be a good college coach. I don't think he could build a dynasty. First of all, a dynasty is rare and elite. Very, very few of them. Not even sure who would be considered a dynasty these days. NAU is possible on the men's side if they keep it up over the next 5 years. Dynasty's usually require more than just good coaching but also some other benefits that attract talent (altitude, academic reputation, available scholarship allotment....). In other words he can't do it by his coaching alone.
Also, I believe that good coaches need to be good with people, good communicators and have the ability to create a culture. Creating a culture in a college environment is very different than at the pro level. College athletes have other demands on their time and sometimes other priorities like graduation, getting a job, paying for school.... Plus the institutions themselves create demands/priorities expected of coaches who represent them. Pro runners more likely prioritize running and focus more on running for obvious reasons. Writing good workouts is only a small part of what a college coach does and has to deal with.
He is a good coach and done a fine job with his group. I don't like the fact that he coaches high school runners because this limits high school runners into only the realm of training and I believe high school running is much more than training alone. His taking on young runners, even if he doesn't overtrain them, is not a good thing. It is an example of what is wrong in youth sports and now exists in running- too much of a professionalized approach rather than an integrated approach (running fitting into the concepts of teamwork, leadership, patience, social relationships with friends....)
Well said.
tiny improvements wrote:
His athletes barely even improve. Reed has improved by 9 seconds in the 10k and 3 in the 5. A 13:45 guy should be able to run 1:02 no problem. The hype of this coach is way out of proportion with his weak results.
most All-Americans stop training competitively after college because they know a 1:02 is GARBAGE and isn't even worth their time. Better to just start a real job instead training to win local road races for 150 bucks.
Most of the people going to olympic trials in the marathon were mediocre college runners who just hammered mileage for years after graduating. kids who never broke 4:10 in the mile.
YMMV wrote:
tiny improvements wrote:
. A 13:45 guy should be able to run 1:02 no problem. .
Stick to your day job.
Actually Jack Daniels VDOT for 13:45 lines up with 1:02
Shows how much you know.
tiny improvements wrote:
His athletes barely even improve. Reed has improved by 9 seconds in the 10k and 3 in the 5. A 13:45 guy should be able to run 1:02 no problem. The hype of this coach is way out of proportion with his weak results.
23rd at nationals to 4th at nationals is an important improvement.
Agree a lot actually wrote:
tiny improvements wrote:
His athletes barely even improve. Reed has improved by 9 seconds in the 10k and 3 in the 5. A 13:45 guy should be able to run 1:02 no problem. The hype of this coach is way out of proportion with his weak results.
This.
And don’t cite Club XC team champions. The top 25 distance runners (at least) do not race that junior varsity “championship”.
Name at least 25 Americans that can beat Hillary Bor and Ben Blankenship in a 10k xc race.
stateezee wrote:
tiny improvements wrote:
His athletes barely even improve. Reed has improved by 9 seconds in the 10k and 3 in the 5. A 13:45 guy should be able to run 1:02 no problem. The hype of this coach is way out of proportion with his weak results.
23rd at nationals to 4th at nationals is an important improvement.
He had to run a full NCAA season in 2017 before USATF, he had nothing left. Being able to train specifically for that race, plus being a year older helps.
Also important to point out the field for 2017 is WAY more competitive than 2018 as 2017 was a qualifier for the World Championships. No world championships in 2018.
Look at this soft field from 2018, it's pathetic:
1 Lopez Lomong NIKE/Bowerma 28:58.38
2 Shadrack Kipchirchir NIKE 28:59.67
3 Elkanah Kibet U.S. Army 29:05.51
4 Reed Fischer Tinman Elite 29:06.81
5 Garrett Heath Brooks/BROOK 29:09.15
6 Matthew McClintock ZAP Fitness 29:11.47
7 Ryan Mahalsky Hansons-Broo 29:18.16
8 Zachary Zarda Kansas City 29:23.38
9 Zachery Panning Grand Valley 29:23.97
10 Mark Parrish Pure Athleti 29:24.92
11 Colin Bennie Syracuse 29:27.14
12 Joel Reichow Team USA Min 29:28.10
13 Kevin Lewis Team USA Min 29:42.59
14 Ben Bruce HOKA ONE ONE 29:48.16
15 Tyler Mueller Tinman Elite 29:52.91
16 Kyle Masterson SKECHERS PER 29:53.60
17 Sean Davidson HOKA Aggie R 29:58.55
18 Gregory Leak Tacoma City 30:06.49
19 Nicholas Kipruto U.S. Army 30:19.75
20 Craig Lautenslager Unattached 30:21.73
21 Will Geiken HOKA Aggie R 30:25.29
22 Rajpaul Pannu HOKA Aggie R 30:46.07
jack daniels facts wrote:
YMMV wrote:
Stick to your day job.
Actually Jack Daniels VDOT for 13:45 lines up with 1:02
Shows how much you know.
Under Daniels a 1:02:06 is worth 13:32, 13:29 under IAAF tables.
That is what I know. What you don't seem to know is just how big a jump that represents, especially under less-than-ideal conditions. He is at least 30 seconds faster in good conditions.
Also, that 13:45 comes from 14:24 three years ago.
YMMV wrote:
jack daniels facts wrote:
Actually Jack Daniels VDOT for 13:45 lines up with 1:02
Shows how much you know.
Under Daniels a 1:02:06 is worth 13:32, 13:29 under IAAF tables.
That is what I know. What you don't seem to know is just how big a jump that represents, especially under less-than-ideal conditions. He is at least 30 seconds faster in good conditions.
Also, that 13:45 comes from 14:24 three years ago.
13:45 is equal to 1:02:56 in the half. Reed is clearly stronger on the longer end, as he can't ran 3:58 in the mile which is also the same VDOT.
Reed's college coach got him from 13:48 from 14:24 you fool. Tinman got Reed to 13:45, a 3 second improvement.
tinman is doing alright, but to say he'd be the best coach in the NCAA is incredibly dumb.
nah son wrote:
stateezee wrote:
23rd at nationals to 4th at nationals is an important improvement.
He had to run a full NCAA season in 2017 before USATF, he had nothing left. Being able to train specifically for that race, plus being a year older helps.
Also important to point out the field for 2017 is WAY more competitive than 2018 as 2017 was a qualifier for the World Championships. No world championships in 2018.
Look at this soft field from 2018, it's pathetic:
1 Lopez Lomong NIKE/Bowerma 28:58.38
2 Shadrack Kipchirchir NIKE 28:59.67
3 Elkanah Kibet U.S. Army 29:05.51
4 Reed Fischer Tinman Elite 29:06.81
5 Garrett Heath Brooks/BROOK 29:09.15
6 Matthew McClintock ZAP Fitness 29:11.47
7 Ryan Mahalsky Hansons-Broo 29:18.16
8 Zachary Zarda Kansas City 29:23.38
9 Zachery Panning Grand Valley 29:23.97
10 Mark Parrish Pure Athleti 29:24.92
11 Colin Bennie Syracuse 29:27.14
12 Joel Reichow Team USA Min 29:28.10
13 Kevin Lewis Team USA Min 29:42.59
14 Ben Bruce HOKA ONE ONE 29:48.16
15 Tyler Mueller Tinman Elite 29:52.91
16 Kyle Masterson SKECHERS PER 29:53.60
17 Sean Davidson HOKA Aggie R 29:58.55
18 Gregory Leak Tacoma City 30:06.49
19 Nicholas Kipruto U.S. Army 30:19.75
20 Craig Lautenslager Unattached 30:21.73
21 Will Geiken HOKA Aggie R 30:25.29
22 Rajpaul Pannu HOKA Aggie R 30:46.07
23rd to 4th is an important improvement. I realize not everyone races in non-championship years. Finishing one second behind Kibet is pathetic? It’s something he had no prayer of doing while at Drake.
club XC was insanely soft.
16th place at Club XC was 30:00
41st place at NCAAs was 30:00 - IN THE SNOW
look it up wrote:
club XC was insanely soft.
16th place at Club XC was 30:00
41st place at NCAAs was 30:00 - IN THE SNOW
I asked for at least 25 runners that could beat Bor/Blankenship in a 10k xc race. Something the hater, er....poster, implied they could easily provide.
It's been heartening to see Tinman getting the long-overdue recognition he deserves in the last year or so, now that he's finally gotten the opportunity to coach a few guys other than Drew Hunter with at least some talent. Most of them have been sub-elite, but are now starting to show at least low-echelon elite results under his coaching. And even though that coaching has not had much time to bear fruit yet.
Until this point, he's been stuck in the catch-22 doldrums of coaching either masters' athletes or others with less talent. Now that things have reached some kind of critical mass after years of laboring in obscurity and he's been able to dig himself out of that hole, it will be interesting to see what happens.
Someone earlier said something about Schwartz's leveraging of social media to gain more prominence, as if that was a bad thing. But when you're caught in the damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't, non-college-coaching situation he'd been stuck in for a number of years, you've got to hand it to him for being persistent and doing what he could to get his name out there with two strikes against him.
Also have to say that the naming of the training group based in Boulder as "Tinman Elite" (with the emphasis on Elite) was marketing genius, whoever came up with that idea. That, along with the group's results in the last year or so, has really helped them all do an "end run" around the higher-echelon coaching and training group barriers that seem to rule the roost in this country.
Tinman is Bae wrote:
Tom is clearly one of the best coaches in the country.
He's certainly one of the most humble guys out there:
"My professors all came to me for answers, because they knew that certain people have the “it” factor. I did not see that in myself, however...."
Tinman is Bae wrote:
Based on the results of the Tinmen since their group really came together, I’ve been thinking about how Tom is clearly one of the best coaches in the country. His athletes just keep improving and the group will only get better as more athletes recognize how good a coach he is.
Here’s my hypothetical...could Tinman build an NCAA dynasty if given a head coaching job? Almost all of the best distance squads in the NCAA aren’t at schools known for other sports (Syracuse, Colorado, NAU, Portland, Villanova). A good distance coach can win wherever. So let’s give Tinman a hypothetical job at a Power 5 school that has never been known for distance running (think Kentucky, Penn State, Illinois, Arizona State). This way he has good facilities and a biggish name to use for recruiting. Could he win a title, and if so, how long do you think it would take?
Thyself promoting has to stop! It's a joke, right?
hi tinman wrote:
YMMV wrote:
Under Daniels a 1:02:06 is worth 13:32, 13:29 under IAAF tables.
That is what I know. What you don't seem to know is just how big a jump that represents, especially under less-than-ideal conditions. He is at least 30 seconds faster in good conditions.
Also, that 13:45 comes from 14:24 three years ago.
13:45 is equal to 1:02:56 in the half. Reed is clearly stronger on the longer end, as he can't ran 3:58 in the mile which is also the same VDOT.
Reed's college coach got him from 13:48 from 14:24 you fool. Tinman got Reed to 13:45, a 3 second improvement.
tinman is doing alright, but to say he'd be the best coach in the NCAA is incredibly dumb.
So at least a 50-second improvement by equivalence, under poor conditions? Quit acting like any 13:48 NCAA guy can do this. It's a hell of debut.
Tinman is Bae wrote:
Almost all of the best distance squads in the NCAA aren’t at schools known for other sports (Syracuse, Colorado, NAU, Portland, Villanova).
Are you joking?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Basketball_Championship_GameAgreed. I have to respect the way Tinman has built himself from pretty much grass roots level coaching. His training principles that he wrote about were perhaps nothing "new" and some people seemed to mock him for that. However, inventing something new is not necessary if it does not work and Tinman always seemed to have a solid understanding of what it takes to keep training consistently to improve yourself as a runner based on his experience as a runner himself and his work with others.
Go tintin. He is also a great runner himself. Look at him run with his dog - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_EK_tFz9ug