Being an observer of the sport, I follow what is going on with some/most of the top performers. I read their blogs, follow them on Twitter, it's part of the job.
One of such athletes is Sarah Groff. I never met Ms. Groff or even talked to her on email, but I've been following her career for some years. It was quite puzzling to see her form crumble when it was crunch time to get the qualification for Beijing. She strikes me as an athlete that does have what it takes to make it as a top performer, but it seems that there is that last 1% missing. Her race at the WCS Final was a good example of that. My coaching bias attributes this pattern of underachieving to her coaching options these last few years.
For all this, I was happy to read her last blog. I was happy to see that she is breaking up with an environment that is not conducive to high-performance (Colorado scene, US triathlon "coaches", etc) and go work with one of the best coaches in Triathlon, that runs a very successful squad. But above all, I was happy to see someone show the commitment it takes to do the right thing.
Very often I see athletes make terrible decisions that keep them further from achieving their goals. Very often I see athletes choose what is comfortable. Very often I see them choosing the lifestyle over the commitment to be your best. So when athletes do the right thing, they deserve to be praised. Well done Ms. Groff.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
The Opposite
"George : Why did it all turn out like this for me? I had so much promise. I was personable, I was bright. Oh, maybe not academically speaking, but ... I was perceptive. I always know when someone's uncomfortable at a party. It became very clear to me sitting out there today, that every decision I've ever made, in my entire life, has been wrong. My life is the opposite of everything I want it to be. Every instinct I have, in every of life, be it something to wear, something to eat ... It's all been wrong."
In one of my favorite Seinfeld episodes, George comes to the realization that he should try to do the opposite of everything he usually does, since what he usually does is wrong. By following this principle, his luck changes and everything begins to go his way including getting a girlfriend, a job with the Yankees and moving out of his parents' house.
I often think that most coaches should follow this principle: do the opposite of what they think is right, and maybe they will start doing things the right way. I was reminded of this principle when reading the last entries to this blog.
I would think that it would be well understood that running and walking are two distinct types of human locomotion, with different kinematics and kinetics. This difference comes from the different duration of the stance phase in the two gaits, Cappellini et al (2006). This obviously has implications when it comes to specificity of endurance. Simply put, endurance gained while walking has little to no impact in running performance, and vice-versa. This is the reason why traditionally race walkers only run during the off-season and do most of their training as race walking.
Perhaps more important is the different kinesthetic awareness that these two different modes of movement promote. While one mode (walking) promotes a long, heel-to-toe, stance period, the other (running) should promote a short stance period, since there is ample evidence that running economy is increased when support time decreases and peak forces increase.
Lastly, it seems obvious to me that if an athlete, any athlete of any level, has the time and energy, he/she should be running more, not walking. Not only walking increases overall fatigue, it doesn't promote run-specific endurance, while emphasizing movement patterns that are not related to running.
So that's my positive, constructive message for the holiday season: Do the opposite.
In one of my favorite Seinfeld episodes, George comes to the realization that he should try to do the opposite of everything he usually does, since what he usually does is wrong. By following this principle, his luck changes and everything begins to go his way including getting a girlfriend, a job with the Yankees and moving out of his parents' house.
I often think that most coaches should follow this principle: do the opposite of what they think is right, and maybe they will start doing things the right way. I was reminded of this principle when reading the last entries to this blog.
I would think that it would be well understood that running and walking are two distinct types of human locomotion, with different kinematics and kinetics. This difference comes from the different duration of the stance phase in the two gaits, Cappellini et al (2006). This obviously has implications when it comes to specificity of endurance. Simply put, endurance gained while walking has little to no impact in running performance, and vice-versa. This is the reason why traditionally race walkers only run during the off-season and do most of their training as race walking.
Perhaps more important is the different kinesthetic awareness that these two different modes of movement promote. While one mode (walking) promotes a long, heel-to-toe, stance period, the other (running) should promote a short stance period, since there is ample evidence that running economy is increased when support time decreases and peak forces increase.
Lastly, it seems obvious to me that if an athlete, any athlete of any level, has the time and energy, he/she should be running more, not walking. Not only walking increases overall fatigue, it doesn't promote run-specific endurance, while emphasizing movement patterns that are not related to running.
So that's my positive, constructive message for the holiday season: Do the opposite.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Yes, more football...
I read this bit on Peter King's column on SI.com, I thought it was pretty good. About Cincinnati Bengals coach Marvin Lewis:
'1. Marvin Lewis is not kidding around. Not many things I see on video make me sit up and say, Whoa. But when HBO's "Hard Knocks'' captured Lewis ripping the tar out of his team after a sloppy preseason loss to St. Louis, I thought, Marvin's tired of getting pushed around.
Lewis screamed at his team to "be f---ing pros!'' And it not only got my attention -- it got his vets' attention. "Oh, I remember the moment,'' said cornerback Johnathan Joseph. "His message was pretty clear -- whether it's the preseason or regular season, he's not going to tolerate us playing like that.'''
'1. Marvin Lewis is not kidding around. Not many things I see on video make me sit up and say, Whoa. But when HBO's "Hard Knocks'' captured Lewis ripping the tar out of his team after a sloppy preseason loss to St. Louis, I thought, Marvin's tired of getting pushed around.
Lewis screamed at his team to "be f---ing pros!'' And it not only got my attention -- it got his vets' attention. "Oh, I remember the moment,'' said cornerback Johnathan Joseph. "His message was pretty clear -- whether it's the preseason or regular season, he's not going to tolerate us playing like that.'''
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Recapturing
After USC's surprising loss at Oregon, USC coach Pete Carroll responded to critics with the following:
"We don't change our philosophies after something like this, because we believe in what we're doing, and we believe in the stuff we've done over the years. How we respond is to go back to the truth of who we are and demonstrating resiliency. It's not about changing -- it's about recapturing."
I like it!
"We don't change our philosophies after something like this, because we believe in what we're doing, and we believe in the stuff we've done over the years. How we respond is to go back to the truth of who we are and demonstrating resiliency. It's not about changing -- it's about recapturing."
I like it!
Monday, November 2, 2009
Lifestyle
Some months ago I was reading a piece in Runner’s World (!) and in it, Marty Liquori explained the reason why his training group lived in Gainesville, FL: It was a cheap place to live, with good weather year-round and decent places to run. And I immediately thought, how many pro triathletes would be caught dead in Gainesville, let alone live there?
I coach athletes that live in Alabama and Louisiana. When they mention that, they might as well have said they lived in Iraq or Afghanistan, given the scorn they receive from other triathletes. It seems that in our sport, unless you are living in Boulder, San Diego or Tucson, you are a loser. If you can’t live in one of those places, then at least it needs to be a place with at least one Whole Foods (Boulder has FOUR!) and several independently owned coffee shops populated with thick-frame glasses hipsters and fixies. All this because, in triathlon, the established culture tells you that living the lifestyle is more important than performing. Living the lifestyle is more important than winning.
But let’s face it, unless your name is Matt Reed or Laura and Greg Bennett, or you work 60 hours a week or you’re independently wealthy, you can’t afford to live the “cool” lifestyle. If you coach a few athletes and you’re spending more money traveling to races than winning in prize-money, you can’t afford to live the lifestyle. And you end up having to make options in order to live the lifestyle. You compromise and every day you’re further away from your goals.
There is a lifestyle culture in triathlon that is detrimental to (high) performance. Because it tells you that being cool and living in the right place is more important than doing what it takes to be successful, to win races. But one thing I’ve come to realize, not every elite athlete is interested in winning, which is somewhat puzzling. The subject for a future blog.
I coach athletes that live in Alabama and Louisiana. When they mention that, they might as well have said they lived in Iraq or Afghanistan, given the scorn they receive from other triathletes. It seems that in our sport, unless you are living in Boulder, San Diego or Tucson, you are a loser. If you can’t live in one of those places, then at least it needs to be a place with at least one Whole Foods (Boulder has FOUR!) and several independently owned coffee shops populated with thick-frame glasses hipsters and fixies. All this because, in triathlon, the established culture tells you that living the lifestyle is more important than performing. Living the lifestyle is more important than winning.
But let’s face it, unless your name is Matt Reed or Laura and Greg Bennett, or you work 60 hours a week or you’re independently wealthy, you can’t afford to live the “cool” lifestyle. If you coach a few athletes and you’re spending more money traveling to races than winning in prize-money, you can’t afford to live the lifestyle. And you end up having to make options in order to live the lifestyle. You compromise and every day you’re further away from your goals.
There is a lifestyle culture in triathlon that is detrimental to (high) performance. Because it tells you that being cool and living in the right place is more important than doing what it takes to be successful, to win races. But one thing I’ve come to realize, not every elite athlete is interested in winning, which is somewhat puzzling. The subject for a future blog.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Problem? I don't see a problem...
I was just reading this, and came upon this section:
"At the risk of dismissing its value, the coaches probably gained enormous value from other coaches' presentations - Bob Bowman (Michael Phelps' coach) would have heard some valuable tips from Terrence Mahon (Ryan Hall and Deena Kastor, among others), and vice versa, but I dare say that the science would not have changed the way any of the coaches are approaching altitude training for their athletes. They already had a strategy, and I doubt whether the science showed them anything to improve or change it.
And this is a typical problem (...)"
Is it? I don't see a problem with success. Here are some of the most successful coaches in the World explaining some of the methods that got them this success, and for (some) sports scientists, it is a problem if it goes against the science, which when it comes to endurance training still has huge gaps.
The problem I see is scientists that instead of looking for the scientific basis for success that I am sure is behind the success of those coaches, prefer to throw rocks from their precariously founded ivory towers.
The author goes on to expand on how he sees coaching as "the ability of the coach to engage in a scientific process", which is something I strongly disagree, and it shows the traditional lack of understanding that (some) sports scientists have of the coaching process.
"At the risk of dismissing its value, the coaches probably gained enormous value from other coaches' presentations - Bob Bowman (Michael Phelps' coach) would have heard some valuable tips from Terrence Mahon (Ryan Hall and Deena Kastor, among others), and vice versa, but I dare say that the science would not have changed the way any of the coaches are approaching altitude training for their athletes. They already had a strategy, and I doubt whether the science showed them anything to improve or change it.
And this is a typical problem (...)"
Is it? I don't see a problem with success. Here are some of the most successful coaches in the World explaining some of the methods that got them this success, and for (some) sports scientists, it is a problem if it goes against the science, which when it comes to endurance training still has huge gaps.
The problem I see is scientists that instead of looking for the scientific basis for success that I am sure is behind the success of those coaches, prefer to throw rocks from their precariously founded ivory towers.
The author goes on to expand on how he sees coaching as "the ability of the coach to engage in a scientific process", which is something I strongly disagree, and it shows the traditional lack of understanding that (some) sports scientists have of the coaching process.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Paulo's Mailbag
Reader "hal_jordan_1" posted this on the comments section of this blog:
"ok, this is unrelated to your post but it's something that bugs me. You should seriously rip this guy appart, he is loosing it. Not only Wellington has shitty technique, now all the TBB's that have gotten FISTed by him got good results because of him, starting with Biscay.
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/cadence_P2539875/
"
Dear "hal_jordan_1",
Thank you for pointing me to that thread. So you mean to tell me that someone with zero coaching credentials or creditability is posting nonsensical and delusional pseudo-advice??? You mean to tell me that someone is wrong on the Internet???? My goodness... that almost never happens, especially on that site... ;-)
Whenever you get riled up by what some people write, I recommend you to read the cartoon below. I find it very soothing :-)
"ok, this is unrelated to your post but it's something that bugs me. You should seriously rip this guy appart, he is loosing it. Not only Wellington has shitty technique, now all the TBB's that have gotten FISTed by him got good results because of him, starting with Biscay.
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/cadence_P2539875/
"
Dear "hal_jordan_1",
Thank you for pointing me to that thread. So you mean to tell me that someone with zero coaching credentials or creditability is posting nonsensical and delusional pseudo-advice??? You mean to tell me that someone is wrong on the Internet???? My goodness... that almost never happens, especially on that site... ;-)
Whenever you get riled up by what some people write, I recommend you to read the cartoon below. I find it very soothing :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
