CF vs Pfaff - CF wins hands down

system · October 24, 2005, 11:28am

This is sad but true. Hopefully they will give Charlie a pardon at Bejing in 2008 . I’d say 20 years worth of lost potential is long enough!

Charlie_Francis · October 24, 2005, 1:17pm

I don’t know if he was in a rush to mention me but the L’Equipe guy (forgot which one) called me and said that when they caught up with him for an interview, they noticed that he was carrying a copy of CFTS with him and they asked him about it.

Charlie_Francis · October 24, 2005, 1:19pm

Thanks but no thanks! Been there, done that! Now it’s your turn. If I can help, great!

Charlie_Francis · October 24, 2005, 1:23pm

9.79, 9.78, 9.77… hmmmm

pierrejean · October 24, 2005, 2:12pm

We are talking about the same story I told him that a lot of coaches around use the CFTS…

eroszag · October 24, 2005, 5:17pm

and WTF Asafa is doing with his power training (this scientist probably doesn’t know he has World leadership in specific power jumping and throwing tests…).

For the sake of knowing everything…do you know the actual tests and performances???

Nikoluski · October 24, 2005, 6:36pm

I really don’t like this and coming from Billat, why do they try to analyse and box everything with mathematical models? I’ve seen it in other areas -with no success by the way- and now again. You are dealing with humans, after all and such models are generalisations, I suppose… And not accurate ones sometimes by the looks of it…

Ally · October 25, 2005, 7:45am

Pierrejean, I read a L’Equipe in June (its a bit hazy in my memory now) where someobody, who preferred to remain anonymous, criticised the effect Charlie’s technical work had on Marion. Any idea who that was?

pierrejean · October 25, 2005, 7:49am

I can’t remember which article you are refering to. Anyway, if this person wants to remain anonymous i can’t give his/her name anyway.

Charlie_Francis · October 25, 2005, 11:04am

You need to remember that there are lawsuits flying around and Marion Isn’t suing ME.
I had enough experience with Marion to know that she was a delight to work with, tried her very best at all times, and was training at times under the 60m world record in SPP1 until her pregnancy progressed to the point where she had to suspend high intensity work. Number 2 can verify what I’m saying and he has it on film as well. You can read her remarks about me in her book:
“…To my delight, he was focused to the point of obsession on the minutest details of sprinting. He had computor programs (No2 actually- CF) that digested reams of data to decipher what your angles should be according to your body type at each separate meter of a race. He would film us and analyse our positions, sometimes sitting up all night so that he’d be ready with the correct advice in the morning session… We had a good raport, but he and Tim really saw eye to eye and spent ages discussing the techie details. We got to know his wife and young son too, since sometimes Charlie would invite us home for dinner- she was a truly excellent cook!”
There are those out there who would like you to believe that Marion, as a multi- Olympic and World Champion isn’t able to discern who’s telling her the straight goods about sprinting and who’s not.
As for her more recent difficulties, some of you may not know that Marion suffered a severely fractured foot while playing Basketball in College that required surgery to put in a large pin (she has very long, thin bones). During the pregnancy process, the same pregnancy hormone that allow the hips to spread also allow ligaments to stretch everywhere, including the foot.
The usual flat footed issue all women face after childbirth is compounded by the repositionning of the pin and resultant discomfort.
Restoring the arch in her case is very difficult because the usual tactic I’d employ- EMS- cannot be used around metal implants, as using EMS can lead to necrosis of the bone surrounding the pin. Her loss of foot elasticity on the side with the pin has led to a series of Quad strains, as the normal foot action off the ground that initiates the return is missing. She needs alot of rehab work to restore the arch before her problems can clear up.
This has been my suspicion all along and this was confirmed by Dr Mike Prebeg, who treated her at the Nationals this year.
I haven’t had the opportunity to speak to her directly about this as she has been in a very difficult position, though she has sent cards for Christmass and Birthdays etc. A very fine person, in my experience, who doesn’t deserve the abuse she’s gone through!

RandyG · October 25, 2005, 11:33am

…I’d say :eek: ! That girl was flying…Tim too! Can’t say I’ve seen the human body move so fast in person!!!

pierrejean · October 25, 2005, 11:47am

Billat is world-wide known especially in her work on VO2 max and brang interesting theories in a way they broke the former ones.
However, she has proved her limits talking about sprinting…

re-Marion : debate D.Pfaff vs CF here we go
Don’t get me into it.
More than a calendar year is needed to be back to someone’s level from maternity in sprints, 2 years for 400m, 6 month for High Jump. The problem was double : too high goals for her too soon in 2004 leading to deceiving - for her - results, and the harrasment of media. Taking in account of these 2 elements, her comeback in 2004 was excellent to me (season best 11.04 ten months and one week after delivery, and 7.20-7.30 long jump to the board at OT). Now Marion makes the mistake to move from coaches to coaches, how can she build a serious program…

Charlie_Francis · October 25, 2005, 12:04pm

Yes, as you know Randy, both were under the WR over 60m at that time.

RandyG · October 25, 2005, 12:27pm

Under!?!..you’re being kind. They were set to put it out of reach…way out a reach.

John · October 25, 2005, 1:33pm

Charlie_Francis:

…
As for her more recent difficulties, some of you may not know that Marion suffered a severely fractured foot while playing Basketball in College that required surgery to put in a large pin (she has very long, thin bones). During the pregnancy process, the same pregnancy hormone that allow the hips to spread also allow ligaments to stretch everywhere, including the foot.
The usual flat footed issue all women face after childbirth is compounded by the repositionning of the pin and resultant discomfort.
Restoring the arch in her case is very difficult because the usual tactic I’d employ- EMS- cannot be used around metal implants, as using EMS can lead to necrosis of the bone surrounding the pin. Her loss of foot elasticity on the side with the pin has led to a series of Quad strains, as the normal foot action off the ground that initiates the return is missing. She needs alot of rehab work to restore the arch before her problems can clear up.
This has been my suspicion all along and this was confirmed by Dr Mike Prebeg, who treated her at the Nationals this year.
I haven’t had the opportunity to speak to her directly about this as she has been in a very difficult position, though she has sent cards for Christmass and Birthdays etc. A very fine person, in my experience, who doesn’t deserve the abuse she’s gone through!

Thanks for that very interesting but evryone knows scandal and innuendo is better for media ratings than facts :rolleyes:

Given Marion and in particular Tim’s in depth knowledge can you see them getting into coaching?
(sorry not fully up to date with his ‘status’)

Charlie_Francis · October 25, 2005, 3:02pm

The pay’s a tad low!!

Nikoluski · October 25, 2005, 6:38pm

I am quite familiar with her work, but that doesn’t make me feel any better about “modelling” everything…
As to your second point, people should rather stick to their specialty and let others of same, if not higher, calibre practise theirs IMO!

THEONE · October 26, 2005, 3:58pm

nap:

I recently had the opportunity to attend the High Performance Symposium in Edmonton Alberta put on by Athletics Canada. The speakers included Dan Pfaff, Assistant Coach, University of Florida; Dr. Anatoly Bondarchuk, Assistant Coach, Kamloops Track & Field Club; and Dr. Michael Leahy, founder of ART.

I have also been to CF’s last seminar in BC, and now am going to compare my experience and understanding of both symposiums.

I remember leaving each day after CF’s sesions with more information than I could possibly comprehend, and with more questions and doubt about a number of ideas I had about training.

I had no such concerns after leaving the 3 hour session with Coach Dan Pfaff. The only thing that kept going through my mind is why did I spend $495.00 on this conference? All he kept refering to was the number of athletes he had blown up over the years, and the importance of difusing training ‘bombs’ before they ‘blow up athletes?’ I guess, I’m not fluid in track terminology!

I think my expectation was to have another system (Coach Pfaff’s) to compare things to(CF’s Training System), to see the validity and vulnerability of some of CF’s concepts of trainig. Which at times can seen to err on the side of causion vs push the envelope. I am now crystal clear on the motto do no harm, and protect your athletes at all costs. I could not believe some of the stories and the way in which the seminar unfolded. I was expecting substance and all we heard was fluff.

I wanted to hear Coach Pfaff describe his technical model of running or discuss his multi-lateral approach to developing training protocols for power speed athletes. Special consideration was to be paid to the integration of various forms of strength work including starting strength, special strength, absolute strength, movements involving three degrees of freedom and the use of power indices. All I kept hearing about was bombs and terminology, no details.

So, I thought when we continued with the second part of the symposium with Dr. Michael Leahy it would get better, more detail to the overview we just recieved. And I was wrong. Much of the detail from gait analysys to breakdown were only discussed with ART practitioners in the second afternoon sessions which were closed to coaches. They did open one session to the coaches on the last day but did not tell us until the day before so many of us coaches could not make arangements in time.

When comparing the two coaches it is easy to see and appretiate how intuitive, confident, and knowlegeble CF is in his ablity to communicate his ideas. Coach Pfaff made me feel uneasy in considering any of his ideas because of his apparent lack of certainty (confidence is probably a better word) with his training methods. Athletes trust us with the limited time they have and their health and well being, and I feel confident and secure using CF’s Training System with my athlete.

I don’t know how many people have ever watched House MD, but I swear if CF was a doctor? The way he forces people to think and challenges us to lean for our selves, to make tough decissions and have confidence in making them, and most importantly to be accoutable and live with the consequences.

Maybe if I had gone to Coach Pfaff’s session first, before attending CF’s, I would have thought it amazing and thought provoking, but I did not. I did howerver, have that feeling you have right before you write a big exam, you now the one were you can not lie to your self any longer and you open the first page and you realize whether you know the material or not? I felt I knew most of the answers, and it made me feel more confident about my coaching and the CF Training System.

The highlight of the hole week for me, was Dr. Anatoly Bondarchuk, Assistant Coach, Kamloops Track & Field Club. His three-hour session coverd the development of “Sporting Form.” This term refers to the top psychological and physical condition of the thrower in preparation for top performance. It included Mr. Bondarchuk’s system of classifying different exercises, and different athletes in the development of sport form as well as his unique periodization concepts.

He was a vibrant speaker, friendly, and fatherly(if that is such a word). He was a meat and potatoes guy (worked right into the details of his system) he was genuinely interested in the audience understanding his ideas, stopping to answer all questions. The only problem was the 3 hour length of the symposium which was not long enough. It was unfortunate that Dr. Anatoly Bondarchuk was not the center of the conference, I would have felt I received value for my money and time.

It is interesting how, in the evaluation of athletes, Dr. Bondarchuk catagorizes athletes in to three catagories as to how they respond to the effects of training. Two are very simular and can use most of the training models, and one group reacts much slower and certain modles do not work for them.

I thought this very simular to CF’s Short to Long / Long to Short identification of athletes. Very simple, effective and crutial to the development of athletes with different CNS abilities (types). intelligent, intuative people have the ability to break the complex down, see a path, and simplify.

Coach Dan Pfaff and Dr. Michael Leahy were friendly and answered questions, but I did not feel they shared much. I also felt that coach Pfaff abdicated too much of the development of the athlete to the supporting staff (ART, etc.). He kept talking about how the athlete needed to fit into a certain model(with little room for individual idiosycases or styles / he felt these flaws would usually lead to injury)Nothing to do with training methods?

Also what if your technical model is incorrect, and the things you are correcting, such as the natural counter rotation of the hips and shoulders, or positive hip displacement, limit performance improvement? You may become relient on other elements for performance improvement.

What happened to, ‘if it is not broke don’t fix it’? It came across, that with intervension(ART) here and there, is were athletes would find their performance improvements, not in the training it self? It also concerned me that the coach and athlete may become dependent on these protocals to produce PB’s.

I did not see a clear picture of cause and effect, just jump right in and fix away all your limiting factors?

Over all I would have to say I was not impressed with the event, however, I do think Dr. Anatoly Bondarchuk would be an excellent speaker and guest (given enough time explain his system), as would Dr. Michael Leahy discussing ways to identify problems.

This experience has has made me more apprecialtive to CF for his time (to organize his system), and his willingness to share it. I can’t wait until the next CF conference, I have a lot of questions!

A different take on it…
http://www.otfa.ca/news/Edmonton%20Coaching%20Symposium.pdf

nap · October 26, 2005, 6:18pm

I am not sure what you do not understand?
I do not know if you attended either conference (I suspect not)!
I do not even know if you have ever attended one of Charlie’s conferences (I suspect not)?
But yet you insist on discussing something you did not experience.

The Ontario mentor coach ‘report’ is still someones ‘opinion’!

The crux of the problem lay in the presenters’ (Dan Pfaff & the U of A) inability to coherently present training ideas over the four day period. It was the opinion of a number of coaches I spoke with after sessions and during breaks that we were wrongly expecting progressive ideas that we could build on with practical application.

I did not criticize Coach Pfaff on his, knowledge, experience, success, or willingness to share ideas (as he did with me on numerous occasion), but with his inability to present a clear image of training as a presenter.

I did not find Coach Pfaff’s anecdotal stories of blowing up numerous athletes amusing or endearing. I also found Coach Pfaff’s ‘Vocabulary’ of training difficult to understand and follow, especially coming from a ‘so-called country guy’. Even the Ontario mentor coach’s report had to ‘identify’ a number of terms which ‘simply meant simple things’ (so why complicate). This only added to the difficulty in following the presentation and the concepts.

That was not the case as I have stated numerous times, after attending CF’s presentation in Vancouver. The concepts and ideas created a framework, not an exacting blueprint (to be follower in every detail). There was much room for the art of coaching, and it was clear that it was the coaches’ responsibility to figure that out. But the concepts: short to long / long to short, alternation of CNS and Tempo work, importance of regeneration, vegetarian vs. carnivore, absolute limit vs. usable limit, technical model (positive vertical hip displacement / foot contact bottom dead center), avoiding paralysis by analysis (purpose for hill runs). These concepts were clear in my mind in a two day conference, and very practical.

I even had the same opinion after attending Dr. Anatoly Bondarchuk’s presentation, (even with the interpreter), his ideas were clear.

THEONE · October 26, 2005, 8:15pm

WTF, I simply provided a link to someone’s summary of the same conference that was different from the one offered on this site. The thread has evolved a little, so I used your post to help members follow along.
Get over yourself dude.