The fact they just got competitive women, depends on 2 facts…1 cannot be discussed here, the second has been dealt with int the past; special exercise can be useful when you run 11, so bounds, speed weights and so on…not when you are faster…shorte GCT…the same at low level sprinting, many benefits from bounding, but at high level, just get more prone to injury.
Eroszag, I don’t think it’s reasonable to even consider #1 because we all know that ‘that which may not be named’ is something that was/is not restricted to particular geographical locations- as evidence by more than one of our own world class American female sprinters have been associated with it.
Regarding #2, I agree with the potential dangers of the single leg alternated and repeated bounding; however, we’d have to know that this is what every sprinter is/was subjected to before it was considered to be a major reason why there aren’t/weren’t more world class times being ran by athletes from those nations.
Additionally, Wells made a living off of those type of drills so we can’t necessarily rule out their efficacy or alternatively, consider their presence in the training to automatically exclude one from attaining world class results.
and for some comic relief, an example of training that seems to be interestingly exclusive to the hordes of performancetrainingspecialistgurus in America: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTtdfWh-SJk
(you know what blows me away, not even the fact that some fool is using some of these exercises on athletes, but that it appears to be acceptable enough to them to post a demonstration of this type of abortion on youtube for the whole world to see)
I think we’d all agree that there’s no question that there’s one thing, above all else, that all world class sprinters have in common; and that’s the requisite morpho-biomechanical genetic potential.
this brings us back to the reason why I started this thread, which was to discuss the results of NCAA sprinters, or T&F in general, weighed against the talent pool that constitutes NCAA T&F.
I don’t have the statistics; however, it would be interesting to know how many high school sprinters enter the collegiate ranks and either:
- only marginally improve upon their high school results over the course of 4 years, 2. don’t improve upon their high school results, or 3. become riddled with injury in college which may be a clear reflection of training related problems
If you don’t find it reasonable to look at “1” then you are an idiot. There are numerous women that have had sex changes and the like. Evidence that such things were going on before they were even teens. If you can cite some evidence of that happening elsehwere, maybe you’d have a point.
The fact that they have nobody right now just furthers the point that their programs were developed completely on those factors. The US and many other countries are still as competitive or more than they were back then.
James, if the Soviets were limited by their genetics, where were they in the Men’s 100m in Moscow?
A Scot who was running 11s not long before and had access to almost no facilities won in 10.2x. How many Russians or East Germans were even in the final? In their own back yard… they couldn’t handle Wells, Mennea, and numerous others.
Hah, I still cannot believe Wells won off that training. Shows you how much humanity knows. Someday maybe someone will win the Olympics off of Crossfit.
Fogelson, is it possible for you have a discussion void of you demonstrating childish emotion, defensive posturing, and combative language?
How old are you?
You are incredibly naive to think that ‘the issue’ is localized to overseas populations.
You are now derailing this thread by furthering the discussion of a topic that is not tolerated by the administration here.
Keep this up, and your use of combative language, and I assure you that you will be the one who goes away.
You’ve been a member of this website all for about 5 minutes and your are clearly unable to remain civil during disagreement.
I will be notifying the administration of this.
James, how long someone is a member or not is not really of relevance. Further, you simply identify anything that runs contrary to your opinion as childish or defensive. When I back up my position with facts, you run away and hide. Now, instead of acknowledge that things are difficult and there are other factors, you want to say (without pretty much knowing jack about even 10% of the NCAA) that NCAA T&F knows nothing and that the USATF Certification/Coaching Education is a joke. I wish you would say that to the face of some of the many NCAA coaches. If you said that to John Smith when he was at UCLA, … Let’s say it would not have been pretty.
Let’s make a list of some NCAA coaches (past and present), you can explain to me why they suck or don’t know what they are doing and are squadering talent:
-John Smith
-Tom Tellez
-Dan Pfaff
-Boo Shexnayder
-Bob Kersee
-Clyde Hart
-Larry Judge
-Lance Brauman
-Randy Huntington
-Loren Seagrave
-Dennis Shaver
You know what, I’ll stop there.
James, how long someone is a member or not is not really of relevance. Further, you simply identify anything that runs contrary to your opinion as childish or defensive. When I back up my position with facts, you run away and hide. Now, instead of acknowledge that things are difficult and there are other factors, you want to say (without pretty much knowing jack about even 10% of the NCAA) that NCAA T&F knows nothing and that the USATF Certification/Coaching Education is a joke. I wish you would say that to the face of some of the many NCAA coaches. If you said that to John Smith when he was at UCLA, … Let’s say it would not have been pretty.
Let’s make a list of some NCAA coaches (past and present), you can explain to me why they suck or don’t know what they are doing and are squadering talent:
-John Smith
-Tom Tellez
-Dan Pfaff
-Boo Shexnayder
-Bob Kersee
-Clyde Hart
-Larry Judge
-Lance Brauman
-Randy Huntington
-Loren Seagrave
-Dennis Shaver
You know what, I’ll stop there.
I was just about to say - being banned at this point would make the most sense. A new user who insults and argues with well respected members of this forum…
Fogelson- read the site rules about drug references before going into this line of argument any further- it goes absolutely nowhere.
If James likes the Soviet training system, that’s fine- I like SOME of it but not all. Borzov IMO was not really a direct product of this system because his coach- Petrovsky did not follow the training system of the rest of the sprinters. There are many succesful programs and my preference is to look at these programs and try to see what I can glean from them, as I believe you do.
I disagree.
First: No amount or quality of instruction can prepare you for hands-on experience, so there is a learning curve for everyone.
Second: Some coaches have moved beyond what has come before, creating a new reality that been stretched beyond the competence of those who were teaching, based on past knowledge.
fogelson, let’s be clear here. As I stated earlier, all of our words are written down and documented (unless posts are deleted).
Your immature keyboarding is reflected in the combative words, and habit of embellishing my words, that you insist upon including in your posts such as:
and so on…
I haven’t used those words in any of my posts so why are you making up science fiction while speaking for me?
This is why I ask your age.
I’ve already acknowledged the great coaching of men like Pfaff and Smith and I’m familiar with everyone on your list except Judge and Shaver and all the names you mentioned obviously have impressive resumes so why the instigation? Are you actually envisioning a fist fight between me and John Smith…
Unbelievable.
Why would you use the most celebrated coaches in a system in order to support a discussion revolving around the problems of a system. Obviously the the most accomplished coaches are irrelevant to this discussion and, instead, the discussion applies to the hundreds of collegiate coaching schemes.
Again, I have to wonder how old you are.
It appears to me as if you’re not reading the same words I am because I’ve shared much more ‘facts’ than you in the form of names, times, distances, and so on.
What facts have you shared other than pointing out the names of great sprinters and coaches and then you went on to erroneously talk about gene pools as being synonymous with skin color.
I haven’t once disputed what has actually happened in T&F history while you, on the contrary, refuse to acknowledge what has happened (regarding the success of sprinters from the former GDR and USSR).
I’m not comparing athletes against athletes, I’m suggesting that we compare coaching models and sometimes the athletes’ accomplishments are not directly reflective of the coaches efforts as very gifted athletes are capable of high results in spite of lousy coaching and there are alternative instances of very good coaching efforts that are not reflected via the athlete’s performances.
please, for your own good, stop embarrassing yourself fogelson.
This is a computer forum and there’s no where to hide.
I’m laughing thinking about why someone would write that on a computer forum. priceless.
I’m glad Charlie pointed out what has been obvious to me since we began this exchange because some objectivity was sorely needed.
So there you have it, since you’re unwilling to see the logic in my words then perhaps Charlie’s will strike a chord.
James…the point of a past discussion with me , PJ and others, was that those “specific” means of training were more suitable to slower sprinters, women and medium level sprinters, whereas for the top level, general means is the way to go.
GDR dominated in females, not USSR to be fair.
In italy we have been exposed to all kind of eastern training and coaches…I find their methods no superior at all…just more organized and bureucratic, like communist society was.
The fact that they did not produce a single outstanding sprinter except for Borzov ( whose coach was so against the “system”, that, despite 2 gold medals was not awarded with ussr’s top award , red star or whatever it was), is quite enlightening.The genetic pool cannot be used as an excuse, in fact on the female field they were competitive (ussr) or dominating (GDR).
This thread could become quite interesting, we all should just stay away from flames, personal and drug comments.
I have no argument with that Charlie.
My feelings are that the model I have envisioned doesn’t ‘fit’ within the current paradigm and that in the event of what I have in mind coming to fruition, the outcome of the paradigm shift would be coaches beginning their careers from a position of much greater qualification as a higher level of hands-on experience would occur as part of the coaching education; thereby allowing coaches to enter the profession with an already accelerated learning curve that is far beyond what the current ‘Russian Roulette’ infrastructure allows .
‘Russian Roulette’ referring to the chances of apprenticing under a qualified coach in the current system.
James,
I am very serious about my assertions and what I have said to you. I think most educated people would label you the same, one way or another, if you made such unsubstantiated and absurd claims. You seem to associate false respect (as in, respecting something which deserves no respect) as something that comes with age and maturity, when I don’t see that at all. I have seen numerous top level academics call specific individuals idiots and call them out on false claims and proclamations. There is no reason to respect somebody who disrespects an entire group of people, without basis, like you do. Being only in your 30s and having substantially less coaching experience and results that many of the people you disrespect, you have no stance to begin to question the age, maturity, or anything of anyone.
I don’t see how what you are saying has ANY relevance to what Charlie has said. Your attempts to misrepresent what he says on other sites to justify your pseudo-intellectualism and self-believed superiority is scary. Your denial of facts is even scarier. You have earned no respect in what you have said, the way you present your beliefs, your results, or your experience, so you shouldn’t be demanding much.
Since you know what NCAA T&F needs without having even been involved at that level, you should probably use that info for your football team, which is one of the most underperforming teams in the last couple years.
Charlie, I apologize for any drug talk or implication, however I do believe it is a necessary acknowledgement and denial of such is dangerous. I will discontinue discussion regarding that, with the caveat that people should keep ALL of the history in their head in these matters.
I agree wholeheartedly in looking at all successful programs, which is why I am baffled by the lack of respect James shows for some of the most successful coaches ever.
Eros, perhaps I haven’t been clear in elucidating my affinity for the Soviet model. It’s exactly the organization of it that interests me.
My criticism of so many of the ‘coaching models’ in my country stems from the lack of a unified system.
I believe in unified systems; however, I must impart subjectivity when defining my idea of what the unification is characterized by.
People seem to forget that even when the Soviet Union existed there was a great deal of individualized coaching efforts, even amidst the piece meal system.
Just imagine, if in the western hemisphere, Charlie, or Pfaff, or Smith were in a position to construct a blueprint for the entire nation that still provided for individualization by the coach practitioners. this is wildly speculative; however, I’d wager large sums of money (if I had them) that the current situation would be galactically improved upon.
Regarding genetics, it is my opinion that genetics must be acknowledged as without a certain genetic ‘makeup’ the highest sports results in the sprints are physiologically unattainable.
Also, while there is far less influence from the former Eastern Bloc in the USA, in comparison to parts of Europe, I’ve had the great fortune of developing a very close relationship with the Verkhoshansky family as well as correspondence with Dr. Issurin thus anything that I am able to share with respect to Soviet methods is reflective of what I’ve learned first hand from these esteemed individuals as well as others.
I, like, others, believe in assimilating only what I find to be particularly beneficial to my coaching model and the training of my athletes.
As Tonto said to the Lone Ranger- 'What you mean ‘we’ kemo sabe?"
James, guess who is one of the major contributors and organizers of the USATF coaching education? Hint, it is one of the guys you just mentioned.
Socio economic factors may now be a greater factor in denuding the potential gene pool within North America and Europe than they used to be.
Fast/strong/well coordinated young athletes will earn significantly more money in soccer/american football/tennis etc than athletics.
The availability of a handful of super coaches appears to be of great significance. Elite squads such as Clyde Hart, John Smith, CF are capable of turning out major talents.
Simplistically, 3 or 4 great coaches in a country could outweigh whether the rest of the coaching system is good, bad or indifferent.
So do we need a system that will produce the pearls.
Bad luck for the ordinary club athlete who may experience only a mediocre regime, but the questions is - are we developing a good system for all or a super system for the elite ? ideally both, but life is hard…
Fogelson,
This long list of insults you just directed at me has terminated any further exchange between you and I.
But thanks for clarifying your age.