Experience From - George Parrott , Kevin Kepley , Steve Siguaw , Dale Perry , Andrew Wilkins , Shawn McDonald , Jay Hodde #1, Dina , Frank Probst , Jay Hodde #2 , Jay Hodde #3 , Ray Zirblis , Jim Miller , Bryan Beel , Stewart Dutfield ,
I have just read a post on ultra which used the phrase ""Don't learn the hard way..." in the closing line relative to a question on training for ultras. I thought it was a most insightful observation and worth reflecting, perhaps, on a bit more and more attentively....
What are our options for personal learning? We can learn by observing, by reading, by listening, and also by personal experience.
Obviously this phrase addresses the alternative of "learning by experience." It is telling us that we do NOT need to learn by experience, for many times that means learning via BIG MISTAKES and personal sacrifices which we can ONLY discover AFTER we have made them.
"The hard way" in learning when it comes to our sport (running and racing, from track distances to the trail ultras) involves doing the sport and then using hindsight to assess what works and what doesn't. Here the big problem is when we use "what doesn't" and then get ourselves either hurt or simply underprepared for our goal event.
So WHERE is this all leading me?
I think the message in "not learning the hard way," is to USE OTHERS for their wisdom and expertise. Use others who are experts and demonstrated sources of excellence either for themselves and/or for others, e.g. get a COACH.
At the very minimum having a "coach" allows one to have an external guide and "second opinion" as to what mades sense and what is possible, both in terms of workouts and racing goals. LISTENING to the coach is also VERY important, IMHO, of course.
There are two major types of training "problems" I have observed in my 20 years or so of running, racing, and ....coaching:
In most of our endurance sports activities there are FEW and NONE "shortcuts," but there are MANY "paths to avoid," and without a "coach," the athlete is very likely to try many of those DEAD ends for themselves.
George Parrot tells us to get a COACH.
How many of the ultrarunners out there have pr have had a coach? Was it worth it? Did it help? Would you recommend it to others?
Kevin, If you decide to get a coach, make sure you get a coach who has been where you want to be. Hiring a coach who is an expert at racing 10K's and has never run an ultra will benefit you for a 10K but not get you to where you want to be regarding running an ultra.
Arthur Lydiard became an experiment of one and used his own running experiences on his highly successful athletes. Get a coach who has done the workouts, done the races and suffered through what they want you to suffer through and then you've got a good coach.
Kevin Kepley wrote:
How many of the ultrarunners out there have pr have had a coach? Was it worth it? Did it help? Would you recommend it to others?I ran ultras for a number of years without a coach (at least one who charges for his/her services). I did okay. I ran Leadville a few years ago and managed to squeak in a 29:45 finish. I finished, under the cutoff, but with hardly any room to spare. It was not fun chasing cutoffs (ask my pacer for that year, Jan Ryerse). But I was able to do it under my own training program. I felt proud of that effort. But I knew I needed some help if I wanted to improve my time at Leadville.
This year, I hired a running coach to help me improve my time for Leadville. I hired him not to make myself more competitive, but to better my personal goals for that race (i.e., finish under 29 hours, and maybe a 28:30 finish, avoid the dreaded cutoff chasing, and finish in a non-wasted fashion). I finished it this year in 27:23. I probably could have done that on my own, I knew what I needed to do. I just needed someone to shape my training in such a form that allowed me do what I know needed to be done. And to provide that extra "push" to get out there and just do it. And provide the encouragement that what I was doing or not doing was right.
Would I recommend it to others? That depends on what that person's goals are I suspect. On the whole, I would recommend it *if* you want to achieve some goal that seems unattainable at the time, or to get you to a certain level of running. In my case, I started with my coach three months prior to the run (I was in panic mode after a number of not so great attempts at some ultras which made me think finishing Leadville was in jeopardy). I got in shape and and was able to surpass my goal by a significant degree.
I am still using my coach for next year's goal of finishing Leadville in under 25 hours. To me, that seems unattainable, but so did finishing Leadville last June when I was in an ultra funk.
I think I may have a unique persepctive on this coach thing. I am a high school soccer, basketball, and lacrosse coach as well as a coach-free ultrarunner. It is the coach-free aspect of ultrarunning which appeals to me so much.
As a coach of several team sports I am certainly appreciative of the importance of coaches in the lives of athletes. They can support, cajole, nurture, harass, love, inspire and get the best out of their athletes. The relationships can be wonderful and meaningful. Indeed, some of my closest friends today are either former coaches or former players I have coached.
Nonetheless, ultrarunning is my thing. I love the solitide, the freedom, and the mystery of it. It is an area of my life over which I can have complete control. You know what I mean (trails today, roads tomorrow, long run Saturday, baby jogger run with the two year old Sunday, easy week this week hard next week) I love all this stuff. It is fun and it is mine. Is it somewhat selfish? You bet! But in a world which is increasingly snatching away more and more of my time (and alot of the snatching is done by coaches in disguise - bosses, advertisers, spouses, children etc,...) I think I've earned an hour or two a day of coach free running.
In my case, if I need a coach it is probably to coerce me into running less rather than more, slower rather than faster. I love the freedom of coachless training; the solitary trails and the cameraderie at events.
What about Motivation? OK I can see that some people might need that but as a runner fighting his running addiction it is admittedly difficult. Nonetheless, cranking some loud music, filling out a Leadville entry form or reading some inspirational quote can get most people out the door. It is the independent nature of ultrarunning which is so great. Just look at some of the independent souls on this list (and now, off this list). If people want to get a coach, great. If they want to cut 15 minutes off their 50 mile time, go for it. But for those of us who do just fine without them, let us. That way we can continue to struggle to keep up with the big dogs (who I know are lurking out there BTW) and mooch as much training advice off of them as possible which is much more fun than a coach anyway.
I am coaching a friend in our ultra club here in San Diego. His thoughts about getting help with his running are much like those given by Dale Perry. He has plenty of race and training experience to reach his goals. One of his big goals for 2000 is to finish the Angeles Crest 100 next Sept. and to do it in a way where he feels good much of the way and is not near the cutoffs. He has previously finished AC three times and two Wasatch's. He has "hired" me to coach him for a few reasons. To give guidance about the details of training, in particular to add back quality workouts to his program. To work out a better plan for training and race nutrition and fluid intake. For encouragement that what he is doing for training "will work" and to not have to worry as much about "the big picture". For motivation to eat better, to take the time in a busy schedule to run most days, and for the wisdom to know when to rest and when to run harder. My friend ran AC last year and was cutoff at mile 59. He had a tough day. We reviewed some of the likely reasons for his struggle on race day and will work together so that he is prepared and confident both in the physical and mental arenas. As his coach I am going to do my best to build up his endurance and regain some speed thru the weekly training schedules I suggest, and to provide ample encouragement and motivation.
Coaches are resources, who have "been there", and offer you practical tips, planning, and support. If you decide you want a coach to help you, then do some research and check their background, coaching style, and philosophies, and talk with other runners they have coached, and ask if you can do a trial period for free to start. Most coaches will be able to provide all this info to you and will be happy to give an initial free "consultation" to review your running background, racing history, goals, etc. Also, remember that it takes time for any changes the coach makes to your running program to take effect, so be patient. Over the period of a few months you should see differences in how you feel on your training runs and in races. As to finding a coach, ask around at races or your friends you train with. The coach need not be local, although that has some advantages. Much/most of the coaching can be done over the phone, or via email. The terms of the coaching "agreement" vary and can be individualized. Make sure you know what these are before you start with the coach and make any payments. I, like most coaches, am happy to work with runners for as long as they would like. After a period of time you may wish to move on, to design your own training program, or to take a rest. Finally, coaching is not for all runners. It depends on your personality to some extent, and your goals, experience, etc. Having a coach help you is one way to "gain experience" and to define and reach your goals, whatever they might be.
I'm a firm believer in experience being the best coach possible. I don't think they offer much benefit to one who has an extreme amoun of self-drive. What a coach *does* offer is an incentive program -- and a good one will also offer advice to step back and NOT race at every opportunity.
Do I know how to achieve my Y2K goals? Yeah, I have a decent idea. Could a coach help me do that, too? I'm sure a good one could. I've been successful in my running and racing thus far, so I'm a believer in not fixing things that aren't broke...
One question and I'll stop my rambling: Is one's success diminished if a coach guides you along and shows you how to succeed? Can the coach take the credit for a job well done?
Sounds like I could make an argument parallel to the pacing dilemma if I wanted to, doesn't it?
I have had several coaches, some who coached our team and two coaches for individual sessions. I have mentioned the most recent several times, Danny Dreyer, because he made such a difference in my running - nine months since the last time I fell, for instance. Danny is also an ultrarunner himself, and placed first senior at the Quad Dipsea this year against stiff competition.
I have learned something from all of these coaches. Of course we all learn from each other and from experience as well. However there is nothing comparable to having someone who is qualified in the area in which you wish to excel take an objective look at your current performance, and help you go from there.
George wrote:
..."Here the role of the "Coach" is absolutely critical, for the temptation is to "self-destruct,"and these kinds of "hard way learnings are brutal." I have done this to myself" ...Am I the only one who has seen a "coach" run their athletes into the ground. The coach's desire to win does not always protect the runner. The burn out rate with hot shot high school and college hot shots and not so hot shots is very high, for many, many reasons, including over training and racing. These young men and ladies all had a "coach".
Many of us self coached folks are quite happy with our coach AND we do not even have to call 'em "COACH". Coaches are like any other endeavor/occupation, there are good ones and there are bad ones. Just sounds like you had a bad coach, who you now imply learned from his experience and is now a good coach.
In response to Frank...
Maybe the focus needs to change:
I read somewhere in the last two days that Robert Youngren (I know you're out there!) said his 5k and 10k times only got faster when he started focusing his training on longer distances.
I wonder if Arthur Lydiard has a point.
For those unfamiliar with Lydiard's view on why the USA is not producing world class marathon runners (and that's a point we can debate, too), he has steadfastly claimed that we are training our youth in the wrong way.
Lydiard claims that repeats on a track are not the way to prepare our youth for running at the collegiate level. He advises "high" mileage during the teenage years -- not this "5k maximum daily average" that so many coaches advise (at least around here). The mileage produces strength and adaptation that is used for a base in the marathon -- and in shorter events like the 5k and 10k.
Ray K. sounds right again. Mileage (and only mileage) maketh world-class runners.
Let me turn this into an ultra topic, because the same argument that applies to 26.2 miles could also apply to longer distances, too. Why are the "fast guys" not really that fast when compared to historical performances??? Opinions, anyone?
George wrote: I think the message in "not learning the hard way," is to USE OTHERS for their wisdom and expertise. Use others who are experts and demonstrated sources of excellence either for themselves and/or for others, e.g. get a COACH. I think this forum can provide much of what George talks about. Others on this list can use the collective experience of the group as a "coach".
Unfortunately, whether your coach resides in person or in cyberspace -- or is just a group of fellow runners sharing their own expereince and advice -- a coach will do no good if the athlete is unwilling to listen.
I am one of those people who do seem to need help in doing their best. I don't need it continually, but rather from time to time. However, I had poor experiences in my childhood with various idiots and sadists calling themselves coaches, which is probably why I've devoted myself to individual sports that I could attempt to master on my own. I forget the exact Robert Burns quote about seeing ourselves as others see us, but to me, the value of a coach is exposure to thinking and experience outside of one's own, and an outside person observing one's efforts. For all but a few people, acute, objective self observation is a difficult skill to acquire and employ well.
As regards training, one person has just so much energy, drive, and knowledge. Two people together can not only double, but can 'square,' those qualities. Mike Spino ran running clinics at Esalen Institute in Big Sur, CA, in the early 70s, and when I'm running today I still hear his voice in my head. His long-ago advice and observations have merged with my own inner voice or dialog. He had me running distances and speeds I did not think were possible for me. I suppose what I've really had are running mentors--four of them-- over the years. Looking back, they've been male, generally older, faster, and always more experienced than myself. No surprizes there. On our runs together, I typically deferred to their selections of pace, distance etc. This doesn't mean I didn't make decisions for myself, but 2-3 times a week I had a standard to measure myself against. In the 70s, much of what I got from a mentor was hard to come by elsewhere. And there is nothing like someone with a bit of authority to state the obvious. At our first meeting, Spino looked at my feet and said, "If you want to be a runner, you might want to get yourself some actual running shoes!"
Today, in the midst of the Information Age, I feel awash in data, advice, and reports on running and much else. Now, a wiser, more experienced companion can help me cut through and back to the basics. For the past three years, that person has been Newton Baker. He'd be embarrassed to hear himself described as a mentor, but while we are good buddies, I know that the teaching about running is pretty much a one-way street. He is a smart, trusted, and generous advisor. Don't get me wrong: I still obey Sister Mary Whatshernames admonishment from Saint Thomas Aquinas to "Trust the authority of your own instincts." But sometimes, to meet certain goals or prepare for certain races, I can use the help.
I went through college on a combination of cross country track and cross country skiing scholarships. I remember always being tired and on the edge of injury. My college experience certainly burned me out on running for about 10 years after I graduated. College coaches are under pressure to extract the best performance out of athletes during that 4 year eligibility window. They can't help themselves. It's part of the game.
Distance runners don't naturally peak in their late teens and early twenties. My observation was that the folks who did well in college in our team, generally didn't pursue running it afterwards. The people who went on to national and in one case world class level were those we considered to be wankers during college. My conclusion is that they developed at a slower and sustainable pace. When I took up running again in the mid 80's, I was running better times with less training simply because I allowed myself the luxury of resting when I needed it.
In hindsight, if my own children get interested in competitive running, I will discourage them from going the college scholarship route to schooling. They will be better off in terms of their overall running career if they train on their own during that time or go with a coach outside the college system who has the long term perspective. I might also add that athletic scholarships don't pay that well. We were getting the equivalent of sixty cents an hour for the amount of time we were putting in.
Jay wrote:
I read somewhere in the last two days that Robert Youngren (I know you're out there!) said his 5k and 10k times only got faster when he started focusing his training on longer distances.Jay, I also read your follow-up post on this one (the examples of declining performance). This problem, as you know and pointed out, is not limited to the ultramarathon level. I think you're correct when you say that Lydiard would argue that we are training our runners the wrong way if we want world-class performances. However, unless I really have misinterpreted Lydiard's ideas, I don't think it's as simple as "run more mileage." It IS true that Lydiard advocated more mileage, but Lydiard also seemed to advocate FAST mileage. Like Courtney Campbell mentioned the other day: 10-milers at 6:00 pace. I don't think that Lydiard would say we should slog through 8:00-pace 15 milers and call it high-quality work. He did say, I think, that a high-mileage base was good, but only because it makes you stronger for the stuff that's coming later on (fast-paced long runs, hard hill work, etc). Anyway, I look forward to trying these things out for myself now that I have finally graduated and have a little more time for running. I'd love to try more high mileage at quicker tempo to see what happens. As it has been going, I have made up for my decreased training time (ie. less mileage) by doing alot of fast stuff. Not just the 5k and 10k races Rob Youngren mentions (which are great for pumping up your run far/fast potential) but also 2 days a week of hard track repeats and once or twice a week of long, fast repeats (all on a dirt track, I might add, so that my legs didn't get trashed). Well, that's more than two cents' worth. I think that Jay is on the right track, but he simplifies it a little too much. Just doing tons of mileage won't solve the problem, you have to practice running longer distances at a good pace. It's like that old saying: long, slow training makes for long, slow racing.I wonder if Arthur Lydiard has a point.
For those unfamiliar with Lydiard's view on why the USA is not producing world class marathon runners (and that's a point we can debate, too), he has steadfastly claimed that we are training our youth in the wrong way.
Lydiard claims that repeats on a track are not the way to prepare our youth for running at the collegiate level. He advises *high* mileage during the teenage years -- not this "5k maximum daily average" that so many coaches advise (at least around here). The mileage produces strength and adaptation that is used for a base in the marathon -- and in shorter events like the 5k and 10k.
Ray K. sounds right again. Mileage (and only mileage) maketh world-class runners.
Let me turn this into an ultra topic, because the same argument that applies to 26.2 miles could also apply to longer distances, too. Why are the "fast guys" not really that fast when compared to historical performances??? Opinions, anyone?
Lydiard is not saying that lots of slow running makes us fast. After all, if this were the case then members of this list should be cleaning up at 5K races.
This discussion goes back well before the days of "long slow mileage." In 1966 Martin Hyman and Bruce Tulloh wrote, "A number of athletes make the mistake of doing too much training of a poor quality. This is both boring and wasteful of both time and effort. The ability to run a long way slowly will not win races...It may be argued that some runners, notably Clarke, have achieved a high standard through training based mainly on long, slow runs. This is not strictly true, however, because these are athletes of exceptional willpower who have gradually taught themselves to train at a steady, fast pace over long periods. The average athlete going for a steady run usually subsides to a fairly slow and useless lope." (Hyman, M. & Tulloh, B. [1966]. Long distance running. London, Amateur Athletic Association)
Lydiard's training consists of phases; a buildup of long distance over several months, then hill training, then a short period of intervals and speedwork immediately prior to track season. This does not lend itself to competing in multiple seasons (track, cross country, indoor track) or to a schedule of road races that occur throughout the year. Lydiard does encourage using races as part of the later and shorter phases of training, however.
This does open the possibility that one could run ultras--albeit not at the highest level of commitment--for most of the year, then start hill work & speedwork in a phased sharpening for a season dedicated to fast shorter races.
I have run by far my best 5K-5 mile races in the early fall after mixed-up but enjoyable summers of longer races with some speed and hill work thrown in.