how come I am agreeing with you all of a sudden?

The gym where I started boxing many years ago had a recent world champ coaching. He was still a very competitive fighter. He was a natural athlete - light, very strong for his size, super fast, really talented guy. Watching this guy scrap was amazing - I have never in person seen anyone move as fast as him, and when you sparred him the little f**** would always pepper you with shots you just didn'ty see. He was quite brilliant, and also a complete asshole, and I mean that in every sense of the word.

Anyway, the fighters he produced were just terrible. He treated them all as if they had his gifts. So there was no defence, he never taught them footwork, he never developed a fight plan around that boxer's unique talents, for the simple reason that he knew one way to fight, which was the way he fought. As a result his coaching manual had one page.

In a way this was good for me and my coaching partner because guys would go and train with the ex world champ, they would get a series of hidings and then some of them (ok the ones we thought might make fighters) would come to us, train about six months...and start winning.

So I completely agree. Often successful athletes know one way to win - their way. They have never had to think too much about how there might be other paths to a particular goal.

BTW...I really do admire your posts.

---

kiwipat

per ardua ad astra

Dear Paulo, thank you for taking the time to look over my post to Colin. My editor appears to be functioning prefectly in what is known as a sub plot. Your sincere concern for my welfare is touching, I must apologise for contributing to the thread as I didn't realise that it was an invitation only thread.

---

"How bad can it be?" - SimpleS

Great Post , but I have the exception.

Johann Bruneyll

He was pretty good pro in his day.

not a coach....director sportif.

Kurt

---

http://www.pbmcoaching.com
USA Triathlon Level 3 Elite Coach
USA Cycling Level 1 Elite Coach

Kurt, maybe Ronnie is coached by Johann.

---

"How bad can it be?" - SimpleS

I think the "been there, done that" experience is something that is very valuable in a coach. If Paulo's suggestion that the competitive athlete would be too involved in their own training then I would guess the best coach to look for would be someone who has retired from competition and also been a competitive athlete.

yea, maybe. I bet he has a lot of free time.

Kurt

---

http://www.pbmcoaching.com
USA Triathlon Level 3 Elite Coach
USA Cycling Level 1 Elite Coach

The two best coaches I have ever had:

Water Polo (Steve Heston: One of the best players in the US before he eventually went on to coach the USA Olympic Team)

Swimming (Tracey McFarlane-Mirande: Olympic silver medalist and most technique oriented swim coach I have ever seen)

I assume as the sport of Triathlon ages we will see more of the greats giving back to the sport.

Jim

>>I assume as the sport of Triathlon ages we will see more of the greats giving back to the sport. <<

We already have.

Paulo's becoming the "I think I'm intellectual" swimfan.

clm

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

This is really interesting and rings true in many sports I have played as well. When I think back to the best and most talented coaches I had in hockey, they all had one thing in common. They were students of the game. They read everything, watched everything and studied everything hockey all the time. Whereas the dudes who were ex-NHLers or ex Junior league players never really studied the game as much as they rested on what talent they had to get them by as coaches.
Some of the best coaches are the ones who study all aspects of the game, not the ones who were great at the game themselves.

LOL.

---

"How bad can it be?" - SimpleS

hehe.

I agree with you. I don't know what a "Truly Great" coach is, but I would have to think that gordo, Mark Allen, et al are at least near the top.

Just because you were/are good, doesn't mean you can't be a student of the game and be in tune with your athletes. Indeed, I think if anything that those who speak in absolutes is more indicative of someone that might have trouble tuning in to their athletes.

LMAO

Unfortunately I had to live through this scenario with my last coach, who is a very gifted elite athlete. But who doesn't believe in testing, a heart rate monitor or anything but his own racing strategy, "go out as fast and hard as you can and pray your body holds on." He doesn't believe in swims over 1800-2000 since he doesn't like to swim and thinks anything over that is a waste of time.

I have 4 bad HIMs to prove that his theory works great on an elite athlete but not one like me who is not elite. I actually did better when I trained myself.

Further still, he has a cookie cutter approach that assumes that all of his adult athletes are time challenged. So one of my best assets - which is time since I work for myself - was not used.

But I know this is not going to be the case anymore!! ;-)

I think there are people who understand that it's the system that is helping them deliver the personal results and those that think it is merely there innate talent. People who understand the former -- Mark Scott, Dave Allen, Mitch Gold, Rich Strauss, Scott Jones, etc. -- make very good coaches in my opinion. There are too many examples that go against your assumed convention.

I find your post very Dev like. You seem to posting because you think people want to hear what you have to say, not that which is truly insightful. Maybe you guys are the same person.

WHen this sport started in the late 70's, virtually all of us were self coached, and remained so throughout our careers. We made a lot of mistakes, it was basically trial and error. Start with 150 miles a week cycling, and after 3 or 4 years we were doing 300 to 500. SOme guys would do weeks of 600(mostly Germans), so where was the breaking point, and would we be better served to go faster, for a shorter period?? Most of us answered those questions for ourselves in all 3 diciplines and how to balance them, and I got to witness the answes that others figured out also. Lots of different answers, so any cookie cutter approach today is not worthy as great coaching. I've had swimming and running coaches, and in my case, they were former great athletes. They were able to communicate to me the nuances that make average good athletes, into great athletes. That is what I needed, but if I were a BOP'er starting out, then I would need a lot less, and probably for several years, maybe forever, depending on my goals.

I once spent some time in Dave Scott's program in Boulder in the early 90's, just as a drop in for workouts. I found his program to be very informative, and his athletes all seemed to like him and did well in his programs. I can't say what is happening now with him, but I assume he does allright, and apparently coaches quite a few people. I heard a lot good things about Gordo and his approach, somewhat like Molinas, but there again, I have no direct expirence with those two as coaches. Tim SHeeper up in Nor Cal. has a great program, coaching 100's of athletes, and he continues to race pro at 43 years old. Mike McMahon is anotrher guy that has had great sucess with pros, not sure about his AG'ers, also a former and current great athlete. There are coaches that throw a lot of the "More is More" at a whole group, and wait for the few to surface that can handle it. THe Germans and CHinese were famous for that stragedy. It obviously worked for some, and they would go on to greatness, but the climb to the top was littered with 100's of broken bodies, many of which could have also been great under a different approach. And most of those programs are run by regular coaches, and not former greats of the sports.

I guess my point here is that I agree with Paulo, except that I take his arguement a bit further and say that regular coaches also make bad coaches. I see them all the time, and USAT level 1 and 2 certificates mean almost nothing. Just that you have spent some money and time, and can go to class for a few days. Most good coaches that I know now, only get the certs to fill out their resume for the average uninformed potential client. It's like the old merit badge system, the guy with the most, must be the best, it's just business. IF that is all you have, which many do, then you have almost no background to be coaching triathletes. The fact that someone has done the sport for a very long time, and been sucessfull, is worth a level 10 credential. Now how you use and impart that information is the key. DO you hold to your standard for every athlete like Paulo suggests?? THen you waste your knowledge, and only benifit those that are exactly like you were. And yes, there are some of these out there. Do you use that knowledge, and all the information you learned from your peers, to tailor programs for individuals, that fit more closley with others that were similar to your clients? THen you are using your vast and varied potential as a coach, and probably doing a great job. And there are many of these coaches out there also.

I don't think that having been a great athlete, or not, has much to do with how well one will coach a variety of athletes. There is a whole list of positive attributes that go into it, communicating well, patience, observational prowess, willingness to continue the learning process, admitting when you are wrong, and on and on. I do however think that given all things equal, I would want the person that had the athletic background. You can teach a lot of things, but some things are best learned by personal expirence.......

I was going to PM you with a response to this but noticed you did not allow the receipt of PM's under your username.

I read your thread with interest. Well said. I agree with you on this.

What is your read on the influx of people calling themselves coaches, particularly in the U.S.?

While you include some of this information in your original thread, what qualifications do you think a coach needs to be qualified and competent?

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Having read this whole thread with interest, I think that ST misses a point that seems to be overlooked a lot on this forum. "Everyone is Unique" while I tend to agree with Paulo that most really competitive athletes make poor coaches in any sport (Martial Arts is a great example) There is always an exception. From what I understand Gordo is both a great athlete and a fine coach. But it has more to do with the type of person he is overall than anything else. He is also a good business man, if my recollection of his bio is correct. He is one of those individuals who is good at what they are doing or he doesn't bother to do it.

Some people make great athletes, some people make great coaches, a few have the ability to do both. The really good ones know the difference. The ones that don't know the difference are the really bad coaches. In my experience in teaching Martial Arts it soon became apparent to me that I would be a rotten competitor. What a blow to my ego that was. I soon discovered I had a knack for teaching it, and while it wasn't the thrill competing would have been it was nice to take a group of student to a tournament and watch them clean up. I spent 8 years learning to be a good instructor, I could have spent 8 years learning to be a bad competitor, but I would probably have quit the sport in dispair before then.

The most important thing I learned in teaching was to treat the students/athletes as individual and tailor what i taught and how I taught to the individual. Everbody is Unique, I used to teach everything three different ways, because people have different ways of absorbing data and often time will not get it the first time, but if you change the message it makes sense.

So while it is unfair to say that all great athletes make lousy coaches, it might do you good to consider how much time this great athlete has spent learning to coach and how much time he spent learning to be a great athlete. Going back to Gordo, he spent time learning why things worked while becoming a great athlete and I think that is the difference.

---

Jim

**Note above poster works for a retailer selling bikes and related gear*

I definitely see swimfan's influence in your post. But, as usual, I LOVE your posts.

PS-No, I'm not talking about him, I happen to like him. So stop being defensive ;-)

Dear Sir,

Congratulations, you have invested several paragraphs in defense of your ego and identity as a coach who was not a great athlete.

Because there are anecdotal examples of coaches who are successful despite not having been great athletes, you have created agreement on our little forum which, I hope, will temporarily help you self-soothe the deep lingering self-doubt you possess when in the presence of other coaches who are/were great athletes.

Sir, I recommend you end the self doubt, you take your new found sense of security and become a "guidance counselor" of goodness and positive reinforcement to those you previously disparaged, held in contempt, or treated with indifference.

You sir are evolving! Keep it subtle and we won't question why. :)

Odd for me to come to the defense of one of Paulo's arguments as he neither needs help defending his perspective nor woud he do the same on my regard, but I'm missing the purpose of your comments.

I agree that being a good athlete does not pre-dispose a person to being a good coach.

What I would like to know is, what makes a good coach? What qualifications and personal qualities go into making someone a credible coach?

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Monty,

I think you made a good summary of the history of triathlon coaching in the US and the people involved. Even though I can think of some names, they are definitely different from the names you will think off, and other people will think of other names. Julian thinks I meant Mark Allen, Cathy thinks I meant Molina and you mentioned Dave Scott is doing ok. I wouldn't even DARE to criticize those three, out of respect for all they've done for the sport.

This discussion is not meant to be bashing the great athletes that are indeed great coaches, because there are cases of that in every sport. I thought I would express my opinion in a topic that is dear to me, triathlon coaching. I would like to end by saying that this is not about me. I'm not in the run for being a "great coach" for several reasons, the biggest one that I only have 8 years of experience and only coached around 60 athletes in my short career. I am often envious of those that have been around for longer and that know so much more just because they've been around for longer... and knew what to do with all that information.

Great discussion. Great athletes certainly do not automatically make great coaches; however, there are many who have been - and are - successful, and they do exactly what you warn against: they essentially transcend what worked for them to their athletes, with a nice touch of fine tuning. Siri Lindley is the best example of this (as well as other disciples of Brett Sutton). She absolutely coaches her athletes in her mold and with her distinct training techniques and workouts ... and has had terrific success with many (most notably, Lauren Groves this year - 4th at ITU World Champs); however, those who do not fit or adhere to her "mold" are not nearly as successful, and ultimately leave the fold. Lesson: find what works for you as an individual and with a coach that you fully and implicitly trust and respect.

I guess the corollary to this would be the old saying "those who can, do....those who can't, teach..."

But the reality is looking at the big picture---what will work for a variety of athletes with their own idiosyncracies and limitations, both physiological and time-committment wise as opposed to what works, or worked, for them as an athlete.

Very good thoughts.

And yes, I love your posts too.

;-)