As I train for a half marathon I have increased my study of training. The more I read the more I come to conclusion that training is training and winning is genitic.
Every philosophy has hardcore supporters and detractors and people winning using the philosphy. People when using tons of milage or minimal milage. They win with ton of intesity or little intesity. Ms. Wellington switches coaches and postions and still kick everyone’s ass. Thoughts?
I think it is a combination of genetic and luck.
Can everybody be Michael phelps? Tiger Wood? Chrissie Wellington? Michael Jordan? Ushain Bolt? Etc? of course not and the ONLY reasons are genetic and luck.
The same apply to the business world as well of course. Can everybody be Bill Gates?
Fred.
My question is can you put Chrissie on any coaches plan and still kick ass? I say yes. It seems like 95% of coaching is marketing and 5% is teaching.
In an interview a while back, Paul Yetter (former head coach at North Baltimore, and now head coach for Auburn University) said that he thought anyone could get to AA time standards given hard work and good coaching, but if you were going to go faster than that, you needed to have picked your parents wisely.
Pulling out the USS time charts, for 17-18 year olds, that gives you:
100 free
men- 59.19 LCM, 51.39 SCY
women- 1:05.59 LCM, 57.39 SCY
1500/1650
men- 18:13.29 LCM, 18:00.99 SCY
women- 19:26.39 LCM, 18:58.69 SCY
yes, all genes in the sense you can increase your vo2 max by 10-20 per cent, at a maximum. and vo2 max is quite a strong indicator of your potential running speed. no, not all genes in the sense you can increase your effectivity by an x amount, which in practice means that by training you can decrease the amount of oxygen you consume at a certain pace. think frank shorter had some 74 ml/kg when he won olympic gold and I know a now retired pro triathlete who finished fifth on Hawaii with a vo2 max of 69 ml/kg.
then again, I know athletes which are mediocre national level though they have vo2max of some 80 ml/kg. you may have heard of the studies which concluded that eastern african distance runner do not have superior vo2 max in comparison with white runners, they just have superior effectivity.
not ALL genetic
but lots
As I train for a half marathon I have increased my study of training. The more I read the more I come to conclusion that training is training and winning is genitic.
Every philosophy has hardcore supporters and detractors and people winning using the philosphy. People when using tons of milage or minimal milage. They win with ton of intesity or little intesity. Ms. Wellington switches coaches and postions and still kick everyone’s ass. Thoughts?
As I train for a half marathon I have increased my study of training. The more I read the more I come to conclusion that training is training and winning is genitic.
Every philosophy has hardcore supporters and detractors and people winning using the philosphy. People when using tons of milage or minimal milage. They win with ton of intesity or little intesity. Ms. Wellington switches coaches and postions and still kick everyone’s ass. Thoughts?
Anyone can and will improve with training. You are limited, however, on how much you can improve by your genetics. And, you really can’t know what that limit is until you test it.
So how much does training philosophy really matter? As long as someone is doing some distance work and some speed work does it really matter if it’s Jan Schmo Super Coach’s way? Is all the fighting over how to do it just for marketing purposes?
could matter a lot if speedwork injures you
in general I think the details are quite nebulous and difficult to figure out for yourself
but that there is one constant among everyone who gets fast
they train a lot, and they aren’t lazy about it. (no biking at 14mph all day please, no swimming 25 meters then resting for a minute please)
So how much does training philosophy really matter? As long as someone is doing some distance work and some speed work does it really matter if it’s Jan Schmo Super Coach’s way? Is all the fighting over how to do it just for marketing purposes?
Interesting. That sounds about right to me. Do you have a link to the full interview by any chance?
So how much does training philosophy really matter? As long as someone is doing some distance work and some speed work does it really matter if it’s Jan Schmo Super Coach’s way? Is all the fighting over how to do it just for marketing purposes?
I suspect it matters quite a bit. The problem is in “proving” it matters. And different genetic predispositions may respond better or worse to different training philosophies. Showing that kind of difference would be almost impossible. So, a lot of educated guess-work goes into this stuff.
Yes, but not for the reason most people think.
Most amateur athletes don’t get anywhere near to the point where genetics is their sole limiter. But most amateurs do get to the point where genetics combined with the amount of work they are willing to do is a limiter, eg, genetics does play a big role in how fast you can go on X amount of work where X is much less than the ideal amount of training.
So, in a perverse way, genetics is probably an even bigger determinative in the age group ranks than the “pros.” Once you get to the top athletes, all the bad genes have been weeded out and we are back to work and psychology as the determatives.
There are many who will give 100%, but few who have an equal 100% to give.
There are many who will give 100%, but few who have an equal 100% to give.
I would disagree. I think there are few willing to give 100%. 100% means no more to give.
A large percentage of performance is getting out the door and doing a given sport four times a week every week. Schedules, a hired coach, feedback, powermeters, all of it has a lot to do with helping you get out the door.
No, it really isn’t.
The question you pose speaks to our collective yet flawed beliefs about genetics themselves. Genetics are not carved in stone, unalterable and all-powerful. Epigenetics exists. Literally, “above your genes”. Certain genes will express differently at different times though the underlying DNA remains the same. Mechanisms exist in which even the underlying DNA does not remain the same.
We mostly believe, or at least pay lip service to, the idea that thoughts have power. We visualize races, control our thoughts, repeat mantras, etc. And then we draw a line between believing that our minds can exert a subtl influence and believing that our thoughts possess any form of real control. Real control we relegate to the microscopic and barely comprehensible world of the gene. That way we can feel better about our performances, or lack of.
Most say our performances are bound by our gentics and we can improve, by training the mind and body, to perform very close to our genetic limits. I say, and always have, that our performances are bound by nothing, except our ability to imagine and believe in ourselves. Science is beginning to see things this way as well. Your mind controls everything. It is the most powerful creative force in the universe. It doesn’t control everything except your DNA. DNA falls right into the category of everything.
Think outside the double helix.
Dave, you have made a remarkable claim
that our mind can control our DNA
what evidence do you have that this is actually possible? and I mean, not in some sense that you can stress yourself out enough to damage some DNA and get cancer
but, directed, postive change of your DNA throughout every cell in your body?
do you mean this philosophically, in that one day we can develop medical treatments to do this, or do you think, I today, can do this via meditation?
what are you saying?
No, it really isn’t.
The question you pose speaks to our collective yet flawed beliefs about genetics themselves. Genetics are not carved in stone, unalterable and all-powerful. Epigenetics exists. Literally, “above your genes”. Certain genes will express differently at different times though the underlying DNA remains the same. Mechanisms exist in which even the underlying DNA does not remain the same.
We mostly believe, or at least pay lip service to, the idea that thoughts have power. We visualize races, control our thoughts, repeat mantras, etc. And then we draw a line between believing that our minds can exert a subtl influence and believing that our thoughts possess any form of real control. Real control we relegate to the microscopic and barely comprehensible world of the gene. That way we can feel better about our performances, or lack of.
Most say our performances are bound by our gentics and we can improve, by training the mind and body, to perform very close to our genetic limits. I say, and always have, that our performances are bound by nothing, except our ability to imagine and believe in ourselves. Science is beginning to see things this way as well. Your mind controls everything. It is the most powerful creative force in the universe. It doesn’t control everything except your DNA. DNA falls right into the category of everything.
Think outside the double helix.
He is saying we can use our minds to get our genes to express differently. For example, you have a ford pinto and a ford mustang in the driveway and everyday you drive the pinto because you don’t think you can handle the mustang. Well, if you teach your mind to believe in yourself and you believe you can handle the mustang then you will be faster. You had both right in front of you the whole time but you were just expressing the slower version until you used your mind to change which expression you used. That is how I took it anyway.
When I coached high school I came to the conclusion that I could help an athlete reach a certain point. I also noticed that the genetically gifted athletes could go much farther up the ladder. I still believe this.
that is just saying that practice makes you better at stuff, and often better than you think is possible.
there are still going to be genetic limits, which will be different for different people
even if we can’t ever be sure what those limits are.
He is saying we can use our minds to get our genes to express differently. For example, you have a ford pinto and a ford mustang in the driveway and everyday you drive the pinto because you don’t think you can handle the mustang. Well, if you teach your mind to believe in yourself and you believe you can handle the mustang then you will be faster. You had both right in front of you the whole time but you were just expressing the slower version until you used your mind to change which expression you used. That is how I took it anyway.