The New York Times article titled “The Latest in Fitness: Millions for Charity” is about how great programs like tnt and others. To be “fair and balanced” NY Times quotes Doug Stern with an the opposing view point.
But not everyone thinks charity endurance events are the best way for out-of-shape do-gooders to give back. “Why not train because you want to train and write a check because you want to write a check?” said Doug Stern, a trainer who runs a swimming and deep-water running clinic in Manhattan.
“It’s too much, too fast for a novice athlete,” said Mr. Stern, who added that the 20 weeks that many charity training programs last isn’t enough to build the cardiovascular capacity and muscle tone required to finish an endurance race without injury.
“People feel beholden to the pledges they’ve received,” he said. “They push themselves over the finish line, and a lot of them end up injured and in the pool with me.”
Why doesn’t he think 20 weeks is enough time to train for a 1st time tri? I guess if you are massivley overweight or something but, jeez, I had pretty close to zero level of fitness and comfortably fnished a sprint tri after 10 weeks of fairly mild training. Two guys I know did the same but for an olympic. I was more conservative.
I agree with Doug. TnT seems to just send people out there to suffer. Just as long as you meet your fund raising goal everything is ok. You'll be ready for London Marathon, Dublin, St Anthony's, Wildflower, Big Sur or what ever race you choose. It doesn't seem to take the time to build people into athletes. For most of us, this is a life long pursuit and I don't think that TnT tries for that. They'll get you to your big race, just make sure you reach your quota.
I am glad Doug was able to expess his views in such a respectful manner. He is a better man than me.
My quote would have been,
“TNT sucks, it just seems like a bunch of people getting together to get a free vacation during which they do a race. Unfortunately for the rest of us they have to race in the same races that we do. I wonder how many of these newly made endurance athletes actually continue to do anything to keep themselves in good shape after the race. Also how many of them continue to raise money for the charity once they got their free ride to the destination race they chose.”
It is a lot more fun to bash TNT than argue with each other about who should be able to kill each other in the London Bombing thread.
It doesn’t seem to take the time to build people into athletes. For most of us, this is a life long pursuit and I don’t think that TnT tries for that. They’ll get you to your big race, just make sure you reach your quota.
That is actually one of the core points of the article. A lot of people that participate in these organizations are driven by fund raising and not fitness or athleticism.
To quote one person in the article who has trained five months for NY City Tri
“ I am not an athlete”
“I don’t feel at all motivated by the competition itself."
It’s all great to raise money but why be a out-of-shape do-gooder, which, at the end of the day, is what you will be if you train for five months then stop. Give if you want to give, train for the sake of training.
I wonder how many of these newly made endurance athletes actually continue to do anything to keep themselves in good shape after the race.
I’m one person that did my first triathlon at a TNT event and I now am working towards an HIM at the end of this year and an IM in 2006. From my TNT team, at least half of the people have plans of continuing doing triathlons for the near future. Of course, I live in the Triathlon Capital of the Universe so things may be different here.
Harum for me… Another TNT thread. For the record, here’s my take on TNT:
Cons: The programs vary significantly from region to region, chapter to chapter. The primary motive of the program is fund raising (as opposed to developing athletes). The focus of the program is on entry level athletes, and I feel a drive to bring in more experieinced athletes would benefit the mix of participants. There is almost never enough coaching staff. While I understand purple is the color of the Leukimia and Lymphoma Society, their logos, graphics, uniforms and image is in sad and urgent need of a complete re-work. An image overhaul would enliven the current crowd, re-invent the concept and showcase the charity and cause with a new and vibrant feel. Sure it would cost money, and for charities that is always in short supply- but it would return itself significantly I believe as the “Purple Menace” is now as much a stigma as it is a badge of honor.
Pros: TNT is the first wide-scale, nationally (Internationally?) co-ordinated charity endurance training program. Whether you like the book or not- they wrote the book on charity endurance fund raising prgrams and continue to be the largest and most vigorous. TNT brings new athletes into the sport that sometimes stay in the sport. While the technical sophistication of the some of the coaching and training is a great opportunity for improvement, there is (at the very least, contingent on individual regional programs) a structured training environment provided to participants. The social aspect of TNT is attractive to many participants. Events benefit from TNT participation with increased numbers. TNT has taught athletes how to travel to events and race.
This is well said and not TNT bashing at all. I have a friend that just did her first marathon with TNT. It took her over five hours. It is now a month later, and she can barely walk let alone swim, run or bike. She may have to have surgery on her lower back/hip. She did a good thing to raise money for TNT. Was she ready athletically? I’d say ‘no’. Again, not bashing TNT… but endurance distances takes time and lots of training to build your body so it is ready for the demands placed upon it in a long endurance event. AND, everybody’s body reacts differently. One couch potato might be ready in 20 weeks…it may take another 20 months. I think the safe route to avoid injury is 20 months.
I’m on my fifth team-in-training event Sunday morning when I suit up for NYC. As a Leukemia survivor, I can’t even begin to be remotely objective about the program. Needless to say, I think it is a wonderful program. As Tom rightly points out, the program does vary from chapter-to-chapter so I can only speak to NYC. But I will point out that the NYC chapter provides, in my opinion, a template - that if followed, allows most participants to get through the event. And while you all can no choose to believe it, the TNT staffers care about a tremendous amount more than just getting the dontations and the athletes care about a lot more than just getting a “free vacation” and doing a race. I’ve been involved with the program for 4 years and have met through the program some of the most wonderful people I have ever known.
Yes, not all the participants are fast. But despite the assertions to the contrary, there hearts are in the right place. I have to pass them to, but I haven’t had an experience where anyone got in my way to the point it affected my race.
It’s really easy to collectively bash this program, disrespect the participants and question there motives, but I’ll sit here and defend it until I can’t type anymore.
Because some kid who isn’t born yet but will be soon, isn’t going to die because of what TNT is doing this year and despite what all of you want to believe, it’s not making that kind of a difference in your lives.
I’m a pretty much live and let live person, but my fundamental problem with TNT is that I’d be asking people to pay my way to events when I could do them myself…
I support several charities (BOD, etc.), but I’d never be able to sign up for a TNT event and raise $$$ knowing that they were paying me to go to Alaska for a marathon, or Florida for a triathlon. That doesn’t pass my personal smell test.
Injuries? No doubt. That is a given.
ETA: I’d have a lot more respect for the outfit if they required participants to pay for their own room and travel. I’d give a whole hell of a lot more in that case.
I’m a pretty much live and let live person, but my fundamental problem with TNT is that I’d be asking people to pay my way to events when I could do them myself…
If you think that people do TNT to have their fees paid for events than you are WAAAAAAY missing the point. I’m a competitive age grouper, a TNT alumnus, and a survivor of Hodgkins Lymphoma. It may not be for you but unless you’ve participated and have experienced the different motivations for people to do this program I would hold off on judgement. No organization is perfect, but TNT does a lot more good than harm. Not just for blood disease research but for running, biking, and triathlon too.
TNT maintains at least a 75% return on the dollars raised. Meaning that 75% of all $$$ raised goes directly to patient services, research, and the rest of the Society’s mission. That’s 75% after the fees, coaches, staff, and these “vacation perks” are paid for.
The 75%+ ratio is more than competitive and should pass anyone’s smell test.
I support TNT and think their mission is really great. There have been stories of “coaches” who have pressured athletes to meet a quota of $$$ and have given shorter shrift to training in meetings/letters/etc. Of course, you only hear the “bad” stories and managing a large group of athletes with a variety of athletic backgrounds is certainly challenging. But it is these stories that people remember and associate with TNT. There is a big group that does a TNT Century every year that trains near me. They are always polite and friendly and move to the right when I want to pass their paceline. There is certainly a stigma in some athlete minds regarding TNT, but as long as it continues to work, I think they should stick to what they’ve done. There are bad coaches that tell people they can be ready for IM races in 20 weeks out there, you just have to hope that TNT does a good job screening. I also think that coaches should have ZERO COMMENTARY REGARDING FUNDRAISING. Let the coaches coach and the administrators worry about the other stuff. That’d sit better with me.
Not to be picky, but in today’s acronym plagued world, why does TNT use that as an acronym, since really Team In Training is another acronym. I’m sure that Triathlon International Team (Australia), which uses the real acronym, wouldn’t mind sharing it with it’s much larger friend. I mean, if your acronym spells something politically incorrect, change it!
To me, this is a much more important issue than having masses of the participants at races.
They would gain much more acceptance if they only stood for what they stand for.
You’re right about this. That was such an amateurish, short-sighted ovesight and so easily corrected early on. now it would cost thousands and thousands of dollars to re-name the program to something more digestible.
Maybe it is just you and I, but don’t you think somebody would have thought of that early on? I mean, come on, the name of the organization actually abbreviated winds up being a generally objectionable sexual slang term. That seems pretty easy to avoid.
I mean, there is a reason why the Christian Athlete’s organization, a fine organization, is called “Athletes in Action” (A.I.A.) instead of Christian United National Team, which would result in an equally indelicate and offensive acronym.
TNT maintains at least a 75% return on the dollars raised. Meaning that 75% of all $$$ raised goes directly to patient services, research, and the rest of the Society’s mission. That’s 75% after the fees, coaches, staff, and these “vacation perks” are paid for.
The 75%+ ratio is more than competitive and should pass anyone’s smell test.
Just wondering where those figures come from, and “the rest of the Society’s mission” is a pretty big “and”. Does that include adminstrative overhead and all salaries? Maybe you are saying that the TNT program has that level of efficiency, but not that the Society itself does.
The Society, I believe, actually does better than 75%. The 75% is simply for the Team in Training program. The information comes from the annual reports the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society is required to file as part of its non-profit status.
Don’t start with the Society’s “mission” you’re going into a debate that you are clearly uninformed for. Check out http://www.leukemia-lymphoma.org/hm_lls if you are really interested.
If you need to talk to survivors and families that have benefited from the Society’s “mission”, let me know. I can arrange that.
DWM said: Don’t start with the Society’s “mission” you’re going into a debate that you are clearly uninformed for. Check out http://www.leukemia-lymphoma.org/hm_lls if you are really interested.
All Monk did was ask a question. And a valid one at that. He did not start a debate or doubt the oraganization. In turn, you answered it and gave him a reference. I see no harm in what he did. Considering that in an earlier post you admitted your inablility to be objective, perhaps you shouldn’t accuse him of “starting a debate” or call him “uninformed” for asking a question.
Personally, I think what TNT is doing is great. Several of their coaches are good friends of mine, and I respect their ability. Additionally, I have several friends who have done the program. To point out the obvious - that some of the participants of some of the programs need to learn basic etiquette or are a little over their heads - should not be perceived as condemnation of the program.
I come in contact most often with people who are raising money for charity when they are injured.
Coaches refer these injured athletes to my deepwater running class as a way of rehabing from overuse injuries. Some come to me in a panic because they have difficulty swimming the distance needed to finish a race.
I rarely come across those who have successfully completed their training programs so my perception is sKewed.
If these programs peek a non-athlete’s interest and spurs them on to continue I applaud them.
I’m not “anti-” TIT, I was just asking. So, in other words, you have no actual information. Your point is that “it is a good cause, so no one should question it”. All I did was ask if you had any authority for your claim, which you don’t. No big deal.