Brian Sell-Talent or Hard work?

I'm not that good. Yet. I did plyo work 6 times a week for 9 years during my trampoline training. If every 6 year old was forced to do this then I'm sure their bodies would be as strong and as adaptable as mine. Some people aren't just born strong, but they are made strong. And I completely agree with the "born with 60% ft die with 60% ft muscles" thing. And what I was saying was that if you aren't amazing at 5k, that doesn't mean you aren't as talented as the rest of the 5ker's, you just aren't running the right race.

I understand all of your viewpoints, I really do, but I just can't concede to the fact that some people are born better than others. Call me an optimist, but I just don't think it is right to sell someoene short right off of the bat.

BagoXC25 wrote:I'm not that good. Yet. I did plyo work 6 times a week for 9 years during my trampoline training. If every 6 year old was forced to do this then I'm sure their bodies would be as strong and as adaptable as mine. Some people aren't just born strong, but they are made strong. And I completely agree with the "born with 60% ft die with 60% ft muscles" thing. And what I was saying was that if you aren't amazing at 5k, that doesn't mean you aren't as talented as the rest of the 5ker's, you just aren't running the right race.

I understand all of your viewpoints, I really do, but I just can't concede to the fact that some people are born better than others. Call me an optimist, but I just don't think it is right to sell someoene short right off of the bat.

but that's how it goes bud. just wait till ryan and sara hall have a baby and you'll see.

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

He also blood doped.

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

you forgot to mention the blood doping.

FK wrote:

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

He also blood doped.

i swear that we are freakin related.

AudienceOfOne wrote:

FK wrote:

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

He also blood doped.

i swear that we are freakin related.

Lol

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

both lydiard and you are disregarding the lactate threshold or jack daniels training principle #7 of diminishing return which I will explain in brief:

1) Lactate Threshold: Arguably the only way to get better at distance running, rasing the level of effort it takes to elicit the lactate threshold is almost an exact measurement of athletic capability for running. The down side, "junk miles, jogging, and lsd will NOT raise your lactate threshold. only increase your endurance and burn fat. Note that by endurance I do not mean speed endurance, I mean endurance on long runs, the ability to cover greater mileage without rest. Seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, this endurance is hardly ever called upon and therefore not neccesarily needed to a great extent. So in result, doing lots of mileage will NOT make you faster at a 5k. For marathoning and ultra marathoning, its a different story.

TL;Dr version: Lactate threshold cannot be increased by LSD, Lactate threshold needs to be increased to go faster, therefore, running high mileage will not make you faster in a 5k. Lsd only builds endurance, and seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, you do not need that much endurance.

2) Diminishing return, Daniels training principle #7
Say you start running at 40mpw, and you get 20% better.
this does not mean running 80mpw will make you 40% better.

The higher the mileage, the less improvement from that mileage is seen.

40 mpw= improved 20%
80 mpw= improved 10%
90 mpw= 5%
110 mpw= 2%

total percentage of improvement= 37%
Also, the rate of setbacks (injuries and lack of motivation) increases DRAMATICALLY with increase in mileage:

40mpw= 10% chance of setbacks
80mpw= 50% chance of setbacks
90 mpw= 70% chance of setbacks
110 mpw= 85% chance of setbacks.


Instead of just STATING running lots of mileage is good and quoting an outdated running coach, why dont you EXPLAIN to me why running high mileage improves performance?

^^Absolutely agree with that.

He's got some talent, but I'll attribute it to a hell of a lot more hard work. Brian Sell comes from a small school near mine that gets almost no attention towards track and field, and doesn't have the same facilities or coaching as other high teir programs. He worked his ass off those four years and decided he wanted to continue his hardwork and it really paid off.

Trackaholic wrote:

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

both lydiard and you are disregarding the lactate threshold or jack daniels training principle #7 of diminishing return which I will explain in brief:

1) Lactate Threshold: Arguably the only way to get better at distance running, rasing the level of effort it takes to elicit the lactate threshold is almost an exact measurement of athletic capability for running. The down side, "junk miles, jogging, and lsd will NOT raise your lactate threshold. only increase your endurance and burn fat. Note that by endurance I do not mean speed endurance, I mean endurance on long runs, the ability to cover greater mileage without rest. Seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, this endurance is hardly ever called upon and therefore not neccesarily needed to a great extent. So in result, doing lots of mileage will NOT make you faster at a 5k. For marathoning and ultra marathoning, its a different story.

TL;Dr version: Lactate threshold cannot be increased by LSD, Lactate threshold needs to be increased to go faster, therefore, running high mileage will not make you faster in a 5k. Lsd only builds endurance, and seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, you do not need that much endurance.

2) Diminishing return, Daniels training principle #7
Say you start running at 40mpw, and you get 20% better.
this does not mean running 80mpw will make you 40% better.

The higher the mileage, the less improvement from that mileage is seen.

40 mpw= improved 20%
80 mpw= improved 10%
90 mpw= 5%
110 mpw= 2%

total percentage of improvement= 37%
Also, the rate of setbacks (injuries and lack of motivation) increases DRAMATICALLY with increase in mileage:

40mpw= 10% chance of setbacks
80mpw= 50% chance of setbacks
90 mpw= 70% chance of setbacks
110 mpw= 85% chance of setbacks.


Instead of just STATING running lots of mileage is good and quoting an outdated running coach, why dont you EXPLAIN to me why running high mileage improves performance?

if it werent for all your advice i wouldve quit running a long time ago.

so wait....my goal is to get into the 17s this year..thats not off of talent guys. my very first mile was in sixth grade off no training and i got a dinky 7.34. you call that talent? i believe that putting myself in the 17s in 5k in 8th grade would very much set me up for a good elite running career and now you guys are saying that it wont? german ran a much faster one at my age but has he improved much? hard work > talent.

P2 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

both lydiard and you are disregarding the lactate threshold or jack daniels training principle #7 of diminishing return which I will explain in brief:

1) Lactate Threshold: Arguably the only way to get better at distance running, rasing the level of effort it takes to elicit the lactate threshold is almost an exact measurement of athletic capability for running. The down side, "junk miles, jogging, and lsd will NOT raise your lactate threshold. only increase your endurance and burn fat. Note that by endurance I do not mean speed endurance, I mean endurance on long runs, the ability to cover greater mileage without rest. Seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, this endurance is hardly ever called upon and therefore not neccesarily needed to a great extent. So in result, doing lots of mileage will NOT make you faster at a 5k. For marathoning and ultra marathoning, its a different story.

TL;Dr version: Lactate threshold cannot be increased by LSD, Lactate threshold needs to be increased to go faster, therefore, running high mileage will not make you faster in a 5k. Lsd only builds endurance, and seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, you do not need that much endurance.

2) Diminishing return, Daniels training principle #7
Say you start running at 40mpw, and you get 20% better.
this does not mean running 80mpw will make you 40% better.

The higher the mileage, the less improvement from that mileage is seen.

40 mpw= improved 20%
80 mpw= improved 10%
90 mpw= 5%
110 mpw= 2%

total percentage of improvement= 37%
Also, the rate of setbacks (injuries and lack of motivation) increases DRAMATICALLY with increase in mileage:

40mpw= 10% chance of setbacks
80mpw= 50% chance of setbacks
90 mpw= 70% chance of setbacks
110 mpw= 85% chance of setbacks.


Instead of just STATING running lots of mileage is good and quoting an outdated running coach, why dont you EXPLAIN to me why running high mileage improves performance?

if it werent for all your advice i wouldve quit running a long time ago.

uhhhh, why? i don't see how tracko's advice has a difference in if you quit or not...

P2 wrote:so wait....my goal is to get into the 17s this year..thats not off of talent guys. my very first mile was in sixth grade off no training and i got a dinky 7.34. you call that talent? i believe that putting myself in the 17s in 5k in 8th grade would very much set me up for a good elite running career and now you guys are saying that it wont? german ran a much faster one at my age but has he improved much? hard work > talent.

yes i do call it talent. 7:34 in 6th grade off of no training? pretty decent.

AudienceOfOne wrote:

P2 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

runner_dude wrote:

RUNxxWILD07 wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

not neccesarily, just because you run high mileage doesnt make you a good runner. I speak to a college XC runner alot and he says there are people running 120+ mpw and getting their asses kicked by guys running 60-70 range.

high mileage does not undisputably equal fast times. trust me.

+3413421541
i think it can equal fast times. if you are doing the miles right. if you are just doing crap miles to raise your mileage, then no, prolly wont help.

EVERY mile you do as long as you're not walking will help you. Granted, some miles will help more than others, but in the end they all help. Lydiard advocated running 100+mpw, IN ADDITION to 'jogging' as much as possible. Lassie Viren, a man who took Lydiards ideas to the extreme won 4 gold medals, and is the only person to win the 5000m gold 2 olympic games in a row.

both lydiard and you are disregarding the lactate threshold or jack daniels training principle #7 of diminishing return which I will explain in brief:

1) Lactate Threshold: Arguably the only way to get better at distance running, rasing the level of effort it takes to elicit the lactate threshold is almost an exact measurement of athletic capability for running. The down side, "junk miles, jogging, and lsd will NOT raise your lactate threshold. only increase your endurance and burn fat. Note that by endurance I do not mean speed endurance, I mean endurance on long runs, the ability to cover greater mileage without rest. Seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, this endurance is hardly ever called upon and therefore not neccesarily needed to a great extent. So in result, doing lots of mileage will NOT make you faster at a 5k. For marathoning and ultra marathoning, its a different story.

TL;Dr version: Lactate threshold cannot be increased by LSD, Lactate threshold needs to be increased to go faster, therefore, running high mileage will not make you faster in a 5k. Lsd only builds endurance, and seeing as a 5k is only 3.1 miles, you do not need that much endurance.

2) Diminishing return, Daniels training principle #7
Say you start running at 40mpw, and you get 20% better.
this does not mean running 80mpw will make you 40% better.

The higher the mileage, the less improvement from that mileage is seen.

40 mpw= improved 20%
80 mpw= improved 10%
90 mpw= 5%
110 mpw= 2%

total percentage of improvement= 37%
Also, the rate of setbacks (injuries and lack of motivation) increases DRAMATICALLY with increase in mileage:

40mpw= 10% chance of setbacks
80mpw= 50% chance of setbacks
90 mpw= 70% chance of setbacks
110 mpw= 85% chance of setbacks.


Instead of just STATING running lots of mileage is good and quoting an outdated running coach, why dont you EXPLAIN to me why running high mileage improves performance?

if it werent for all your advice i wouldve quit running a long time ago.

uhhhh, why? i don't see how tracko's advice has a difference in if you quit or not...

when i hit plateus his advice helps me a lot. and plus i would be a lot worse without his info. im competitive so if i still sucked id have quitted by now.

AudienceOfOne wrote:

P2 wrote:so wait....my goal is to get into the 17s this year..thats not off of talent guys. my very first mile was in sixth grade off no training and i got a dinky 7.34. you call that talent? i believe that putting myself in the 17s in 5k in 8th grade would very much set me up for a good elite running career and now you guys are saying that it wont? german ran a much faster one at my age but has he improved much? hard work > talent.

yes i do call it talent. 7:34 in 6th grade off of no training? pretty decent.

thats completely awful?

P2 wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

P2 wrote:so wait....my goal is to get into the 17s this year..thats not off of talent guys. my very first mile was in sixth grade off no training and i got a dinky 7.34. you call that talent? i believe that putting myself in the 17s in 5k in 8th grade would very much set me up for a good elite running career and now you guys are saying that it wont? german ran a much faster one at my age but has he improved much? hard work > talent.

yes i do call it talent. 7:34 in 6th grade off of no training? pretty decent.

thats completely awful?

in 6th grade after no training? no. that's what most people would get. i love it how everybody acts like they have zero natural talent and everything they've ever accomplished is because of hard work.

in the immortal words of sPine, " saying that you got to where you are just because you work hard is just another form of self-gratification."

you're gonna be a good runner, but you still have talent.

I ran a 7:30 mile in 5th grade, off no training. Am I fast? Hell no.

T B K wrote:I ran a 7:30 mile in 5th grade, off no training. Am I fast? Hell no.

you're decent.

AudienceOfOne wrote:

T B K wrote:I ran a 7:30 mile in 5th grade, off no training. Am I fast? Hell no.

you're decent.

Not where I live.

T B K wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

T B K wrote:I ran a 7:30 mile in 5th grade, off no training. Am I fast? Hell no.

you're decent.

Not where I live.

for your age your decent.

AudienceOfOne wrote:

T B K wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

T B K wrote:I ran a 7:30 mile in 5th grade, off no training. Am I fast? Hell no.

you're decent.

Not where I live.

for your age your decent.

For me decent is bad. If you're not the greatest, then you are decent. If you are decent you are bad. In my mind at least.

T B K wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

T B K wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

T B K wrote:I ran a 7:30 mile in 5th grade, off no training. Am I fast? Hell no.

you're decent.

Not where I live.

for your age your decent.

For me decent is bad. If you're not the greatest, then you are decent. If you are decent you are bad. In my mind at least.

lol. dude quit acting like your elitist or something.

I do not believe that people are born leaps and bounds better then other people.
I believe that becoming good is:
"95% training and hard work"
5% genetics

Just because you have genetics doesn't mean you are good. It means that you have more potential to be good, but you have to put the work in too.

Just Because wrote:I do not believe that people are born leaps and bounds better then other people.
I believe that becoming good is:
"95% training and hard work"
5% genetics

Just because you have genetics doesn't mean you are good. It means that you have more potential to be good, but you have to put the work in too.

you actually believe that a guy like el g got to where he was because of only 5% genetics?