It's July, and once again I have become addicted to watching coverage of the Tour de France on TV. After resisting for a few weeks, I've been glued to the TV set for the final week in the Alps, and what's worse, I've started to think and talk in the foreign language of professional cycling. If I'm out on a run with a group and someone goes ahead, they've "launched an attack on the peleton," and when someone charges up a hill, they're looking for points for "King of the Mountains." My conversation is peppered with phrases like "setting the tempo," "controlling the breakaway," and "defending the maillot jaune."
Sad as this condition may seem -- especially so since I have no cycling experience whatsoever -- it usually passes within a few weeks of the riders taking their victory laps on the Champs Élysées. However, there is one lasting effect of watching so many hours of this stuff, and that is a renewed appreciation of the importance -- and dangers -- of riding, or running, with the pack.
I thought about this again last night, setting off from Cold Springs with about twenty-five other runners and heading up Commonwealth Ave. towards the Chestnut Hill Reservoir. I had planned to run easily, but that plan was almost immediately out the window as I was swept along by a large pack that moved at a steady but rapid tempo. I felt like I had about as much control over my own pace as a leaf that falls into the stream.
It was not unpleasant to be running too fast; actually, it was intoxicating. In fact, it took quite a bit of willpower to follow my original plan of turning at BC, and heading back towards Cold Spring on a pre-arranged shorter loop. there were five of us who turned at that point, and immediately after leaving the larger pack, I suddenly felt the fatigue that had been building up through the early fast miles.
This kind of experience shows the positive aspects of running with a group, and also its perils. In a group, most of us find the collective strength to work harder, and the psychological support to overcome the daily fatigue of training. But at the same time, running with a group can mean turning over responsibility to others for important decisions about training. If a coach is not monitoring the group, the pace and distance of the runs will tend to be determined by the group's strongest, or most excitable members. I wonder how many of us have found ourselves hammering away in practice day after day, even though our race performances suffer for it.
Ideally (and selfishly), the best situation is to have a group that always runs at the right pace: easy, when easy is called for, and fast when the pace needs to be challenging. Realistically, that never happens. On the other hand, by having different training partners for different occasions, you can accomplish the same goal. For example, I think everyone should have at least one training partner who runs so slowly that when you run with that person, you are guaranteed an easy day.
As I write this, the Tour riders are finishing up their final individual time trial. After nearly two weeks of being concerned about drafting and having teammates around for every emergency, it is fascinating to see how the riders cope with having to do all the work by themselves. But even on this day, they have the radios in their ears and they know exactly what the other riders are doing or have done. Even when they are on their own, they are in the midst of the group.
So, too, are the runners who come to Cold Springs. Even when they aren't actually running together, they form a kind of society that encourages its members in training and racing at a higher level.
Ultimately, no one runs alone. You just have to make sure you're in the right group.
7 comments:
Continuing our discussion from a previous blog, running easy is only called for if you are too tired or not motivated. Otherwise running fast is always called for, if you want to be good. Race performances won't suffer from hammering away in practice day after day---if you get enough rest before your race and if you are motivated to hammer away. Just my opinion.
Coach, I respect your opinion and I acknowledge that there are some athletes who reached the top by hammering away day after day.
But there are numerous counter-examples of athletes who only reached their potential when they learned how to build proper recovery into their training.
I think the need to hammer every day is often the result not of a training decision, but of personal insecurity and lack of confidence.
There are many ways to the top. All of them involve hard work. But they also require discipline to do the right work and the right recovery.
One of the more poignant quotes on the subject is this one: "...I thought that if 110 miles a week got me a 2:08 marathon, if I went to 130 I could run 2:07. That didn't happen. Sooner or later you cross the borderline between proper training and overtraining."
That quote is from Alberto Salazar, who, based on his experiences and mistakes as an athlete, has moderated his approach as a coach. As a recent article says... "Salazar has handled [Galen] Rupp very carefully (which, predictably, led to carping about coddling... Even at 22, Rupp’s weekly workload is significantly less than many of his peers, and Salazar has mandated regular breaks from training. "
Well, I'm sure this won't be the end of the discussion. Thanks for continuing to read the blog, and for caring enough to comment.
By the way, after having the Keefe brothers and Weinfeld hammer me yesterday, and Jake Gleason regularly run me into the ground, I'm thinking your your team is going to be pretty good next year. But give them a couple of moderate days for me, ok?
NSRP WOOT
Jon, I appreciate your website and check it everyday. I enjoy your comments and how you promote local athletes and running in general. So I know you won't mind me differing with you on some subjects. I realize that I have a minority view and that your philosophy is the predominate approach to distance training. That said, my main difference seems to be with the degree to which you see the need for recovery. Building recovery in when not necessary results in lost growth. Of course, runners need recovery. The issue is to what extent and how often. When you feel good and are not tired you need to take recovery days. The Africans don't worry about recovery days. We do. Maybe that's why they are so far ahead of us. The Kenyans recover between their 1st and second workout of the same day--everyday. Runners should recover when their body tells them and when their motivation won't allow them to continue hammering. That is assuming they want to be as good as they can be.
As you say many runners reach their potential by not hammering away. I agree, of course. Not many runners are motivated to take the pain of hammering away day after day and they will need more recovery. They'll succeed and reach their potential, which was limited by their less than maximum motivation.
The ability to hammer away does in deed result from insecurity and lack of confidence, as does most extremely high achievement in any field. It's not "normal" to make the sacrifices and endure the pain necessary for the highest achievement. One is most often motivated by insecurity, the need to make up for feeling otherwise inadequate. That's a good thing.
In short, we should worry less about working too hard too often and more about not being motivated enough to hammer it out more often.
Running in the comfort of a pack is a great way to get out of your comfort zone physically, without the mental stress of pushing yourself solo. This is exactly the danger of training with a pack every day. Add a full schedule of racing to the mix, stir in academics and you have the recipe for injury, sickness and mental burnout. Too many of our post collegiate athletes are burnt crisper than a Fenway Frank over a bonfire.
Enjoy the pack, beware the pack and above all listen to your body when it's begging for recovery.
Terry
Danger is in the eye of the beholder, Terry. Not everyone feels as stressed as you about studying, their racing schedule, etc. I agree you have to listen to your body, but I guess the issue is what we hear. And what we hear depends on how motivated to excel we are.
I've said this before: you are both right! Our beliefs determine everything we are. First of course our own, shared by those around us, and by the emanations at large, which are strong.
So, one could construct a belief set where training hard twice per week is just as effective at reaching a goal (a race), as a belief set where one hammers 5.73 times per week. Indeed the latter may, but does not have to, come with the limitation that one ~must~ train hard 5.73 times per week in order to be successful. It is even possible that one could use a training program consisting of four hours per day of Wii and a diet of ice cream that makes you a champion, but success with this scheme is not very likely since this is thoroughly unsupported by the emanations at large. However, I'd be the last one to tell you it is not possible.
We were talking last week about how successful training programs come and go (we didn't use the word fad). One thing these typically have in common is that they borrow heavily from existing paths to success, thus confer the advantages of these morphic fields onto the new program. They also usually incorporate something(s) novel or unique, which dare I say, may make the training fun on some level, or at least make it interesting, and when we are engaged in the process of creating and enjoying it we are at our most dangerous. Then, when you have a group contributing to this scheme and participating in its success it will grow quite strong.
Choose a training program that is fully supported by your belief systems and you are likely to thrive. That said, constantly adjust those beliefs to ones which are most useful. For example, purge memes which limit you; this could be something like, "when I do a long run on Sunday I am tired for my workout on Monday." Not useful, erase it. You might still be tired on Monday, but don't draw that in on purpose!
Me? I believe I can fly, which gives me a much better chance of doing it, but I won't be too disappointed if I am not able to mock gravity completely someday...
jk
Post a Comment