Volume 7, No. 1
HOME OF THE DRAKE RELAYS PRESENTED BY ASICS
GREG NIXON ASICS ELITE SPRINTER
ASICS . COM FACEBOOK.COM/ASICSAMERICA
COACHING AT H L E T I C S
Publisherâ€™s Note by Larry Eder
Dealing with Over-Involved Parents by Roy Stevenson
Meb Keflezighi & Bob Larsen: The Gamblers by Larry Eder
Epic Lagat/Rupp Battles Are to Be Savored by Dave Hunter
Cayla Hatton Debuts Over 10,000m: 33:17.28
Why You Need a Coach
The Key to Running the 200 Meters
by Roy Stevenson
by Wallace Spearmon Jr.
Volume 7, Number 1 Spring 2012
COACHING AT H L E T I C S
2012 Spring Shoe Review
Interview with Nobby Hashizume: Lydiard Foundation
Gender in Broadcasting
by Cregg Weinmann
by Lesley Higgins
Special Thanks To: Kristen Cerer, Sue Hall, Alex Larsen, Debra Keckeisen, Tim Garant, Tom Mack, Mary Ward and Sydney Wesemann
Group Publisher: Larry Eder, firstname.lastname@example.org, 920-563-5551, ext. 112
Dedicated to: Fr. Ralph Passerelli, S.J., Jim Marheinecke, Steve Pensinger, Dan Durante and Terry Ward, a.m.d.g.
Group Editor: Christine Johnson, email@example.com
phone 608-239-3785; fax 920-563-7298
Advertising: Larry Eder, firstname.lastname@example.org, 608-239-3785
Coaching Athletics Quarterly is produced, published and owned by Shooting Star Media, Inc., PO Box 67, Ft. Atkinson, Wisconsin 53538-0067, Christine Johnson, President, Larry Eder, Vice President. Copyright 2012 by Shooting Star Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Publisher assumes no liability for matter printed, and assumes no liability or responsibility for content of paid advertising and reserves the right to reject paid advertising. Opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Publisher. No part of this publication may be reproduced or stored in any form without written permission of the Publisher.
Writers/Contributors: Lesley Higgins, Dave Hunter, Wallace Spearmon Jr., Roy Stevenson, Cregg Weinmann Photographers: PhotoRun.net Layout/Design: Kristen Cerer Proofreader: Marg Sumner, Red Ink Editorial Services Editor: Toby Cook Pre-Press/Printer: W. D. Hoard & Sons Company, Fort Atkinson, WI
Coaching Athletics Quarterly is not related to or endorsed by any other entity or corporation with a similar name and is solely owned by Shooting Star Media, Inc. Publisher recommends, as with all fitness and health issues, you consult with your physician before instituting any changes in your fitness program.
Special Projects: Adam Johnson-Eder, email@example.com
Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
publisher’s note Welcome to the first digital issue of Coaching Athletics. We ask you to (1) read it, and (2) pass it around. Encourage anyone who would like a free subscription to sign up at www.coachingathleticsq.com. I recently returned from the Millrose Games in New York. The Millrose Games were hosted at the NYC Armory this year, and there were many naysayers. I was among them. I loved Madison Square Garden, with all its history and I wanted to see a meet at that historic site host the Millrose Games again. Well, there was. It was called the U.S. Open at the Armory, and it had its high points and its low points. The Millrose Games/U.S. Open was a showcase of all that’s good about track & field: competition, strong crowd, crisp announcing, and lots of enthusiasm. Ending with Matt Centrowitz’s debut as a professional miler, the meet gave the fans what they wanted—great racing. That night, there were three American records set: two in Fayetteville, Arkansas, (at what games??) with Jillian Camarena-Williams in the shot put and Galen Rupp at 2 miles. Then, in Millrose, Bernard Lagat showed his stuff and set a new AR for 5000m. In Arkansas Rupp broke Lagat’s record and then in New York Lagat broke Rupp’s just-set record. The Armory announced later that Ray Flynn would be meet director of the Armory-based Millrose Games next year. The Millrose Games offered to move a week later on the calendar in 2013, which would mean four strong meets over four weeks in 2013. Track & field, to reach its proper place in the sports pantheon, has to realize it’s both entertainment and sport. The U.S. Open meet has to embrace its 145-meter track, perhaps with a short, sweet schedule and some wellpublicized handicapped races. Consider LaShawn Merritt taking on a field of six, one running 350 meters, one at 270 meters, one at 240 meters and one at 200 meters? Consider Reese Hoffa and Christian Cantwell taking on a relay of high school shot putters? Consider yard distances, such as 600 yards and 880 yards. Our sport thrives at the high school level, and does okay at the college level. It has so many moving parts at the elite level that we have to look at either finding a solution or starting over, scrapping all. The Armory and the Reggie Lewis Center near Boston are two of our positive sanctuaries for 14–18-year-olds. For kids in NYC, The Armory is their only track & field experience. In 2011, New Balance sent me to the Armory and I met a team of 4x400m runners, all 15–16-year-olds, who expressed how they love our sport. And the Armory was the center of their lives for that 3-hour meet each weekend that they got to run there. How do we make our sport better? Send me emails at firstname.lastname@example.org, and I’ll send them on to Stephanie Hightower, president of USA Track & Field. They need to hear your thoughts and comments.
Larry Eder, Publisher
4 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
Meb Keflezighi & Bob Larsen:
The Gamblers by Larry Eder he race was fantastic. 111 men in the field, and 50 under 2:19.01. Nineteen personal bests, including best Olympic Trials Marathon times for places 2 to 15! Meb Keflezighi’s win was masterful, a stroke of real genius, and also, amazingly lucky. Keflezighi and Bob Larsen, his coach, took a gamble—with their eyes open—and once again, the gamble paid off. Here’s the behind-the-scenes story that shows you just how amazing this coach–athlete relationship is and what great gamblers Bob and Meb are. I remember seeing Bob Larsen, Meb Keflezighi’s coach for the past 18 years, at the USATF convention in early December 2011. We chatted, as we always do, first with a couple of jokes, then some track geek talk. I’ve been lucky enough to know Coach Larsen for nearly 30 years, first, as a coach at Grossmont College, then with the Jamul Toads, and then UCLA. One would be hard pressed to find a finer coach or, in my mind, finer man. Bob isn’t prone to hyperbole. He doesn’t exaggerate or make things up. So, when he said that Meb was just beginning to train for the Olympic Trials, I didn’t worry. Bob said it matter of factly, but there was some concern. Larsen’s relationship with Keflezighi is rare among American athletes. Their relationship stretches back to Keflezighi’s freshman year at UCLA. It was during his senior year that Larsen talked to Keflezighi about aiming for the Olympic Games. The relationship has matured, to where one might describe it as mentor/advisor/friend. Larsen is good for Keflezighi, and he, in truth, is good for Larsen. Keflezighi focuses on the workouts, and Larsen worries, but never that you could see. There’s always a smile on his face. Understand this, please. For great athletes, they are always chasing the red line. There’s that gambling nature between too much work, too little work and being ready for the race. Keflezighi and Larsen, while they look conservative, are great and lucky gamblers. The difference is that, for Keflezighi and Larsen, two veterans of world-class athletics gamesmanship, they know the odds. Keflezighi has had periods where he could barely walk, much less run world-class times. In 2004, Keflezighi had 6½ weeks of good training before the Marathon Trials. He and Larsen actually discussed Keflezighi’s not running in 2004, and yet, he made the team. Larsen insists that Keflezighi’s shape before the 2004 Olympic Trials 10,000 meters was better than when he ran 27:13.98 for the AR in 2001 (it was not broken until May 1, 2010). In 2004, Keflezighi ran 27:36 to win the U.S. Olympic Trials 10,000m. Then he went on to win the Olympic Silver medal in Athens on a day so hot that it was difficult to breathe. “I knew I was going to get a medal there at about 20 miles, and I wanted to push Stefano [Baldini], but I just did not have any more.” Keflezighi didn’t give up. While Baldini’s last mile was 4.28, Keflezighi ran 4.38 for the final mile of the 2004 Athens Olympic Marathon. Larsen related that when Keflezighi went over to shake Baldini’s hand after the Athens marathon, Baldini, the Olympic champion, could barely stand up on his own. Keflezighi, while tired, was walking around pretty well. The 2008 Olympic Marathon Trials, held in New York’s Central Park, was a nightmare for Keflezighi. First his former training partner and friend, Ryan Shay, collapsed and died during the race. Second, Keflezighi broke his hip and finished 8th. In 2008, he didn’t make the team, after having made the teams in 2000 in the 10,000 meters and in 2004 in the 10,000 meters and the marathon. His injuries took a long time to heal and he questioned whether he could do this journey one more time.
6 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
Meb Keflezighi is a tough, consistent runner. Since his 2:10.03 at Chicago, he has run 2:09 eight times! Yet, he hasn’t run a real fast time, when 2:05 marathon times are coming in relatively fast. The difference? Keflezighi is a championship runner: He runs well when much is on the line, such as an Olympic Trials and the Olympics. His Silver medal in 2004 wasn’t given to him—he earned it. Likewise, his victory in 2010 at the ING NYC Marathon was a gutty, exhilarating run to the finish line. Keflezighi ran his 2:09.13 at ING New York in 2011, and it was masterful. He developed first a blood blister, then an infection in his foot. “It was painful, and it did not heal for three weeks. In retrospect, that rest was good for me.” Keflezighi didn’t call the blister a blister. He first called it an infection; then he called it “the wound.” Think about that. For a guy who has run nine marathons under 2:10, a wound has to be a near-gaping hole. I am almost surprised that Keflezighi and Larsen didn’t give the near-nemesis of this Marathon Trials a proper name. Just the same—blister, infection or wound—it did play a part in Keflezighi’s preparation for this race. No one knew about Keflezighi’s three weeks off due to the blister until Larsen noted it in St. Louis at the USATF convention. Larsen wasn’t in a panic—he never is. He only mentioned that Keflezighi was just starting training as he had had a blister issue. So, Keflezighi’s 69 days between ING New York and the 2012 US Olympic Trials Marathon were cut down by 21 days—48 days of training. Heck, I’m not sure Jeff Galloway, the minstrel of new marathoners, would consider 48 days enough time to prepare for a 10K, let alone a marathon. However, Keflezighi and Larsen persisted. “It was much worse than we let on. It was on the center of my foot, just before my arch, and it would just not heal. In fact, it did not heal completely until three weeks ago,” noted Keflezighi this morning in a postrace conversation. “We were not sure,” noted Keflezighi. “I really would have liked two more weeks of training, as I wanted to run a 2:08. “The race was okay. I had trouble swallowing some liquid before the race, so I was a little concerned, and in fact, until I burped [at] about 22 miles, I was not feeling great. Up until then, I was not sure I would finish. Remember, they almost dropped me about 22 miles?” he said this morning. “I was thinking of dropping out.”
Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
“Ryan made a move at about 23 miles, and I was finally feeling good, after the burp, and when he let me go, about 24 miles, I charged hard for the next 400 to 500 meters. I knew I had to do it, and I took off,” smiled Keflezighi. “I have a blood blister on the same foot, I will let it heal, but it is not that bad. This race is for the girls. I want them to remember that their Dad ran in the London Olympics,” noted a smiling Keflezighi. Meb Keflezighi is selfless. He signed autographs today and took pictures at breakfast this morning. As I write this, I witnessed his longest uninterrupted time with his wife and family. For him, having a cup of coffee and hanging with his brother, Hawi, as their girls run a bit and giggle, doing what little kids do, is a luxury. So now, the race is over. “This race was the tough one. I needed to make the team to run in London,” he said. He’s right; the Olympic Trials are a battle supreme. Larsen and Keflezighi gambled and, once again, they won! Now, Keflezighi, U.S. Olympic Trials Marathon champion, will take a couple weeks easy, bask in the celebratory events of his victory, spend time with his lovely wife and children and then he and his coach will plan for London 2012. Keflezighi will probably have a few things to do for his sponsor, SKECHERS, which entered the running footwear business over the last two years, took an educated gamble with Keflezighi, and won. SONY Music and UCAN sports nutrition are two of his other sponsors. Keflezighi tweets thoughts on his sponsors and is one of the more effective athletes on social media. As athletes have pondered finding nonfootwear sponsors, Keflezighi’s brother, Hawi, has worked hard to find new partners. And, more than anything else, Meb Keflezighi loves his fans. Larsen and Keflezighi will take some time to plan their training for the London 2012 Olympics—the Olympics that he can share with his wife and daughters, the Olympics where he wants to run well, leaving an indelible mark. This will be proper marathon training, and that should mean a very special marathon performance. A very special performance for these two gamblers. You might want to bet on it … Check out the video RBR interview with Meb Keflezighi (SKECHERS press conference): www.runblogrun.com/2011/11/post-7.html
Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
BLE A T S X A M E D BLA
u will stop missed and yo e b ed, ill w s ay d , birth r run, your spe ss u e m yo a to e b ts p ill a w d shioning a ing Your social life progressive cu vince you to care about noth s It t. u o d te vi to be. n being in running shoe t ride. It will co a ly ai re d g r a u u yo t yo g ing you wan while givin shoe is everyth is h T . g in n n ru but
L L I W E O THIS SH R LIFE. U O Y N I U R
S E D A L B / M .CO RETAILER KSWISS NING R LOCAL RUN
(2nd Fastest Prep Time) Publisher’s Note: If you want an uplifting story about a young runner who perseveres despite misdiagnosed injuries, regains her fitness and, in her debut, runs faster than all but one American woman prepster, then, please, Dear Readers, you must read Doug Binder’s blog on Cayla Hatton. Cayla was a good runner her freshman year in high school, running a swift 4:38.8 for 1500m. During her sophomore year, Cayla was injured playing soccer. The injury was first thought to be a glute injury, but it didn’t heal. She was injured in the 2010 track season. She didn’t finish the 2011 track season because of a hip injury. Her first doctor told her that she shouldn’t run anymore, that she had a skeletal problem. Cayla Hatton was grief stricken. Her parents and Cayla asked for another opinion from an expert physical therapist. The therapist suggested there were muscular Continued on page 11. Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
Cayla Hatton Debuts Over 10,000m: 33:17.28
Why You Need a
COACH By Roy Stevenson
ehind every successful distance runner, or any well-performing athlete for that matter, you’ll find a coach somewhere in the background. Most of us think a coach is only there to give us training schedules, but that’s a minor part of the role. Running is a healthy, inexpensive activity that keeps us fit and teaches us self-discipline at an age when these valuable lessons will stand us in good stead forever. However, there are many pitfalls in distance running that we can easily fall into if we blunder along without knowing what we’re doing—and the younger we are, the more we rely on a coach to help us through our early years as distance runners. Here are some things to look for in your coach. One of the most important things a coach brings with him or her is objectivity. Your coach is your personal sounding board. He or she listens to you talk about how you feel, how confident you are about your current racing fitness, your hopes, and ideas. Your coach synthesizes these thoughts, and does this without having your personal thoughts and feelings interfering with hard decisions that have to be made about your training program. So when a coach recommends that you get more sleep or eat more carbohydrates or slow down your training runs or that you do more stretching in your cool-down, listen. Your coach sees things from an outside perspective and is likely to be right. A good coach doesn’t hesitate to discipline you if you need it—this is most effective, however, when done privately and sparingly. And yes, a coach is expected to deliver good training schedules based on sound principles and experience. A good coach should keep up with the reading on running training techniques and attend training sessions on developments in the sport. You should be able to ask your coach about almost anything to do with running, from how to tie your shoelaces to what sort of sports drinks are the best to take. What’s more, the coach’s schedules should be based specifically on his or her knowledge of you and what you need most in your training. A good coach will take your previous running experience
10 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
into consideration when prescribing your workouts and races. He or she will look at your goals, your training pace and recent racing times. You’ll know that your coach’s training schedules are sound if your team’s injury and illness rates are low. This means your coach is using proven techniques to make sure you aren’t overtraining or overstressing yourself. A good coach should also be there when things go wrong, to do a postmortem and quickly figure out a plan to address it. A coach who demonstrates flexibility in his or her approach to training has your best interests in mind. Motivation is one of the coach’s most important functions. A good coach will give you confidence in your training and racing, will challenge you to perform better, and will make you believe that you’ll perform your best. I’d like to think that I witnessed distance running history one Sunday in New Zealand in 1974, when I had just returned from a training run with John Walker. Walker had cranked through a hilly 18miler at just over 5 minutes per mile all by himself, leaving the rest of us miles behind. His coach, Arch Jelley, said to Walker, “Judging from that run, John, I’ve never had a runner as fit as you. Keep running like that and you’ll break 3:50 for the mile in Europe next year.” Walker looked at him, saw Jelley’s poker face, and said, “Yeah, you know I think I can do it.” And sure enough, Walker went under 3:50 the following August 1975 in Goteborg, Sweden. Finally, one of the most valuable coaching skills is strategizing with the athlete on how the race should be run. Beware the coach who says, “Just go out as fast as you can and hang on to the finish.” Unless you’re the best runner by far in the race, this is advice for a tactical disaster. The coach should take your fitness, your competitors, the weather, and the course into consideration. A coach, then, is a jack-of-all-trades. He or she is there, cajoling you to run your intervals faster one day, congratulating you on a fine performance the next. Above all else, your coach should want you to enjoy the experience.
Continued from page 9. imbalances that affected her running. The therapist suggested that if Cayla worked on building her quad strength, she could run pain free once again. Repeating exercises, day after day, week after week, for months, must have driven Cayla crazy, but, after several months, she was healthy again! Some hard work later, and Cayla was running injury free. Last Sept. 5, Cayla tried a 5K on the road and blasted a 17:34, two minutes faster than the next woman, and came in 17th in field of 2,000! This was her first injury-free race in nearly three years, as her injuries dated back to her freshman year. Between September and February, Cayla did her physical therapy and ran. From nice and gentle, to long, strong miles, Cayla—under the watchful eye of her coach, Boston Running Center’s Joe McConkey—ran 55–65 miles a week, with a long run of 13–15 miles. Healthy again for the first time in nearly three years, Cayla Hatton must have felt like a runner again. When I saw Cayla run a fine 4:51.37 at the New Balance Indoor GP on Feb. 4, I still had no idea who she was. Obviously, Cayla Hatton was someone to consider, as she had held off the top prep miler in the country until the final turn of the race, finishing 2nd. At the US XC Champs, one week after that, Cayla entered the senior women’s race, running against the likes of Sara Hall and Molly Huddle. She placed a respectable 13th, running 28:26 for the chilly 8000 meter course in St. Louis. Then, on April 1 at the SnowFlake Invitational, Cayla Hatton was entered in a mixed race 10,000m at Tufts University. Hatton went out in 82 seconds for the first lap, and noted that she ran 79 seconds a lap, focused on a group of men running together, in front of her. Twenty-five laps later, Cayla Hatton had used that strong distance base and some nice mile speed to a distance six times the mile, and then some. Her 33:17.28 for 10,000m is the second fastest time ever run by a prep woman. The only prep woman faster is none other than Mary Shea, who ran 32:52.5 in 1979. Cayla Hatton is ahead of the likes of Cathy Schiro (then she was
Cathy O’Brian), Lesley Welch, Erin Davis, and yes, Melody Fairchild! Already accepted at Stanford, the Andover Phillips Academy senior is looking to qualify for the 5000 meters (15:50 is B standard).
We think she can do anything now!
Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
WALLACE SPEARMON JR. for Saucony 200 meter ace Wallace Spearmon Jr. comes by his speed naturally. His father, Wallace Sr., was a world-class 200 meter sprinter. But Wallace Jr. is something else. He’s the current U.S. 200 outdoor champion, and ranked #2 in the world by Track & Field News. In fact, since Spearmon went professional in 2005 after winning three NCAA 200 titles (including a stunning 20.10 American indoor record), he has always ranked in the top-4 in the world. He has run in the 19s every one of those six years, and his 19.65 PR makes him the fifth fastest 200 man of all time. He also medaled at 200m in the last three IAAF World Championships—Silver in 2005 and Bronze in 2007 and 2009. Oddly, in high school, Spearmon says track was his least favorite sport—after basketball, soccer and football—but once he settled on track he competed in the 100, 200, 400, 300 hurdles, high jump, long jump, triple jump, 4x100 and 4x400 relays, and the decathlon. Looking ahead, he says, “The next three years are going to be really special for me. But you can’t be thinking about the Olympics or the World Championships without first thinking about the Americans, because the U.S. is the toughest team to make.”
12 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
THE KEY TO RUNNING THE 200 METERS From Wallace Spearmon Jr.
“You have to get faster, and to do that your core has to be strong. It’s especially important for exploding out of the blocks, and for running the turn. The core is not just your stomach—it also includes your hamstrings, your quads, your lower back, and your butt. For instance, you can’t keep an erect posture and run your fastest if your lower back isn’t really strong.”
FIND YOUR STRONG WITH THESE
1 2 3 4 5
STEPS TO A BETTER SPRINT START
Get comfortable in the blocks. The “set” position is awkward and stressful, and you have to hold it for as much as several seconds, so you should develop a style that feels as easy as you can make it. Get your coach to work with you until you’re both satisfied.
Don’t listen for the gun! Researchers have found that reacting to a sound stimulus (listening for the gun) takes an average of 0.225 seconds compared to only 0.120 seconds when concentrating on the action to be taken. So think about what you’re going to do when the gun goes off.
Concentrate on using your arms to get moving. When the gun goes off, start pumping those arms as vigorously as you can. The arm nearest your front block punches up and forward—hard! The other arm shoots backward—hard! This gets you into full running stride as quickly as possible.
Make that first step as long as you can. How? You push hard with both feet against the blocks, while pulling the rear leg through as forcefully as you can and lifting the knee as high as possible. Stay low, while continuing to lift the knees high, as long as you can.
Practice, practice, practice. Of course, you can’t work on everything at once. You have to drill, drill, drill on each action separately, then fit them into your start. Always practice your starts with a sound signal; if no gun is handy, a whistle or a handclap will do.
Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
Getting Parents to Work with You and not Against You in HS Track & Field
By Roy Stevenson
99% of all parents are sane and workable; they just need to be trained like their athlete progeny. here’s not a track coach in the country who hasn’t come across overzealous parents at one time or another. I’ve heard coaches refer to some parents as TPs (terrorist parents), CPs (controlling parents) or HPs (helicopter parents who hover over every moment of their teen’s life). This overinvolvement and interference with athletes and coaches who are just trying to do their job can be a major burden on the unprepared coach.
Some of these over-involved parents are simply misguided; thinking their son or daughter is the best, when results indicate otherwise. Others expect their athlete offspring to win everything so they can get a scholarship to the university. Many parents want their kids to win as an extension of their own ego or for bragging rights in their social circles or because they were good athletes back in their day. Whatever the reason for the parents’ expectations, their behavior is often shocking. You’ve seen it before: chewing out the coach, swearing at him or her, or even their child or athletes on other teams. Here are some tips on how to deal with overzealous parents. Following this advice will make your life easier and take some of the stress off the teenage athletes. Onerous as it may be, it is your responsibility to clarify your expectations with parents. First, realize that 99% of all parents are sane and workable; they just need to be trained like their athlete progeny. A common strategy is to actively educate them with verbal and written material.
14 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
State clearly—in writing—your coaching philosophy and style, and school policies regarding athlete and parent conduct, including meet and practice behavior and the consequences of breaching this code. Emphasize that parents should show respect for athletes competing against your school, and they should cheer their athletes in a positive manner. Some coaches have parents sign an agreement stating that they understand the commitment their teen athlete is making, and that they agree to support it. State that you promote strong ethics, sound principles and high ideals through track & field and cross country. Mention that coaching is something you do and parents don’t, and parenting is what they should be doing. State that it’s your job to run things the way you see fit. Define a common mission for your team, and tell parents how they can help you and their children reach these goals; for example, booster club, officiating at meets, ensuring that the athlete is getting good nutrition, etc. Tell the parents that you expect their cooperation, support and loyalty and that you expect them to be role models of sportsmanship. Establish your coaching credentials and your expertise. When parents challenge you, be the expert in a nondefensive and professional way. This means you don’t respond to problem parents emotionally and you always maintain self-control. Avoid crisis intervention mode with parents at all costs. Waiting for problems and emotions to arise before you are forced to deal with them is a disaster in the making. This means you must communicate with parents, this means keeping the lines of communications open and being approachable. Encourage parents to discuss any problems with you, instead of taking them over your head. Listen to them, and let them know that you hear them, even when you don’t agree with them. Always do this respectfully. Following these basic guidelines will avoid most problems you’re likely to encounter with overzealous parents. Over time you’ll develop additional skills to work with parents to support your efforts.
The Sun Rises, The Sun Sets
EPIC LAGAT/RUPP BATTLES ARE TO BE SAVORED Albuquerque, New Mexico by Dave Hunter
hen Bernard Lagat and Galen Rupp go head-tohead on the track, those who love track & field are united in one thought: “We want them to battle each other forever.” Yet we know that can’t happen. Galen Rupp, the young distance prodigy, has followed a carefully scripted program of progressive development over the past decade that places him, at the relatively young age of 25, at the threshold of what most believe should be the best racing years of his life. His pathway of continued improvement has been wisely constructed by Alberto Salazar, a coach who knows first-hand the right steps—and the wrong steps—an aspiring distance runner can take. After an exemplary collegiate career at the track & field laboratory that is the University of Oregon, Rupp stands at the dawn of his professional career. It’s a different story—and a different time—for Bernard Lagat. For this savvy veteran, one of the most articulate and beloved performers in the sport, there is very little he hasn’t accomplished. An eighttime winner of the Wanamaker Mile, Lagat has secured his place as one of the most successful middle-distance runners of this or any era. With his 1500/5000 double Gold medal performances in the 2007 World Championships, representing perhaps the zenith of his career, Lagat has proven time and again, year in and year out, to be a fierce competitor who can find a way to win off any race pace. And
Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
while no one can rightly say that his recent performances have evidenced any noticeable slippage, Lagat knows—we all know—that Time’s winged chariot is hurrying near. Lagat’s shift of attention from the 1500 to the 5000 as his primary focus—an expected evolution for a maturing middle-distance runner—is an unspoken concession to the aging process. While there’s reason to expect more inspiring performances from Lagat—such as his convincing Millrose 5000 win in an American indoor record time of 13:07.15 earlier this month—the shadows are getting longer as Lagat, at age 37, enters the gloaming of his career. Frustrated by the age mismatch of these two great runners, we conjure up silly lamentations that can’t change things: “If only Bernard were younger,” or “If only Galen had come along earlier in Bernard’s career.” But we can’t concoct some magic elixir that would more perfectly match the primes of their stellar careers. We just need to sit back and fully appreciate their spirited battles. In fact, their age difference—the very aspect of their rivalry that will limit the duration of their duels we love to witness— actually adds spice to their races against one another as we speculate, “Can Bernard outfox Galen again?” “Has Galen found that special strategy that can prove to be Bernard’s undoing?” “Is Galen getting stronger and smarter?” “Has age rendered Bernard vulnerable?” Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012 15
Another chapter in the anthology of the Lagat/Rupp rivalry was written here in Albuquerque Saturday night at the USA Indoor Track & Field Championships. Squaring off in the 3000, the master and the student toed the line in the final event of the evening. At the opening gun, Rupp surged to the front. There would be no dawdling tonight. Dishing out a steady diet of 31+-second laps on the 200 meter banked Mondo track, Rupp was at the point of a trio that included Lagat— closely in second—and Lopez Lomong. Floating around the oval—dropping the remainder of the 3000 field—the threesome maintained this rhythmic pace with amazing accuracy. But the race pace, as impressive as it seemed to most in attendance, was really not taxing given the recent race efforts posted this winter by both Lagat and Rupp. When the 1600 was passed in 4:11, it was clear that the tempo, which would prove to be oppressive for all but the most elite middle-distance runners, lacked the punishment that would be required to take the sting out of Lagat’s patented finishing kick. To set the race up for his final push, Lagat easily slid into the lead with 700 meters to go. Lomong, moving up to second, and Rupp, now in third, gamely held on. But each had to know that they had seen this movie before. With Lagat in command, the pace increased inexorably, but not dramatically, as Lagat began to turn the screw. With 300 meters remaining, it was clear that Rupp was struggling as he began to lose contact. Lagat gapped Lomong in the penultimate lap and the outcome was clear as the bell lap sounded. Powering through the final circuit, Lagat, with no challengers remaining, uncorked a furious kick over the final 120 meters as the full house roared its approval. The stopwatch—which never lies—told the story. Lagat’s final 400 meters was clocked in 56.01 seconds and featured an eye-popping—and truly unnecessary—final 200 meters in 25.42. The 16 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
message was clear: While Father Time will ultimately catch up with Bernard Lagat, it would not be at this track meet. And as the capacity crowd will attest, the performance they witnessed by Lagat suggests that such a day of reckoning is far away. Always gracious in victory, the 3000 meter champion lingered in the post race afterglow to fulfill all autograph requests. Later, with the media, Lagat, gushing with enthusiasm, offered his take on the race. With his children at his side, Lagat admitted that “I wanted to show these kids that their dad can still run fast.” The victor felt this race coming. “I have felt so good all week. I ran easily for 30 minutes yesterday. And I felt so good tonight when I warmed up,” he confessed with a smile. When questioned about why no one can detect in him any perceptible loss of top end speed, the 37year-old runner admitted candidly, “I train hard with younger runners. There is no fooling around. It is all business. I just felt so good tonight. When I got to the last lap, I said to myself, ‘Why not?’ I have my ticket for Turkey and am going to Istanbul. I will return to Tucson tomorrow for 7–10 days of training and then I will head to the World Championship meet. … You know,” he said with a quick smile, “I am the defending champion.” At the far end of the track, Galen Rupp walked alone. He had run a courageous race over a shortened distance that—when racing against Bernard Lagat—clearly worked to Rupp's disadvantage. It was obvious that the 3000 had taken a lot out of him. But it was not possible to discern if the pained expression that etched his face reflected the race effort or the stark realization that Bernard Lagat is not yet succumbing to Father Time—and is not likely to do so any time soon. The writer, who can be emailed at email@example.com, has raced over 90 marathons, including the 1983 B.A.A. Marathon, where he set his PR of 2:31:40. Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
SHOE REVIEW SHOE REVIEWS: Neutral—20 • Performance—21 • Motion Stabilizing— 24
ll things are relative to their frame of reference. This A simplified explanation of relativity pairs well with a quote attributed to Albert Einstein, who had a passing acquaintance with the topic: “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.” Our frame of reference, from a running perspective, was explained almost 225 years ago by Isaac Newton. Newton observed, theorized, and described gravitation and the three laws of motion (among many other things). Simply speaking, our frame of reference is about running on Earth, where the mass of the planet is greater than ours, so we are pulled toward it. We apply a force to the Earth and it gives back an equal force. In this Review, we’ve looked at and weartested shoes in the three basic categories of motion stabilizing, neutral cushioning, and faster-paced/performance
running. We describe their attributes and point out if and how the familiar has been changed, and we share some of our weartesters’ feedback. So whether you’re trying to find out what’s new, what’s changed, or what’s best for you, we’ve got you covered. As we’ve said many times before, knowledge is your best ally. To make good choices for you, you must know the shape of your feet and understand the way they move. If you don’t, you may find your local running specialty store to be a source of good advice and information. There are many shoes appropriate for your running, but if you know your foot shape, foot motion, and footstrike, you can focus on shoes that meet your needs, not someone else’s.
—Cregg Weinmann, Running Network Footwear Reviewer
RUNNING NETWORK LLC PARTNERS
WELCOME TO THE RUNNING NETWORK’S 2012 SPRING SHOE REVIEW
American Track & Field www.american-trackandfield.com
I just returned from the 2012 U.S. Open, an indoor track meet held in New York City’s Madison Square Garden. Among the performances there were the fastest women’s 50 meters in 12 years (6.08 seconds, Veronica Campbell-Brown), the second-fastest men’s 50 meters ever (5.64 seconds, Asafa Powell), and a spirited battle over the mile between Silas Kiplagat and Bernard Lagat. Kiplagat prevailed, 4:00.65 to 4:00.92. Two weeks before, I witnessed the first Americans to make the 2012 Olympic team in our sport. Meb Keflezighi surprised everyone but himself and his coach, Bob Larsen, by running with Ryan Hall and Abdi Abdirahman for 23 miles, and then pulling away to win. On the women’s side, Shalane Flanagan and Desiree Davila dueled for 24 miles before Shalane gained some daylight. Kara Goucher held on for third, after being challenged by the surprising Amy Hastings, who finished fourth. Most of these athletes, as well as local road races and running events, are sponsored by the very companies featured in our 2012 Spring Shoe Review. While companies like adidas, ASICS, Brooks, Mizuno, New Balance, Nike, PUMA, and Saucony are major sponsors, all 44 brands we monitor put back into the sport that they market to—to the tune of over $100 million a year!
Athletes Only www.atf-athlete.com Athletics (Canada) www.athleticsontario.ca Austin Fit www.austinfitmagazine.com California Track & Running News www.caltrack.com Club Running www.rrca.org/publications/club-running Coaching Athletics Quarterly www.coachingathleticsq.com Colorado Runner www.coloradorunnermag.com
As you look over this Spring Shoe Review to determine what shoe you’ll run in over the next few months, we ask that you visit your local running store—that bastion of the running community—and support the brands that support your local running. And please, follow your local heroes in our sport. Several of them will be big surprises in the 2012 U.S. Olympic Trials for Track & Field in Eugene, Oregon June 22–July 2.
Greater Long Island Running Club’s Footnotes www.glirc.org
See you on the roads and at the track!
Latinos Corriendo www.latinoscorriendo.com
Get Active! www.healthclubs.com
Marathon Guide www.marathonguide.com Michigan Runner www.michiganrunner.net
Larry Eder President, Running Network LLC
Missouri Runner & Triathlete www.morunandtri.com Running Journal & Racing South www.running.net
AWARD WINNERS BEST SHOE
RIN G 201
RIN G 201
BEST SHOE Motion Stabilizing SP
RIN G 201
RunMinnesota www.runmdra.org RUNOHIO www.runohio.com Track & Field News www.trackandfieldnews.com
adidas Supernova Glide 4
Mizuno Wave Elixir 7
Nike Lunar Eclipse+ 2
BEST NEW SHOE
USATF’s Fast Forward www.usatf.org USATF–New England’s Exchange Zone www.usatfne.org The Winged Foot www.nyac.org The Winged M www.themac.com
Brooks Pure Cadence
Saucony PowerGrid Hurricane 14
Scott MK 4
Youth Runner www.youthrunner.com
Reviewer: Cregg Weinmann Project Coordinator/Editor: Christine Johnson Designer: Kristen Cerer Proofreader: Marg Sumner, Red Ink Editorial Services Shoe Photography: Daniel Saldaña, Cregg Weinmann Advertising Sales: Running Network LLC, Larry Eder, President, 608.239.3785, firstname.lastname@example.org Publisher: Larry Eder, 608.239.3785 Website: www.runningnetwork.com For a Media Kit, please visit our website. This 2012 Spring Shoe Review is produced independently by Running Network LLC for its partner publications. All shoes reviewed were tested by experienced, competitive runners who were matched to the biomechanical purpose of each shoe model. Copyright © 2012 by Running Network LLC. All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be stored, copied, or reprinted without prior written permission of Running Network LLC. Running Network LLC and its partner publications suggest that, as with all fitness activities, you meet with a healthcare professional before beginning or changing your fitness regimen.
18 | Running Network 2012 Spring Shoe Review
NEUTRAL adidas Supernova Glide 4 BEST SHOE Neutral SP
RIN G 201
Always aimed at performance, the Supernova Glide 4 is a redesign that ups the ante. The upper returns to a breathable, engineered mesh unlike any used in previous versions; it’s supportive while flexible. The redesigned ankle collar adjusts to the heel shape, thanks to a healthy measure of memory foam. The lacing connects to the logo stripes for support, but is articulated at the bottom for better flexion. The midsole continues with the cushy feel, but achieves a better balance of resiliency and responsiveness in its ride. The forefoot’s blown rubber formulation has been thoroughly dialed-in, providing good traction and durability, and the adiWear heel is hardwearing. Performance is enhanced by a significant weight reduction, while maintaining the fit and ride expected in this series, and earning the Supernova Glide 4 honors as the Best Shoe in the Neutral category. “Fit well, was lightweight, and felt great while running. I wore them every day for the first week and put close to 60 miles on them, and they just keep going!” Updates the Supernova Glide 3 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to very mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 6.5–15,16,17,18,19,20; Women 4.5–14 • Weight: 12.2 oz. (men’s 11); 9.6 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved to curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
Brooks Defyance 5
The Defyance 5 flirts with performance weights while delivering high-mileage protection. The switch to DNA cushioning, what appears to be a little less plastic in the shank, and a paring back of the overlays are responsible for the trim-down. The upper swings back to a more closely woven mesh, and the saddle features four elastic eyelets that flex with the foot, maintain secure lacing, and improve articulation since the eyelets are separated from each other. The midsole offers Brooks’ DNA for the first time here, smoothing the touchdown and transition of the foot throughout the stride, as well as improving the cushioning and responsiveness of the shoe. The outersole appears identical to Round 4, except for minor alterations in the heel. The Defyance remains reliably effective, so runners looking for performance in a neutral shoe should give it a serious look. “Quite snug and comfy. Immediate ‘soft’ feel, like slippers, but responsive while running. I think Brooks has come a long way and [it’s] done a great job designing a good, all-around, versatile shoe for the average person.” Updates the Defyance 4 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (B,D,2E); Women 5–12,13 (2A,B,D) • Weight: 11.4 oz. (men’s 11); 8.9 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
K-Swiss Blade Max Glide
The Blade Max Glide (and its fraternal twin, the Blade Max Stable) is new to the K-Swiss running line and is the first road outing for the Blade Max technology. The upper features a seamless interior thanks to no-sew panels at the heel, midfoot saddle, and toe-reinforcing upper; the rest is closed mesh. The midsole features K-Swiss’ new Blade Max configuration, doubled-up columns that attach to the blades, providing more cushion for larger runners than the earlier Blade-Lite set-up could handle. The outersole adds some carbon rubber to the high-wear areas of the heel and blown rubber to the medial forefoot, while the blades occupy the remainder. Overall, runners seeking a firm and responsive shoe will find it here; it’s a durable high-mileage choice for the neutral-footed. “Good fit with a comfortably plush feel. Pretty flexible and responsive ride. It’s a good shoe.” NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 6.5–13,14,15; Women 5–11,12 • Weight: 12.9 oz. (men’s 11); 10.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
Mizuno Waverider 15
The Waverider has long been Mizuno’s premier neutral shoe. Round 15 features changes that are substantive and represent what’s shifting in the entire Mizuno line. The upper sports a few changes—the double-layer, uniform open airmesh is almost like last season’s—but now features a gauze-like mesh for extra support over the airmesh along the lateral vamp and into the medial arch. The lacing has been better articulated so the fit flexes with the foot better. The midsole foam has a smoother, more responsive feel, and the Wave plate has been adapted, resulting in a better overall footstrike. The outersole has the same basic set-up: unchanged in the heel, but the forefoot has realigned flex grooves and the hinge-like SmoothRide inserts have been added just behind the metatarsals for a more responsive feel. This update breathes new life into a dependable icon. “They fit comfortably, with very good toe room, and the cut for the ankle fits right. The bounce and flex make the shoe feel great for my long runs on the roads.” Updates the Waverider 14 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15,16 (D,2E); Women 6–12 (2A,B,D) • Weight: 12.0 oz. (men’s size 11); 9.4 oz. (women’s size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted
New Balance 1080 v2
Last year’s category award winner has undergone significant change—it’s even better this time out. The ride and cushioning are about the same, but the shoe is more than 10% lighter. The upper has a similar two-layer mesh, pared back overlays that are welded where possible, and a new full rand, yet it’s actually more open and bends well where the foot flexes. The midsole has been reshaped, the rubbery crashpad inserts have been replaced with Abzorb so that it’s a little lighter weight without sacrificing cushioning, and a new, lightweight element called N2 sits under the heel to cushion the heelstrike and is responsible for much of the weight savings. The outersole sports significantly redesigned flex grooves and a rubber configuration that improves the forefoot feel. The Stability Web has been replaced with a torsional support called the T-Beam, which is smaller and lighter, yet as effective. The net effect of the new 1080 v2 is more performance. “Snug fit, quite comfortable. A little tighter in the toe box than I like—odd for NB—might need to go up half a size. The feel on the road is very cushy, but not mushy. They seem really pretty durable.” Updates the 1080 • Recommended for: medium-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (D,2E); Women 5–11,12 (2A,B,D) • Weight: 11.5 oz. (men’s 11); 9.0 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, polyurethane Strobel board
20 | Running Network 2012 Spring Shoe Review
PERFORMANCE adidas adiZero F50
The adiZero running line continues to broaden and now approaches a dozen shoes for faster-paced running. The F50 reaches Round 2 with both a new approach called Sprintframe and minor tweaks to the upper and midsole molding. The upper is a closed mesh with thin, no-sew overlays over the forefoot—only the toecap features any traditional stitching. The heel is supported by the Sprintframe, upswept arms of EVA that secure the midsole to the upper while offering a bit of extra support. The midsole is the effective adiPrene/adiPrene+ combo that has worked well for adidas. It also sports the ForMotion cassette that both stabilizes and cushions the ride without being overbearing. The outersole is almost a full-contact bottom, but for a small gap under the shank, shaving some weight without affecting support or traction. The result is a performance shoe that’s lightweight but substantial enough for daily training. “These have a very nice fit; not too snug (just right for me). A great, lightweight shoe for faster runs. Breathes well. Feels good. Good support and traction. I love them.” Updates the adiZero F50 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to very mild overpronation. • Sizes: Men 6.5–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: 10.3 oz. (men’s size 11); 9.0 oz. (women’s size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted
ASICS Gel-Noosa Tri 7
The Noosa comes to the U.S. market from the ASICS subsidiary in Australia. Its roots are in triathlon; it’s really a Gel DS-Trainer in disguise. The midsole is the same chassis as the DS-Trainer with its stable and nicely cushioned ride, along with its wellarticulated forefoot flexion. The balance between engineering and minimalism has extended here to the upper with a stretchy mesh and few overlays, but it’s still secure through the midfoot. It sports perhaps the loudest colorway seen since the ’90s. Another feature is a phosphorescent toecap that glows eerily in the dark. An elastic stretch lace (included) may be substituted for the traditional laces for rapid triathlon transitions and a snugger midfoot fit. The result is a shoe with excellent stability and cushioning that’s versatile enough for hard training miles and longer races. “They snug up around the feet and hug them nicely throughout the run. Very stable-feeling shoe. Whether running on the road or cruising the foothills, my feet were always nice and secure feeling.” Updates the Gel-Noosa Tri 6 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–12,13,14; Women 6–11,12 • Weight: 11.6 oz. (men’s size 11); 9.1 oz. (women’s size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: combination Strobel-lasted, Solyte Strobel board (Solyte 55 heel, Solyte 45 forefoot)
Brooks Pure Cadence
The Pure Cadence is the most substantial of Brooks’ series of Pure shoes. Weighing in at a “whopping” 10.5 ounces, it’s not quite minimal but it’s definitely performance-oriented. The upper is supportive, featuring an elastic Navband that crosses the navicular bone supporting the fit and working with welded overlays to provide a smooth interior and good support. The midsole geometry features a 4-millimeter heel-to-toe drop and is designed to flex with the foot. Contoured pods on the perimeter of the outersole allow adjustments for pressure from the foot or the surface, and provide protection while keeping the weight down. The full outersole offers durable traction even though it’s thin, and features a split between the big toe and the others for better articulation at toe-off. The combination of lightness, low-profile geometry, and performance earned the Pure Cadence our Best New Shoe honors.
BEST NEW SHOE SPRING 2012
“Even though these shoes are very light, the reinforced toe doesn’t lay down across the front of my toes. The shoes have a roomy fit that gives my forefoot all the play it wants. The shoe snugs up around the instep nicely. Interesting how a minimal drop shoe feels more stable without a lot of support.” NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 6–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: 10.5 oz. (men’s 11); 8.4 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: slip-lasted
The Liede is the second running shoe to come to the U.S. market from Li-Ning. Very light, it borders on racing or minimalist, while meeting the performance and durability needs of runners looking for a shoe for faster-paced running. The upper is a gauzy mesh with film-like welded overlays; it wraps the foot securely, though it doesn’t offer much support. The midsole is a wellshaped, injection-molded EVA that’s flexible and well cushioned. It features a 6-millimeter heel-to-toe drop, making it more of a transitional shoe (moving from traditional drop to minimal), but with more of a distance racer’s feel. The outersole uses rubber only in the high-wear areas, and the flex grooves provide a feel for the road, allowing the foot mobility from heelstrike to toe-off. The bottom line? The Liede is a versatile shoe designed for faster-paced runs, whether racing or training to race. “Secure fit, but a ‘barely there’ feel. Pretty well cushioned and responds nicely, especially for a wispy shoe. I like its versatility.” NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7.5–13; Women 6–11,12 • Weight: 7.1 oz. (men’s 11); 5.6 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
Mizuno Wave Elixir 7
The Elixir has been an effective and consistent performance shoe. Like the other Mizuno shoes in this Review, the Elixir has undergone considerable change. The upper is open mesh with a wild, sublimated print that draws a fair share of attention. It’s not simply window dressing, just the beginning of the changes. The overlays have been designed in more of a saddle-like configuration, and it returns to a traditional lacing design that’s successful in its simplicity. The midsole benefits from the resilient Alpha Polymer and the redesigned Wave plate that work together to provide a smoother performance ride than earlier versions. The outersole continues with the durable X-10 carbon rubber heel and G3 forefoot, integrating effective traction and light weight. This combination of light weight, stability, and a responsive ride earned the Elixir honors as our Best Shoe in the Performance category. “Overall, an exceptional shoe. Durable, comfy, and supportive enough for daily use, yet light enough for those pickups and longer races. The only downside is the forefoot. I ended up with a few tender spots in the forefoot after running on gravel.” Updates the Wave Elixir 6 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15; Women 6–11 • Weight: 10.9 oz. (men’s 11); 9.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted 21 | Running Network 2012 Spring Shoe Review
BEST SHOE Performance SP
RIN G 201
PERFORMANCE New Balance 890 v2
When it was introduced last year, the 890 made a splash thanks to its innovative materials and serious performance. Round 2 presents a couple of refinements. The upper has subtle changes to maintain support without affecting fit: reshaped, no-sew overlays in the forefoot and welded saddle supports shave grams from an already-spare starting point. The gaps in the overlays at the throat allow better articulation with the foot as it moves and make the upper more flexible. The midsole geometry has been reworked by reducing the heel-to-toe drop slightly and resculpting the heel bevel for a smoother touchdown. The outersole sports more durable rubber in the forefoot, as the reshaped midsole encourages a fuller landing. The result is a peppy and durable high-mileage trainer that’s light, flexible, and versatile. “Very snug fitting, much like the previous model of the 890. I still really like the way they fit my feet, snugging up around the middle of the foot. Many of the lightweight training shoes I have tried have some sort of pressure spot somewhere in the upper, but these have absolutely none. Very comfy from heel to toe.” Updates the 890 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (D,2E); Women 5–11,12 (2A,B,D) • Weight: 10.4 oz. (men’s 11); 8.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, PU Strobel board
Nike Zoom Elite+ 5
A brand new shoe, the Zoom Elite replaces the Lunar Elite. The midsole shifts back to the Cushlon-and-Zoom Air partnership favored by many fans of the original (the recent resurrection, not the late ’70s version, for those of you who go that far back!). This version is soft, yet provides a firmer and more responsive ride than did the Lunar Elite. The combinationlasted construction features a small fiber board to stabilize the heel and gets a big assist from the snug fit of the heel. The upper is a well-tailored, quasi-racer fit of open mesh with a minimal and newly developed system of midfoot straps that create a saddle-like framework that does an impressive job of securing the foot to the midsole. The outersole returns to the BRS 1000 heel with Duralon blown rubber in the forefoot. A lateral forefoot waffle tread provides additional cushioning, while medial waffles are more durable and provide a bite on softer surfaces. The effect is a reliable shoe for faster-paced runs. “They fit well, have a roomy toe box and tighten nicely around the middle of the foot. I’m not usually a Nike fan, but I liked this shoe. Comfortable ride and good cushioning, as well as stability. This is a good shoe.” Replaces the Lunar Elite+ 2 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to very mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 6–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: 11.3 oz. (men’s 11); 8.9 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: combination Strobel-lasted, fiberboard (heel), EVA Strobel board (forefoot)
Pearl Izumi Kissaki
The Kissaki takes its name from the business end of a Samurai sword. The implication is swift and agile which, not coincidentally, describes its performance. While similar in profile to the Streak and IsoTransition, Pearl’s competition offerings, here the cushioning inserts are larger, the midsole is more generous, and the addition of an EVA Strobel board add up to a comfortable shoe for up-tempo running. The outersole is durable enough for daily training, and segmented for excellent flexibility. The upper offers a close fit and seamless interior that’s kept lighter by the use of welded overlays and a medial wrap at the laces. The tongue is open only on the lateral side, which substantially shores up the foot. The Kissaki is a responsive, flexible shoe that wraps the foot securely for faster-paced runs and longer races. “These felt great the moment I put them on. I really liked the upper support for my feet. The stitched tongue gives it a secure, solid feel, while keeping things cool and dry ... no blisters or hot spots.” NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14; Women 5–11,12 • Weight: 11.4 oz. (men’s 11); 8.9 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
Scott MK 4 BEST RENOVATION SPRING 2012
Round 4 of Scott’s MK series (originally the Makani) has morphed into something different. The upper is open mesh over the toes and closed mesh on the saddle/rearfoot. The Ergologic Fit has been better integrated; here the gusseted forefoot and enshrouding saddle meet more cooperatively to wrap and secure the foot. The midsole foam, called Aero Foam, is completely new and resilient. Scott takes a new approach by combining the solidness underfoot with sidewalls molded into a matrix of deep grooves that resist compression without the deep flex grooves in the midsole. This allows both the necessary flex and full heel, while preserving the integrity of the lighter-weight foam longer. The midfoot is now supported solely by the carbon fiber shank, making the shoe purely neutral. The outersole is simplified: a thin carbon rubber throughout, grooved at heel and toe, textured for the traction regions, and pared away in the low-wear areas. It’s a durable and effective set-up. The combination of innovation, fit, and performance earned the MK4 honors as one of two Best Renovations in this Review. “Great fit, snug in the midfoot but with good room for my toes. Well-cushioned, but not too soft. Really love the ride.” Updates the MK 3 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 8–14; Women 6–11 • Weight: 9.6 oz. (men’s 11); 7.6 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved to curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted
Under Armour Charge RC
With the Charge RC, Under Armour moves in a new direction, or at least toward the fullfilment of promise. The upper trades on the compression fit Under Armour is known for, from earlier versions with a more run-of-the-mill close, stretchy fit. The upper design is split: The snug forefoot wraps from the arch to the fifth metatarsal and is overlapped by the rearfoot saddle that extends to the metatarsal heads, securing the shoe. The midsole is injection-molded EVA that provides consistent cushioning. A TPU plate adds a little flex and support to the shoe and stiffens it a bit. It also makes it more responsive in the larger sizes, though less so in the smaller sizes. The outersole is traditional carbon rubber in the heel and blown rubber in the forefoot, but it’s arranged in small pods to reduce the weight. This new direction is a positive step for Under Armour Running, and provides another quality performance shoe option. “Between the fit and the flex in the very front of the shoe, my forefoot is allowed to move in the way it wants, instead of how the shoe wants me to [move]. The ride is firm and it feels good.” NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15; Women 5–10 • Weight: 10.4 oz. (men’s 11); 8.2 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted 22 | Running Network 2012 Spring Shoe Review
MOTION STABILIZING BrooksAdrenalineGTS12
Powered by gradual tweaks in fit, technologies, and materials, the Adrenaline has become the bestselling shoe in running specialty. Round 12 addresses the usual types of refinements that are made between technological jumps. The upper is slightly different with HF-welded overlays on the lateral side smoothing the interior. The stretchy saddle-like lateral overlays now feature stretch at the top and bottom and have been repositioned for a more conforming fit. The midsole has lost the plastic supports in favor of a reshaped sidewall and more specifically directed grooving in the crashpad. The forefoot features Flextra, a compound tailored to both gender and shoe size, to improve flexion and cushioning in the forefoot. All are positive changes for runners looking for stability and cushioning, and especially good news for Adrenaline GTS junkies. “Overall, they feel comfortable. Especially the fit—snug over the arch—and the mesh feels fresh while running. I also very much like the cushy feel and stability of the shoes.” Updates the Adrenaline GTS 11 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (B,D,2E,4E); Women 5–12,13 (2A,B,D,EE) • Weight: 12.1 oz. (men’s 11); 9.3 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel combination-lasted, fiberboard (heel), S-257 Cushsole EVA Strobel board (forefoot)
Mizuno Wave Inspire 8
Round 8 sees the most significant changes to the Inspire yet. The breathable upper has overlays that are substantial at heel and toe, thin along the medial and lateral sides, with HF-welded overlays from heel counter to eyestay laterally with a stretchier material at the toes. The lacing set-up provides a little stretch and, since the upper group of eyelets flexes separately from the lower set, allows the foot controlled freedom. The midsole manages a softer touchdown with contouring, as Mizuno began rolling out last season. The asymmetrical Wave plate gets some tweaking to boost its effectiveness and perhaps lightens it up. The outersole features redesigned flex grooves, especially the hinge-like SmoothRide inserts in the forefoot, and the ride is a bit better. The fit and performance are the best assets of the Inspire, a franchise that continues to improve as it matures. “Very light shoes, especially great considering how much cushion and support they offer. This is my first time trying this brand, and I highly recommend Mizuno. I am converted.” Updates the Wave Inspire 7 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15,16 (D,2E); Women 6–12 (2A,B,D) • Weight: 11.8 oz. (men’s 11); 9.0 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted
Nike Lunar Eclipse+ 2 BEST SHOE Motion Stabilizing SP
RIN G 201
Lunarlon’s introduction in 2008 launched a new line of Nike shoes; the Lunar Eclipse takes top billing for its plush reputation. In Round 2, the heel clip has been pared down; it still anchors the heel fit, but lightens things up a little. The midfoot adopts a self-adjusting framework of straps to secure the foot during motion, a task previously managed by Flywire. This new system is more effective. The closed mesh features no-sew overlays and has a soft, luxe feeling, even where the midfoot straps secure the foot. The unchanged midsole was well dialed-in with Round 1, as the Eclipse benefited from being a later arrival to the Lunar party. The outersole uses the same molding but now features “environmentally preferred” rubber, which is tough and good for traction. The combination of fit, stability, and plush feel earned the Lunar Eclipse 2 our award for Best Motion Stabilizing shoe. “Overall, a fun shoe to have on for a run. It transitions very smoothly from heel to forefoot for a quiet, gliding run. I run 250–300 miles per month. Minimal wear after 100 miles. Seems to be very durable.” Updates the Lunar Eclipse+ • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 6–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: 12.4 oz. (men’s 11); 9.6 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
Puma Faas 800
The latest shoe in Puma’s Faas lineup, the Faas 800 provides stability through geometry. The midsole is shaped for full-ground contact to improve stability, while supportive molding in the medial sidewall retains integrity and durability. The midsole adds some stability with its canted shape (the medial side is just a bit taller than the lateral side), but the ride is still similar to the Faas 500 or 550. The upper is lightweight, featuring a supportive saddle of no-sew synthetic suede, and the form stripes are more prominent here, providing their support unobtrusively, but effectively. The outersole is minimal in design, with EverRide blown rubber in the forefoot and EverTrack carbon rubber in the heel, but only in the highest-wear areas. Though the 800 is on the heavy side, it’s still light for the amount of built-in stability, so it’s a more-than-fair trade-off. “Nice, light feel, fit securely. Good cushioning and stability, the way I like them.” NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15; Women 6–12 • Weight: 11.6 oz. (men’s 11); 8.8 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
Saucony PowerGrid Hurricane 14 BEST RENOVATION SPRING 2012
Spring 2012 ushers in significant changes to Saucony’s mainline shoes and the Hurricane features two such changes to its midsole. The first is a switch to PowerGrid foam, proven in the Cortana last fall. The second is the adoption of 8-millimeter geometry (the drop in height from heel-to-toe) allowing a more moderate footstrike, thought to improve running form and efficiency. Perhaps most impressive is that it’s at least 5% lighter. The upper adopts an articulated eyestay to wrap and move with the foot, thanks to the stretchy midfoot insert called SaucFit. The outersole features more surface contact yet has a reduced amount of rubber, and redesigned flex grooves improve flexibility and stability. The combination of stability and cushioning, lighter weight, and improved performance earned the Hurricane honors as one of two Best Renovations in this Review. “The Hurricane has been my shoe of choice for the last 5 years. This is a totally different shoe, but what a change. I love them! They are much lighter, but fit as well and have a cushier and more stable ride.” Updates the ProGrid Hurricane 13 • Recommended for: low- to medium-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (D,2E); Women 5–12 • Weight: 11.9 oz. (men’s 11); 9.3 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board
24 | Running Network 2012 Spring Shoe Review
Interview with Nobby Hashizume: Lydiard Foundation How did you get involved in running? I was into “jumping” when I moved up to middle school—high jump, long jump, triple jump. And Victor Saneyev was my hero. So I joined [the] track & field team. I ran 100m in 12.5—not that great. I may have eventually brought it down to 12.3 but I ended up beating all the seniors in a 2000m run—the longest event for middle schoolers in Japan at the time. I figured, 12.5 for 100 won’t get me too far in any of [the] jumping event[s] so I may have a better shot in distance events. I ended up running 5:58 for 2000m in my senior year, but I also won both triple jump and 2000m in one of the district meets, which I would say is very unique. I triple-jumped 12m20 or something in middle school. Triple jump is still one of my favorite events to watch—and my wife thinks it’s one of the weirdest events!
How did you meet Arthur Lydiard? I picked up Run to the Top [and] translated [it] in[to] Japanese when I was 15. I thought all those blackand-white pictures were cool and a story of Murray Halberg—to become an Olympic champion from [a] near-death incidence and with one arm just hanging—is all so inspiring. But of course I had no idea about the actual training. 100 miles a week!? I went straight to the schedule—like most people do when they purchase Running with Lydiard today. I had that book for the longest time (I gave it to one of my runners at Hitachi team when I moved to Minnesota), but it’s funny to see my handwriting to scratch 20x400m workout and such, because I knew, as a middle schooler, I couldn’t have done such a tough workout! Arthur autographed that book for me, but he saw that and he just looked at me with a smile and shook his head! At any rate, fast forward to 1980 and I came to Washington State and went to Bloomsday in May of 1981 and ran into Joe Henderson. A few months later, I wrote to him and, for the heck of it, asked if he had Lydiard’s address. He replied but he put Arthur’s address on the outside the envelope and I would have missed it (his handwriting wasn’t the clearest one I’ve [ever] seen) if it’s not for my roommate asking me [if] this “letter [was] from New Zealand.” I said no and took a look. So, in a way, if it’s not for this roommate of mine, Doug, I may have never met Arthur. I wrote to him. He sent me Athletic Training, which now is available at our Lydiard Foundation website, www.lydiardfoundation.org/pdfs/al_training_eng.pdf, and he “coached” me by correspondence for a while. Then he told me that he was coming to Seattle later
that year so I took an overnight Greyhound bus from Moses Lake, Washington to Seattle to meet him. We kept corresponding for a couple of years. I still have most of his handwritten letters. I visited his clinics sponsored by Phedippides [a] couple of times and he kept asking me, “So when are you coming to New Zealand?” I was 24 and thought, it’s now or never! At the time, [a] Japanese [visitor] can stay in New Zealand for only 6 months with a tourist visa but Arthur wrote a personal letter to [the] Council General to sponsor me for 12 months. I stayed in Manurewa, where John Walker and Mike Ryun also lived, and ran on a grass track where Murray Halberg broke 28 minutes for 6 miles, from November 1983 till November 1984. During that period, Ray Puckett took me under his wings and taught me most of what I know about Lydiardism in a practical sense. Arthur came to the U.S. for [the] LA Olympics and, during that time, his second wife, Eira, got very sick and eventually passed away on the day I left New Zealand. I remember visiting his house before heading out to the airport. In 1984, Ian Ferguson won three Gold medals in kayaking, training the Lydiard Way and, at the welcoming athletes’ banquet, NZAAA presented Arthur [with] a silver plate for his contribution to New Zealand athletics. He just shoved that plate into my hand. Besides my thought at the time of “Man, now I have to repack my suitcase at the airport!” I felt a sense of responsibility handed to me at that moment. And Arthur didn’t forget about it. When he visited my house in 1999 during his U.S. tour, he asked about it and, thank God, I had it displayed in our living room! By the way, that tour wouldn’t have happened without the support and commitment from you and Shooting Star Media. So belated “thanks” for that!
How did you meet Lorraine Moller? Well, interestingly, it was Bloomsday also where I first met Lorraine. But she wasn’t in the friendliest mood because her archrival, Anne Audain, [had] just beat her there. It must have been in 1982 or 83. Then I saw her again in New Zealand, preparing for [the] LA Olympics. Then in 1986 at the U.S. T&F championships, winning 3000m handily. You have to remember here, Lorraine Moller is considered as the marathon queen in Japan, having won [the] Osaka Ladies Marathon three times and Hokkaido Marathon twice. She was invited back to Hokkaido in 2009, and she and I had a couple of clinic gigs there. I guess we just kept running into each other— we even ran into her when I was a Hitachi coach and Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012 25
we were having a training camp in New Zealand. We were running around Cornwell Park and there she was, running. Her brother, Gary, tried to start [a] Lydiard Foundation in New Zealand in 2004, which both Lorraine and I were also a part of. It was only natural that both Lorraine and myself carried on with it.
Why does Arthur Lydiard resonate so much with distance runners? I think a big part of it is because he brought “enjoyment” to [an] otherwise monk-like disciplinary attitude that welcome[d] suffering. In his original book, Run to the Top, he says, “I decided to enjoy running.” I had many runs with him while in New Zealand. And all the weekend long runs I had with Ray Puckett, some of the runs were very tough—I [had] never run such rugged cross country courses as some bush track Ray had taken me [on] and we would run sometimes close to three hours— but we always told jokes and there was always laughter. That’s what usually long runs would turn out to be. Not like those gut-busting intervals. And there’s this great sense of superb fitness that comes with those long runs. Before Lydiard, most distance runners did almost all training on track in a form of intervals. Then came Lydiard, interestingly along with Cerutty and Germany’s van Aaken, who took runners out on the road and trail and run for hours. A few years back, Amby Burfoot interviewed me about Lydiard’s hill training. His first question was “Why Lydiard?” I quickly replied, “Because it makes sense!” His sequential training really makes sense to me. It’s a very natural progression and, if done correctly, times will come down from one year to the next. And it becomes “fun” when that happens. There’s no guesswork with [the] Lydiard program. Remember, a week before he passed away, he was in Boulder, giving a clinic. Someone asked him, “How did you deal with pain?” He said, “What pain? My athletes had fun.” All the “Arthur’s Boys” and other Kiwi runners I got associated with, I can tell you that he wasn’t exaggerating.
Tell us about the Lydiard Foundation. How can people make donations? We are a nonprofit organization. We operate on donation[s], membership[s] and now, hopefully, from income from this online training program. We have been fortunate that the late Brian Maxwell and his wife, Jennifer, helped us for three years (www.lydiardfoundation.org/blog/EntryDisplay.asp x?EntryID=108). Also the inventor of Breathe Right Nasal Strips, Bruce Johnson, has helped us from the beginning, way back even before the Lydiard 2004 Final U.S. Tour. Also we’ve had many people and organizations chipping in and helping us along the way. Personally I wish we could do this without having to worry about money or charging people— you ask anybody I personally coach; I never charge a penny—but unfortunately, “No Buck, No Buck 18 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
Rogers.” We can’t afford to do what we do without [a] certain budget. Anybody who is interested in making [a] donation will be more than welcome and their generosity will be greatly appreciated. You can either send a check directly to us or go to our website, www.lydiardfoundation.org, and go to [the] “Members” page to make a donation via PayPal. Our mission is to “restore the legacy of Arthur Lydiard.” What he had done is just incredible. He didn’t have any motivation to coach champions or anything but almost stumbled across this revolutionary training method which just makes perfect physiological sense. He came up with this system by basically using a commonsense [approach]. I’m working on creating a DVD based on Arthur’s talk back in 1983 and 1963. If you listen very carefully—he gets to talk[ing] so fast, you miss so much if you’re not careful—it really starts to make sense and [you can] understand why his system works so well. He talks about how he advised this long-distance swimmer, Barry Devemport, to develop supreme stamina by “jogging.” Of course, the same thing happened in the 1980s with some kayakers in New Zealand who came out and won a bunch of Gold medals in [the] LA Olympics. The principles really work and they still work today. Our goal is to convey this legacy and explain why it works so well and how you can carry on for yourself. And, of course, we cannot forget his legacy of starting [the] jogging movement. I have been involved with Japanese elite running for quite some time and it’s amazing how much they still praise the influence of Lydiard in Japan. Mr. Chosa, who has been the head of [the] Japanese Federation for the longest time, told me when I talked to him at [the] Tokyo Women’s Marathon back in 2006, “Lydiard had made Japanese marathoning as it is today.” I was asked last year to write a book on [the] Lydiard training method for “ordinary runners” in Japanese. In the U.S., Bill Bowerman, who started [the] jogging movement on this side of the earth, was the one who announced, “I am but the disciple. Arthur Lydiard of New Zealand is the prophet.” But where perhaps a million people run a marathon [who] probably don’t know what Lydiard had done and how he did it. Personally, I am very intrigued how Lydiard turned a 60-year-old heart attack patient into a 4-hour marathon runner in 8 months. As I see so many people struggle to break 4 hours, I’ve actually started to see what’s going on. I’m still studying; but I believe “Lydiard” could still help so many more people if they are willing to take a moment and analyze. We still have a long way to go, as an organization, to spread Arthur’s teaching; but we are getting there one step at a time.
Tell us about your new training site. It is at www.go2lydiard.com and we are developing it to be the place where people can go there and prepare for the races. We are adding races and teams around the country as well as running route[s]. But of course, the main feature there is our
online training program, Master Run Coach. It is originally developed by [the] former Athletic West coach/exercise physiologist Dick Brown. He had been successfully using this program, then an excel form, with his athletes. He developed it based on Lydiard[’s] schedule; but we could see some modifications [were] necessary so we all got together in the spring of 2010 and talked it over. But how it automatically calculate[s] your VO2Max, and appl[ies] that to the actual training paces, how it progresses and all that—that is all Dick’s program. He spent two years developing this formula and we spent two more years to perfect it. We basically tried to make this the ultimate “idiot-proof” Lydiard. Over the years (decades!), people argued how [the] Lydiard program can be applied to, say, high school runners. They always say, “Well, we can’t do it because we don’t have a 24 weeks; we don’t have three months to do the build-up.” Well, that would be ideal, but if you can’t, you can still accommodate [runners] by applying the principles, not a formula. We tried to implement what Arthur had taught us along the developing of this program. For example, so we have 24-week program as the basis. If you only have 23 weeks, well, Arthur always said, “Interval training is the least important.” Okay, so we remove one week from [the] Anaerobic Development Phase. But he also always said that it had to be balanced. So if you only have 22 weeks, now we take one week from [the] Anaerobic Development Phase and, instead of taking another week from [the] Anaerobic Development Phase, we took one week from [the] Coordination Phase because it’s basically still Anaerobic Development. He also said, “There’s no more rewarding way than training on hills,” so we kept [the] Hill Training Phase as long as possible. Now we have faced some dilemma[s]; today we have so many people, as myself once was, who, claiming that Lydiard said [that] conditioning is the most important part of the program, and never get away from it and, never move on to more racespecific training and, consequently, never fulfill his/her racing potential. People who may have run a couple of marathons but never worked on speed can be classified in this category. Some dedicated kids who had run through all summer and came to the program [for] 15 weeks to the race can be [in] this group as well. They wouldn’t need another 10 weeks of conditioning; they need to move on to more racespecific training. So we developed Plan A and Plan B. Plan A is for those who need more aerobic development: beginners, freshman/sophomore in high school. But Plan B is for [the] more experienced runner, who had been running in the past three months, junior/senior in high school. So with Plan B, we start to remove one week from Conditioning Phase and kept the entire Hill Training and Anaerobic Development, Coordination Phase. Remember, all these training [elements] are important. You’ve got to have a balanced whole cycle to be race-ready. You can’t do one way and not the other. So we provided
an “idiot-proof” way of creating the most [well]suited program for each and every case scenario. We ended up creating 1,425 separate programs to be plugged into our website. We got to the point where the training module became too big and started to get some glitches. So we had to divide it into five smaller modules for each event: 1500m, 5K, 10K, half marathon and full marathon. I can say, with good confidence, that this is probably the most individualized and complete training plan out there.
How can athletes use it? Buy the program! (laughter) Seriously, we are still working very hard to make it more user friendly. I was in charge of programs and I got so used to it that I just don’t think anything of getting various programs. It was only when we actually launched it in December and people started to use it that we started to get some feedback. We are constantly changing it to make it more user friendly. But as long as the program itself is concerned, I get [a] chill just playing around with it! (laughter) I mean, it works so beautifully—our web guy, Dallas Jones, who one time was a 46-second 400m runner, did a great job. It was not an easy over-taking. You basically plug in your most recent race time—for those who hadn’t raced, we will soon introduce Dick Brown’s “VO2Max Interview”—to get the estimated VO2Max. All the training paces will be based on this calculated VO2Max. From there, you just pick the event you’re training for, the date you want to start the program, the date of the target race, whether you should go with Plan A or B, how many days you can commit to training per week and the longest duration of run you feel comfortable doing right now. Now, you have to be honest to yourself with this because, as Lydiard had said about the effort chart, “The only person he’s fooling is himself” if you are not being honest about your condition. Now, since we’ve launched this program and now [that] people have been using it, we have come to notice a couple of interesting trends. One is that some people felt the pace seems too easy. We actually poke[d] it, dissect[ed] it inside and out, and twist[ed] it around (seriously, we didn’t take it too lightly), and we have come to this conclusion: If you feel the suggested pace is too easy, then (a) you had never sharpened and peaked properly that your race time and, therefore, your projected VO2Max doesn’t justify your real current potential (in other words, you should be running faster if you trained correctly) or (b) you had been training too fast. If you honestly feel (a) is the case, then you might want to consider “winging” your current race time and subtract 5% and see how the pace looks like. Just recently, I played around with the program and plugged in Arthur’s original runner’s performance, say, 28:30 for 10,000m (I think Barry Magee ran 28:50 on a cinder track). In the first week, you’ll be running 52 minutes out and back at [a] 5:44 pace, or [a] 5:27 fastest suggested pace. Then after 10 weeks of conditioning, you’ll be running 66 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012 27
minutes at [a] 5:36 pace, or [a] 5:18 fastest suggested pace. I remember Barry telling me that they would start out Friday [with a] 10¾-mile effort in about 55–57 minutes and bring it down to 52–53 minutes. That’s pretty equivalent. We did go by an easier side because of what Arthur always said, as did Bowerman or any good coach in history, “It’s always better to be undertrained than overtrained.” Or as Dick Brown always says, “If in doubt, do less.” We even plugged in Chris Solinski’s 26:59 and compare[d] that with [his] reported workout pace and it came pretty close. It is important to not just to look at the first few weeks but the last 4–5 weeks and the paces there, and also utilize the pace—and duration—range effectively. The second thing is the longest run for the marathon. The longest that will go is about 2:30 and, for slower runners, it may only mean about 12 miles or so. We feel that far too many people today are drilled with the idea of 3x20-milers. Arthur was the one who changed his own idea of 100MPW to timebased training simply because he had noticed that slower people were doing it too much. I cannot imagine what some of those slower runners are doing—like run/walk 20 miles on [a] weekend at [a] 14-minute-mile pace!—is actually good for the development. That’s way too much training. We accumulated quite a few sample marathon programs around the world and realized that not too many other countries encourage people to do 4 or 5 or 6 hours of “long run” training. Take marathon-craz[y] Japan, for example. Legendary marathon coach Yoshio Koide (coach of Naoko Takahashi, 2000 Sydney Olympic marathon Gold medalist and the first woman to break 2:20 for the marathon) recently published a book and in it said, “If you can run for 90 minutes, you should be able to finish a marathon.” Koide also said, however, that the program would have to be all rounded—or, in other words, well balanced. He said, “Just running an hour a day, day in and day out, is not training and may not get you to the finish line.” He is, incidentally, a supporter of our program and most probably will help us spread it in Japan. We showed it to him last August at his Boulder house. I’m quite confident that, even though the longest run may even be 12 miles, I would expect people to start posting their PRs.
How can clubs and teams use it? Just this morning I received a call from my old longlost friend from Oregon. He’s now coaching a high school team in Texas and is interested in using Master Run Coach for 50 runners that he has on his team. As I said earlier, I would very much like to see high school coaches to take advantage of this program. I mean, you don’t have to sit and work on the individual program; you just plug in the runner’s information and the whole thing will be there. Of course, the only thing is, it still takes [an] actual live
28 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
coach’s input for any program to work most effectively, so some tweaking may be needed. But the whole Lydiard-based training program is available in any shape and form you may desire through Master Run Coach. The same thing can be true with any team or local running club. One of the things we would like to accomplish is, along with this Master Run Coach, is making our Lydiard Certificate Program available online and making it more easily accessible. This is one of our intentions for [the] www.go2lydiard.com website; to identify Lydiard coaches around the area—we already have a few—so you can allocate a local Lydiard coach and go to them for advice and suggestion[s]. This is our next big project.
Any more thoughts on the Lydiard Foundation? At one point, we thought about a possibility of getting away from the man and just promote the program. Like I said earlier, for whatever the reason, in the U.S., some people associate the name “Lydiard” with [an] “old-fashion[ed]” and “outdated” training method (unlike Japan). So we thought about disassociat[ing] ourselves from that image. In the end, we went against it. [The] Lydiard Foundation is as much [about] training principles as the man himself. We have had many people who offered some priceless items of Arthur Lydiard[’s] simply because it’s for the Old Man. Barbara Bowerman used to tell me that I bring out this “circle of friends” through running. Whenever she said that, I actually thought, “No, it’s through Arthur.” This DVD project I’ve been working on; it really makes me feel like I’m “reviving” Arthur Lydiard. It makes me feel really good. Some people sent us video clip[s] of Lydiard or [a] recording of his talk or some images from old and new. Someday, we would love to have some place where we could display these things. The Interactive Time Line that we have on our website (www.lydiardfoundation.org/about/timeLine.aspx) in a way is to show his influence throughout the world and throughout the history of athletics. We would love someday to do that in real life, not just a cyberworld. They say that a person dies twice. Once physically, and once when all of his/her memories are gone from the rest of us. But there is a third kind: that is the gift that person has left for us goes on and on and on. Then he/she will live forever. I had been blessed with the gift of running and friendship[s] I had acquired through running. But that is actually the gift Arthur Lydiard had given me through the act of running. I feel I owe it to him. And, when you look into it, most of us owe it to him. When Arthur passed away in Texas, I called all the Arthur’s Boys to let them know. That was the first time I got to talk to Sir Murray Halberg. He said, “It’s not the time to feel sad. But instead, let’s celebrate the life of the man.” I hope we can all get together to do just that. And I hope [the] Lydiard Foundation is the place to do so.
Jenn Suhr sets an American record of 16 feet at the 2012 New Balance Indoor Grand Prix.
Photo: Victah, PhotoRun.NET
Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
Gender in Broadcasting by Lesley Higgins
ack in the 1980s and 90s, research was conducted on gender equality in broadcasting. The research showed a discrepancy between the way men’s and women’s events were covered. They found that men were routinely referred to as men , yet women were often referred to as girls. They also found that men were routinely referred to by their last names, while women were often referred to by their first names. Broadcasters’ unspoken reasoning for this was that the hierarchy in our society results in those of higher rank being addressed more by their last name, and the lesser members by their first. The sport of track & field offers a unique opportunity to observe a gender-split broadcast, where the same announcers cover both men and women in the same time slot. So, I sat down and watched archived video of track & field from this millennium and paid attention to those gender issues. The broadcasters had almost a perfect record of referring to women as women and men as men. There were two instances of the word girls, but not so much that it was an issue. Athletes’ first and last names, or last names only, were uniformly used. There was one glaring difference, though, between the college coverage and the postcollegiate coverage. The college coverage was very to the point, very on the topic of the sport for both genders. The coverage of the 2008 Olympic Trials, however, was peppered with a lot of human-interest stories that had nothing to do with the sport of running. The stories covered during the 3000m steeplechase, for example, were Anna Willard’s engagement, Anna Willard’s hair and Delilah Decrescenzo attending the Grammys. On the men’s side, there were fewer human-interest stories, and the most common had to do with naturalized citizenship, which is a relevant topic, especially at the Olympic Trials. There were no discussions about engagements, and rarely of children. The dialog was consistent with the sport of track & field. Human-interest stories play an interesting role in coverage of all sports. The point is to humanize the athletes. The goal is to attract new fans, create loyal followings for certain well-marketed athletes and inspire future generations of runners to follow good role models. If this is the goal, then we need to look at the way the men and women are talked about, and what topics are appropriate to discuss. I would argue that what is appropriate isn’t even necessarily the same for both genders. For example, the implications of discussing the body weight, height and structure of each gender differs wildly. It may seem balanced that a discussion about the height and weight of Chris Solinsky in comparison to his often-smaller 10,000m competitors is equivalent to the same observations about a female athlete being larger than her competitors. It is not. It’s a fact that young girls are the most susceptible subset to eating disorders. It’s also a fact that distance runners are some of the most susceptible of any sport. If the goal of humanizing athletes is to create loyal fans and a devoted following, discussions about a female runner’s weight need to be left out of the discussion, especially when it’s tied to performance. The fact that I can recall specific quotes about female athlete’s bodies years after they were spoken is a testament to the power of making such associations. I remember being shocked during a 2006 broadcast of the NYC Marathon when one of the announcers made the statement that a local athlete was clearly not built like a marathoner. This athlete was one of the biggest talents to come out of the state, and the suggestion that the one thing keeping her from competing with 2:30 marathoners was her size is something that our future generations of runners do not need to hear. Maybe an athlete’s weight is relevant to the sport, but there are so many more relevant things to talk about during a broadcast. For example: the race. The conversation can cover the race being run, the tactics being employed and some interesting tidbits about the athletes as they relate to the sport. There’s still a place for human-interest stories, especially during marathon coverage where the announcers have over two hours of airtime to fill. During track, where often several hours of events are condensed down to an hour or two, perhaps the conversation should stay more on point.
32 Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012
Brittney Reese at the World Indoor Athletics Championships in Istanbul, Turkey
Photo: Jiro Mochizuki, PhotoRun.NET
Coaching Athletics Quarterly - Spring 2012