I found an interesting interview the other day by Amby Burfoot, a Runner's World columnist, with Alberto Salazar. The interview was conducted in light of Mr. Salazar's forthcoming autobiography, 14 Minutes, which hits bookstores today (see a review here, or the amazon page here).
The interview (see part I and part II) interested me for a number of reasons, but two stood out in particular. First was Mr. Salazar's discussion of Galen Rupp's potential marathon debut. As some may know, Mr. Rupp surprised many by entering the US Olympic Marathon Trials this past year, only to withdraw shortly before the race. The incident sparked much discussion regarding Mr. Rupp's marathon potential, given his 10km and half-marathon results. Later, rumors arose that Mr. Rupp would make his marathon debut following the London Olympics in 2012. These rumors where quashed in the interview we're now discussing. In it, Mr. Salazar mentions briefly why he's ruled out the marathon for his charge for the time being:
"He [Rupp] absolutely will run the marathon some day. I’ve had conversations with both Carey Pinkowski and Mary Wittenberg [Chicago and New York City Marathon directors] about Galen running their races this fall. At first I was thinking that he could run a fall marathon and then get back to where he was in maybe five months to be ready for the next track season.
Now I’m looking at it another way. I’m looking at Galen’s improvement curve, which is basically continuous through his entire career to this point. And I’m thinking: Why do anything that interrupts the improvement curve? Our goal isn’t to experiment with something new that might work out, but might not. Our goal is to keep improving."
As the Letsrun.com link from above (here) hints at, some people believe marathon training would be ideal for Mr. Rupp's development in shorter distances. After all, the example is not without precedent. Discussed in this Running Times article, Peter Snell ran his first (and only) marathon in the build-up to his world-record 1:44.3 800m on grass in 1962. Yet as we discussed in an earlier post, marathon running seems to cause a kind of muscle damage from which it takes considerable time to recover (upwards of six-weeks according to some studies). This does not suggest people should not run marathons; it does suggest, however, that muscles damaged in marathons take a long time to heal. In Mr. Rupp's case, who is to say that time might not be more effectively employed developing other components of fitness?
This leads to the second point from the interview which I found interesting. At one point, Amby Burfoot asks Mr. Salazar what he thought was the biggest mistake in his running career. To this he replied:
" I didn’t give myself enough breaks during the training year to recover. I didn’t understand the power of periodization. I would take maybe two days off after a season, then do 70 miles the next week, and 100 the week after that. I basically got no rest at all.
My training was very, very hard, but that’s something you have to do. I wouldn’t change that. You can’t run incredible races without incredibly hard workouts. Nobody can do mediocre workouts, and then sprinkle pixie dust on them to produce great races. I did the workouts, but didn’t have the recovery periods, and that’s why I burned out sooner than I should have."
Accordingly, Mr. Salazar puts a strong emphasis on recovery for the athletes he coaches today:
"With my runners now, they get two month-long breaks during the year. In the first, after summer track season ends, they take two weeks completely off, and then do two weeks of easy jogging. In March, they take a week off, do a week of jogging, and then do two moderate weeks with light interval training before they get back into the real training cycle.
I’ve found that my athletes run their best races after about 10 weeks of intense training. They can’t sustain it and get the same results if they go beyond 10 weeks. And 20 weeks of training with less intensity doesn’t lead to the same peak."
In addition to his point on recovery, Mr. Salazar also echoes conclusions we've discussed regarding periodization and peaking, in that it takes about 10-weeks of intense training to reach a peak level of fitness for a season. Longer periods with less intensity, as he notes, produce less-favorable results.
Mr. Salazar's approach to coaching, so far as it is revealed in this interview, is instructive in that it points to an understanding of training that's focused on long-term improvement. In addition to his knowledge of modern training theory, Mr. Salazar also draws on his own experiences with over-training and pre-mature decline. Indeed, for all the importance Dr. Tim Noakes puts on the superior genetic pedigree of elite athletes, Mr. Salazar's partnership with Galen Rupp this past decade is a testament to the efficacy of a sensibly-designed training program for cultivating continuous improvement. Mr. Salazar's refusal to enter Rupp in a marathon is perhaps just one more indication of this focus on long-term development. I'm sure many would disagree with this approach, but I do not. Well-conceived training is a blessing not every athlete gets in their athletic life, and it's possible that Mr. Salazar's experiences with a spectacular-yet-short career may well benefit Mr. Rupp and others as they seek out the limits of their own potential. Something worth considering anyway.
Happy Tuesday, friends :)
If you enjoyed this post, feel free to share it with others. Many thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment