• Login
  • |
  • Contact

    LIVE SUPPORT

    SEND US A MESSAGE

    ContactCode

    OTHER

    Email:
    info@trackie.com

    Voicemail:
    1.877.456.5544

You are viewing page of 2.

Discussion Forum >>

U SPORTS PREDICTION CONTEST!
Reply to topic Go to last post
Avatar
Anonymous
Posts: 47675
thumbs_up 2
Report  ORIGINAL

Anonymous said 1 week ago

Sanity prevails in BC

Show Original Post
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #26 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Runningman
    "So what you are saying is that you know better than the provincial & national track governing associations?

    The decision was made to fall in line with the governing bodies. Fact of the matter is that participation dropped in 2018 and dropout rates in the races increased significantly.


    Wake up and smell the coffee. Even the IOC is against pushing adolescent athletes too hard too soon. They have produced an encyclopedia sized publication on adolescent development. If you have a spare $300 you can buy a copy.

    Here is Seb Coe on the topic https://youtu.be/T04eR_ygi7Q

    If you put the Top 25 US XC teams against the Top 25 Canadian how do you think Canada would do?

    How many medals has Canada won at the WC and Olympics in races 800m and over in the past 25 years?"


    Did you even watch the Coe clip before posting it, or did you just want to pretend you were grounding your argument by including a vague reference or two in your post? He talks for a minute or two about 14-15 year olds training too hard and perhaps racing too much, so that they are not prepared to do the really important work at ages 17 and up-- you know, senior high school and junior, which is the relevant age group when discussing XC distances. This kind of general discussion is fine but its a long way from the specific question of XC distances and what role they play in LTAD.

    As for the Canada US comparison, this is ridiculous. Among all of the things that might drive superior development in the US you pick out the fact that they has very slightly shorter XC distances in high school? What about the fact that they have the world's greatest track league for 17-25 year olds that includes 5,000, and 10,000m opportunities on the track for both men and women, and vast stretches of year round training climates, and massive financial investments in sports infrastructure?

    You were asked to provide specific references to LTAD guidelines and how they support shorter XC distances for boys and girls. You couldn't do it because such references do not exist. So instead you reply with more bluster.

    And can we just admit that we would not even be discussing XC race distances if we had not been forced to explain why girls//women are still racing shorter ones than men? Now that no one is arguing the females should be racing shorter distances, some people have switched to making sure that males and females are racing the shortest distances possible, so that women and girls will be racing the shortest distance possible.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #27 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Runningman
    "So what you are saying is that you know better than the provincial & national track governing associations?

    The decision was made to fall in line with the governing bodies. Fact of the matter is that participation dropped in 2018 and dropout rates in the races increased significantly.


    So does that mean that the publicly funded BC High School system has reinstituted gender inequality on the grass? Last I checked the provincial and national governing bodies in Canada (thought we were so "progressive"?!?) STILL have not addressed gender inequality in cross country race distances for Youth and Juniors. A little unclear about what exactly has been decided - i.e. seniors male and female at 5k or was it only the young women being dropped down to 5K?

    This post was edited by a Moderator [Issues] 1 week ago . 
    Message from Moderator:
    QUOTE tag
    If you have issues/questions please contact moderator@trackie.com.
    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #28 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Athlete1
    "If you've been coaching kids for nearly 40 years - would you be so kind as to be open and post on behalf of your real name, and not anonymously..? I'm sure you're proud of the kids you have developed and certainly have produced many kids that have gone on to the 'next level'.
    I don't understand why these wise, experienced coaches hide behind anonymous names. It's as if you have these strong opinions, which you support through coaching for so many decades, but yet don't actually want people to know who are you due to lack of actually producing results. Hmmm."


    From one anon to another anon that's pretty bold to call someone out for posting anonymously. If you really want to know who they are then have some courtesy when asking them by posting under your own name!

    Quote comment
  • mattnorminton User since:
    Mar 17th, 2015
    Posts: 171
    thumbs_up 10
    Report    REPLY #29 

    mattnorminton said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Runningman
    "Even the IOC is against pushing adolescent athletes too hard too soon. They have produced an encyclopedia sized publication on adolescent development. If you have a spare $300 you can buy a copy."


    I completely agree that we don't want to push adolescents too hard too soon however I'm not really sure how only doing 5k vs 6k is really going to help that? Overly zealous coaches/parents/athletes are going to push some kids too hard too soon regardless if it's 5k vs 6k. The distance isn't the problem, poor coaching is. Too much mileage is not usually the issue when it comes to burn out, too much intensity and over racing are usually the culprits.

    In my mind a simple progression makes total sense:

    Grade 9 - 3k
    Grade 10 - 4k
    Grade 11 - 5k
    Grade 12 - 6k
    University/College - 8k
    Seniors - 10k

    And yes, females should be running the same distance as males.

    This post was edited by mattnorminton 1 week ago . 
    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #30 

    Bteve Soyde said 1 week ago

    Quoting: mattnorminton
    "I completely agree that we don't want to push adolescents too hard too soon however I'm not really sure how only doing 5k vs 6k is really going to help that? Overly zealous coaches/parents/athletes are going to push some kids too hard too soon regardless if it's 5k vs 6k. The distance isn't the problem, poor coaching is. Too much mileage is not usually the issue when it comes to burn out, too much intensity and over racing are usually the culprits.

    In my mind a simple progression makes total sense:

    Grade 9 - 3k
    Grade 10 - 4k
    Grade 11 - 5k
    Grade 12 - 6k
    University/College - 8k
    Seniors - 10k

    And yes, females should be running the same distance as males."


    Junior = 8k
    University/college = Senior = 10k

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #31 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: StoneColdDataAustin
    "KinRunner has been awfully quiet all of a sudden...."


    Maybe he's busy. Give him a chance to return to the conversation. I'm an optimist, that's why I'm still holding out that Mark Bomba will one day return and explain how training for 10k is different for women or at least slow women than it is for men.

    Quote comment
  • kinrunner User since:
    Sep 27th, 2013
    Posts: 280
    thumbs_up 5
    Report    REPLY #32 

    KinRunner said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Maybe he's busy. Give him a chance to return to the conversation. I'm an optimist, that's why I'm still holding out that Mark Bomba will one day return and explain how training for 10k is different for women or at least slow women than it is for men."


    Yeah a little busy...

    That and my post was completely disregarded for what it was actually asking. Not once did i state that Canada is better, or what my opinion was I simply asked someone making a bold generalization with an attack on coaches and teachers to provide proof of their opinion, and then someone else or them under a different handle came back and asked me for my proof. It was clear that there wasn't going to be a conversation, just back and forth of each other asking the other for proof.

    So rather than starting an internet war with someone I don't even know ( maybe I do know you, if so send me an email, i'm more than happy to chat civilly and share my opinions, and some research from courses and research I've looked at) , I decided to walk away and let others converse about the topic, god knows we don't need more internet brawls between two grown men.

    As someone who is always trying to learn and get better at my craft i'm always looking for information and statistics, and my research focus is conversion and retention rates, that's why i was so keen on someone stating these things, as I have some data for Ontario looking at women's running, the conversion rates and retention and it's pretty interesting. it's not yet ready to share, and I will be looking at the men next but all this stuff is fascinating to me as a metric for development, be it from a local, provincial, national or international level. and the only way we can have predictive models or sound scientific opinions is to ask questions, look at the data, and analyze hence my questioning, that and I don;t believe we need to throw whole groups under the bus online.

    Peace ya'll, Hope to see you all at U-Sports or ACXC in K-town. and if you are the one who posted back to me, come up and say hey lets chat, no need to go back and forth on the internet.

    This post was edited by KinRunner 1 week ago . 
    Quote comment
  • mattnorminton User since:
    Mar 17th, 2015
    Posts: 171
    thumbs_up 4
    Report    REPLY #33 

    mattnorminton said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Bteve Soyde
    "Junior = 8k
    University/college = Senior = 10k"


    Yes, I get it, a lot of people think university/college should also be 10K. I personally think 8k is a great XC distance and given worlds is 10K I think having post secondary at 8k is a great stepping stone. Of course others have their own opinions and I don't think I'm being sexist by suggesting the men come down to 8K, i just think 8k is a great distance for xc and a nice step towards the senior distance of 10k...cue the "you're a sexist/you don't think women are as strong as men comments"...

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #34 

    I disagree said 1 week ago

    Quoting: mattnorminton
    "I completely agree that we don't want to push adolescents too hard too soon however I'm not really sure how only doing 5k vs 6k is really going to help that? Overly zealous coaches/parents/athletes are going to push some kids too hard too soon regardless if it's 5k vs 6k. The distance isn't the problem, poor coaching is. Too much mileage is not usually the issue when it comes to burn out, too much intensity and over racing are usually the culprits.

    In my mind a simple progression makes total sense:

    Grade 9 - 3k
    Grade 10 - 4k
    Grade 11 - 5k
    Grade 12 - 6k
    University/College - 8k
    Seniors - 10k

    And yes, females should be running the same distance as males."


    I AGREE!

    Quote comment
  • ewynands User since:
    Oct 28th, 2018
    Posts: 2
    thumbs_up 12
    Report    REPLY #35 

    ewynands said 1 week ago

    Quoting: mattnorminton
    "Yes, I get it, a lot of people think university/college should also be 10K. I personally think 8k is a great XC distance and given worlds is 10K I think having post secondary at 8k is a great stepping stone. Of course others have their own opinions and I don't think I'm being sexist by suggesting the men come down to 8K, i just think 8k is a great distance for xc and a nice step towards the senior distance of 10k...cue the "you're a sexist/you don't think women are as strong as men comments"..."



    I think the 'progression' argument fails to note that the majority of Canadian collegiate athletes are in the senior division, and as such are already having to race 10km xc. And while it's less common for collegiate athletes to be making senior national teams, its not unheard of, and I would argue that the years of experience of racing the senior distance are invaluable for those who are vying for roster spots shortly out of school.

    Quote comment
  • mattnorminton User since:
    Mar 17th, 2015
    Posts: 171
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #36 

    mattnorminton said 1 week ago

    Quoting: ewynands
    "I think the 'progression' argument fails to note that the majority of Canadian collegiate athletes are in the senior division, and as such are already having to race 10km xc. And while it's less common for collegiate athletes to be making senior national teams, its not unheard of, and I would argue that the years of experience of racing the senior distance are invaluable for those who are vying for roster spots shortly out of school."


    I can certainly see that side of the argument.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #37 

    frmr uni runner said 1 week ago

    Quoting: mattnorminton
    "I can certainly see that side of the argument."


    Agreed. A pretty sizable drop-off in participation is seen after university running careers end. We should promote full senior racing while athletes are motivated by varsity sport and training hard and provide university level athletes, who work hard to get to that level, the chance to race as seniors. Chances are it is the period when a good portion of athletes are the most running focused in their lives. More will be competitive post-college if they do not need to step up the distance after they are done.

    Quote comment
  • mattnorminton User since:
    Mar 17th, 2015
    Posts: 171
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #38 

    mattnorminton said 1 week ago

    Quoting: frmr uni runner
    "Agreed. A pretty sizable drop-off in participation is seen after university running careers end. We should promote full senior racing while athletes are motivated by varsity sport and training hard and provide university level athletes, who work hard to get to that level, the chance to race as seniors. Chances are it is the period when a good portion of athletes are the most running focused in their lives. More will be competitive post-college if they do not need to step up the distance after they are done."


    However back when it was 12km at nationals, that was the only time we ever did 12km. No one seemed to complain back then and no one ever suggested the post collegiate distance should be 12km for the above reasons.

    This post was edited by mattnorminton 1 week ago . 
    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 4
    Report    REPLY #39 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: mattnorminton
    "However back when it was 12km at nationals, that was the only time we ever did 12km. No one seemed to complain back then and no one ever suggested the post collegiate distance should be 12km for the above reasons."


    Yeah men just sucked it up and ran the race. It's almost like these concerns over distances have only been raised when women's xc is part of the conversation.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #40 

    Longrunner said 1 week ago

    Quoting: mattnorminton
    "However back when it was 12km at nationals, that was the only time we ever did 12km. No one seemed to complain back then and no one ever suggested the post collegiate distance should be 12km for the above reasons."


    I'm in the camp of rewarding pure distance athletes to differentiate from track. why not make it 12 and 12?

    Now that makes 10 &10 is a reasonable compromise for me.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #41 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "So does that mean that the publicly funded BC High School system has reinstituted gender inequality on the grass? Last I checked the provincial and national governing bodies in Canada (thought we were so "progressive"?!?) STILL have not addressed gender inequality in cross country race distances for Youth and Juniors. A little unclear about what exactly has been decided - i.e. seniors male and female at 5k or was it only the young women being dropped down to 5K?"


    Both Senior Men and Women will be running the same 5km distance

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #42 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Did you even watch the Coe clip before posting it, or did you just want to pretend you were grounding your argument by including a vague reference or two in your post? He talks for a minute or two about 14-15 year olds training too hard and perhaps racing too much, so that they are not prepared to do the really important work at ages 17 and up-- you know, senior high school and junior, which is the relevant age group when discussing XC distances. This kind of general discussion is fine but its a long way from the specific question of XC distances and what role they play in LTAD.

    As for the Canada US comparison, this is ridiculous. Among all of the things that might drive superior development in the US you pick out the fact that they has very slightly shorter XC distances in high school? What about the fact that they have the world's greatest track league for 17-25 year olds that includes 5,000, and 10,000m opportunities on the track for both men and women, and vast stretches of year round training climates, and massive financial investments in sports infrastructure?

    You were asked to provide specific references to LTAD guidelines and how they support shorter XC distances for boys and girls. You couldn't do it because such references do not exist. So instead you reply with more bluster.

    And can we just admit that we would not even be discussing XC race distances if we had not been forced to explain why girls//women are still racing shorter ones than men? Now that no one is arguing the females should be racing shorter distances, some people have switched to making sure that males and females are racing the shortest distances possible, so that women and girls will be racing the shortest distance possible."


    Why don't you ask USATF, BC Athletics and other jurisdictions that stipulate the distances he is mentioning?? He is providing examples of the Athletics governing bodies that have made the decision to limit races for 16 and 17 year olds to 5km.

    Mr. Anonymous please state your credentials and your supporting documents to support your argument.. Then you can lobby the governing bodies to change the distances that you think 16 and 17 year olds should be running. Please report back with their response.

    Quote comment
  • new-post-last-visitanonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 47675
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #43 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Why don't you ask USATF, BC Athletics and other jurisdictions that stipulate the distances he is mentioning?? He is providing examples of the Athletics governing bodies that have made the decision to limit races for 16 and 17 year olds to 5km.

    Mr. Anonymous please state your credentials and your supporting documents to support your argument.. Then you can lobby the governing bodies to change the distances that you think 16 and 17 year olds should be running. Please report back with their response."


    Yeah, he's "giving examples..." but he claimed much more. He said that there is a basis in the science of LTAD for these "examples". This is just false. There are lots of reasons why different jurisdictions set the XC distances they do, but mostly it's just inertia-- they run the ones they've always run, and they can't remember how they arrived at them in the first place. Actual discussions about what the correct XC distances for 16-17 year olds should be are all but nonexistent, especially in the case of girls in places where they run shorter distances than boys.

    I wasn't making an argument that requires references to LTAD, and I'm not lobbying anyone. I was taking apart his argument, which made baseless references to LTAD and called out other coaches and teachers for being misguided in favouring longer XC distances for kids. He still can't say how USATF or BC Athletics XC race distances are based in LTAD science because they are not. So he's had to resort to saying things like that the US is just better than Canada in distance running. Which is true, but for all sorts of reasons way beyond youth XC distances.

    Quote comment
Previous | 1 | 2
Anonymous

says…    

Quote Underline Italics Bold
Submit Preview

By posting on our forum you are agreeing to the following guidelines.

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

 

Benefits of creating an account!

  • No need to reveal your real name.
  • Quicker to post (no need to enter the "two words" above each time).
  • Gives you the ability to edit your own comments and subscribe to topics.
  • It's free & quick to create an account!
Submit & Create Account

 

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1