Other sports people and thier judgement of running / tri difficulty

--amadeus--

One of the common elements in the "I want to do a 10k / half / mara / tri" threads is that the poster will often say "I'm fairly fit so what do I need to do...". They often mention GAA / Rugby / Soccer training a few nights a week or gym work.

And we normally snort dismissively. I know that if someone trained in a team sport 3 days a week and asked me how long it would take to prepare for a marathon I'd give them teh same advice I'd give a rank newbie with no fitness experience. Most sports involve running as a part of thier training, which I think leaves other sports people thinking that running (and by extension Tri's) aren't that hard. But in fact the training is an order of magnitude different and teh conversion isn't that straightforward.

Or are we just being snobbish about how tough our sports are in comparison to thiers?

donothoponpop

--amadeus-- wrote: »

One of the common elements in the "I want to do a 10k / half / mara / tri" threads is that the poster will often say "I'm fairly fit so what do I need to do...". They often mention GAA / Rugby / Soccer training a few nights a week or gym work.

And we normally snort dismissively. I know that if someone trained in a team sport 3 days a week and asked me how long it would take to prepare for a marathon I'd give them teh same advice I'd give a rank newbie with no fitness experience. Most sports involve running as a part of thier training, which I think leaves other sports people thinking that running (and by extension Tri's) aren't that hard. But in fact the training is an order of magnitude different and teh conversion isn't that straightforward.

Or are we just being snobbish about how tough our sports are in comparison to thiers?

Any time I've run the Dublin marathon, I've passed by guys wearing gaa shirts who are sweating and dying on their feet at the two mile mark, and I assume these are the people who consider themselves fit from all the training they do, ergo they can run a marathon. I'm sure that most ball sports folk have a good base fitness level, but not anything that gets you much of a "bye" when starting a marathon training program. No more than I could imaging I'd last 80-90 minutes on a pitch, with only my LSR's for company.

shels4ever

donothoponpop wrote: »

Any time I've run the Dublin marathon, I've passed by guys wearing gaa shirts who are sweating and dying on their feet at the two mile mark, and I assume these are the people who consider themselves fit from all the training they do, ergo they can run a marathon. I'm sure that most ball sports folk have a good base fitness level, but not anything that gets you much of a "bye" when starting a marathon training program. No more than I could imaging I'd last 80-90 minutes on a pitch, with only my LSR's for company.

On the other side to this i'm often hammered in races by the same people so once someone is not over weight and trains a coupl of times a week there is no reason they cant run sub 35 mins for a 5 mile with little running specific training,marathon and tri are another story.

tunney

--amadeus-- wrote: »

One of the common elements in the "I want to do a 10k / half / mara / tri" threads is that the poster will often say "I'm fairly fit so what do I need to do...". They often mention GAA / Rugby / Soccer training a few nights a week or gym work.

And we normally snort dismissively. I know that if someone trained in a team sport 3 days a week and asked me how long it would take to prepare for a marathon I'd give them teh same advice I'd give a rank newbie with no fitness experience. Most sports involve running as a part of thier training, which I think leaves other sports people thinking that running (and by extension Tri's) aren't that hard. But in fact the training is an order of magnitude different and teh conversion isn't that straightforward.

Or are we just being snobbish about how tough our sports are in comparison to thiers?

No, don't think we're being snobbish.

I played GAA for 4 years.
I played rugby for 6 years.
I played hurling for 10 years.

I gave them up once I realised that I would never get the hand eye co-ordination or sense of location on the pitch to play at a decent level.

I would never say to a gaa/soccer/rugby/hurling person and say "I do sports I can do what you do, sure its only XXX". Now I'd have the hardest work rate on the pitch and probably be relatively less bad as they tired more but I'd still suck donkey cock.

However field sports people tend to think that the requirements of their sports translate into cardio vascular fitness and since they run on the pitch "sure whats a bit of running, 5km, 10km, I'll do a marathon". I got sick of some GAA friends going on about how fit they were and how "all I did was a bit of running". I eventually called them out and we went for an easy run. Recovery-easy pace and only 45 minutes. They died a complete death and now have a little bit more respect for the demands of running/cycling/triathlon. They'd also never watched a running/triathlon race and were a little bit amazed when they eventually watched one and saw the race leaders coming out of T2 at sub 3:00 km pace.

Its just ignorance, we're all raised with an appreciation of fields sports, the tribal aspect appeals i suppose. But few are raised with an appreciation of athletics and the work that goes into it. personall I hate when Dessie Farrell and the rest of the GPA heads go on about the "professionalism and commitment of inter county players". I know many athletes that would see the frequency of sessions and hours committed to training on a weekly basis by the inter county players as a "recovery week" or "not doing much at all cause of work".

robinph

donothoponpop wrote: »

No more than I could imaging I'd last 80-90 minutes on a pitch, with only my LSR's for company.

It's just two 45 minute sessions of 5 second sprints with 30 second recovery, although the being co-ordinated enough to hit a ball at the same time would be tricky I guess.

ekevosu

I've played rugby snce I was 8 so about twenty three years and the training for it was fairly intense the last few years, we had a very good fitness coach but the two sports are very very different.

You need a lot of stamina and fitness for rugby but a very different kind of fitness than a marathon. At the end of the rugby season about four years ago I decided to take up running for the bupa 10K to challenge a teammate and had about two weeks to train, about two runs a week. I found I already had a high level of fitness and a lot of speed from the type of training we were doing in rugby (a lot of focus on speed work). I got on okay even though I did think it was a big challenge and felt the base was there but still a very different ball game, excuse the pun.

When I decided to move up to the marathon last year it was totally different. The fitness you take from rugby will take you so far but not that far at all in terms of pure running (jogging in my case). There is an incredible amount of hard work in building up towards a marathon and I became hooked on it and didn't go back to rugby until I had finished Dublin. I think DNP and a few other posters have it spot on. Impossible to go from a season playing a ball game straight into a marathon without a huge amount of work but at the same time it took me a while to get back to the intensity of sprint, hit, sprint, jog, hit etc when I went back to rugby from purely running.

average_runner

It works the same way too though.

Used to play soccer and i went back a few times and i was in bits. Soccer is a quick start stop game.


Running is a one pace sport.


What i am trying to say is because your a runner doesnt mean your fit to play soccer or because your a soccer player doesnt mean your fit to run.

You have to train at both to get the fitness for all sports!

shels4ever

average_runner wrote: »

It works the same way too though.

Used to play soccer and i went back a few times and i was in bits. Soccer is a quick start stop game.


Running is a one pace sport.


What i am trying to say is because your a runner doesnt mean your fit to play soccer or because your a soccer player doesnt mean your fit to run.

You have to train at both to get the fitness for all sports!

Not always the case :)But there are lots of people who can run fast and are not fit. just looking at races the general size of the people increases the furhter down the field you go.

average_runner

Yeah starting to notice that now. I am moving up the field which is goo:)

Was 94 k March 08 and now 81k and falling.

Running is great as i dont do diets but i do eat pretty healthy

onimpulse

tunney wrote: »

personall I hate when Dessie Farrell and the rest of the GPA heads go on about the "professionalism and commitment of inter county players". I know many athletes that would see the frequency of sessions and hours committed to training on a weekly basis by the inter county players as a "recovery week" or "not doing much at all cause of work".

I was shocked this summer when I found out how little they actually train - in comparison to triathletes / runners anyway... I'd listened to the rubbish all the commentators talk obviously!

getfit

Having competed at both gaelic football and athletics I have a perspective on both set ups.

The athletics training is far harder and involves way more sessions per week and the season is pretty much never ending. Also, runners are way fitter than footballers.

However, the GAA stuff takes more commitment. I currently run about 5 days a week. 4 lunch times at work and a quick hour on Saturday morning - that's it! It takes no family time, I miss no holidays and I can race when I want, not when the games are on.
When I play GAA there are generally 2 sessions a week and a game thrown in at the weekends. Now a training session could mean 7.45 arrival and finally finish at 10 o'clock. Those 2 evenings are a write off!!! The game at the weekend could be a Sunday morning - no Saturday night out and Sunday is written off. While I may only have put 3 days of training into the GAA, the effort personally is massive compared to the athletics. Also, the amount of b*llsh*t around team sports, be it having to turn up to listen to a manager talk for an hour after training or turn up to games even though you are injured to be part of team is very draining when you have a million other things in your life that need attention. Also GAA training tends (not always though) to be very "raw", very little science and generally ends up as sprints/runs to exhaustion. There isn't a culture of 4/5 days of steady training to let the body adapt and improve. It's more of a kill yourself and take 2 days of complete rest to recover and then back ready for another 2 hours of exhausting training. To add to the lack of sports science there is a big culture of "if you're not hurting and ready to puke the training is no good".

This kill yourself training does develop a massive anaerobic capacity though. Believe me, the average 3hr marathon guy would be on his kness and unable to continue half way through a typical GAA session of sprints and high impact tackles. It's a totally different type of fitness. As much as I stated it's a different type of fitness, the way most managers/coaches at club level go about developing that fitness is 90% wrong. I maintain that the typical GAA training should be very similar to 400/800m athletics training. The athletes should be able to do a solid 8 mile run at any time of the year and also be able to knock out a very fast 100m sprint at any time in the year also. Weights/earobic runs/sprint training and intervals should be the core to the fitness element, not exhaustion stuff, but that's a totally different debate!!!!

Pherekydes

In the case of team sports, it depends on the individual player and, in the case of rugby, the position.

A friend of mine played club GAA for several years and could run 4:30 for a mile and 55 mins for 10 mls with no extra training. Some people are conscientious hardtrainers and some are not. You can get away with not training conscientiously in team sports, particularly soccer. You won't in Athletics.

I think a lot of soccer players are of the opinion that they are hard and fit, but back in the 80's when Superstars was on the go they got their collective asses handed to them by Track and field athletes over and over.

-K2-

I've a friend who sneers at people doing sprint or even Olympic tri races on the basis that they are "too easy". He claims that Ironman is the only "real test".

The thing is that he can't run more than 3 miles at a time, so I don't know how he came up with his assesment of the relative difficulties.

tunney

getfit wrote: »

Having competed at both gaelic football and athletics I have a perspective on both set ups.

The athletics training is far harder and involves way more sessions per week and the season is pretty much never ending. Also, runners are way fitter than footballers.

However, the GAA stuff takes more commitment. I currently run about 5 days a week. 4 lunch times at work and a quick hour on Saturday morning - that's it! It takes no family time, I miss no holidays and I can race when I want, not when the games are on.
When I play GAA there are generally 2 sessions a week and a game thrown in at the weekends. Now a training session could mean 7.45 arrival and finally finish at 10 o'clock. Those 2 evenings are a write off!!! The game at the weekend could be a Sunday morning - no Saturday night out and Sunday is written off. While I may only have put 3 days of training into the GAA, the effort personally is massive compared to the athletics.

LOL - poor GAA players 7.45 arrival 10 finish? Thats a weekday long run or cycle? Where are the 5:30 am starts for the 1.5-2 hour swims before work?

No Saturday night out? Boo hoo - are they athletes or alcos? Drink goes out the window full stop if anyone is halfway serious.
Sundays a right off? What do yoy think happens after a 5 hour bike with a one hour run off it?

You run 5 days a week? Were I a pure runner I would be running about 9-10 times a week I reckon. Pure running requires, I believe especially for proper marathons and halfs, at least 130km a week.

The level of commitment to GAA is pathetically low. One more of the reasons I binned it, I was sick of turning up on time and waiting why everyone faffs around. of those hours between 7.45 and 10 most of those are faffing due to the players and management.

GAA players (and clubs) tend to know fcuk all about training methods, nutrition and some day some county will cop on to it and wait until we get strong, fit, big and fast GAA players, then they will dominate. until then though........

scottreynolds

tunney wrote: »

LOL - poor GAA players 7.45 arrival 10 finish? Thats a weekday long run or cycle? Where are the 5:30 am starts for the 1.5-2 hour swims before work?

No Saturday night out? Boo hoo - are they athletes or alcos? Drink goes out the window full stop if anyone is halfway serious.
Sundays a right off? What do yoy think happens after a 5 hour bike with a one hour run off it?

You run 5 days a week? Were I a pure runner I would be running about 9-10 times a week I reckon. Pure running requires, I believe especially for proper marathons and halfs, at least 130km a week.

The level of commitment to GAA is pathetically low. One more of the reasons I binned it, I was sick of turning up on time and waiting why everyone faffs around. of those hours between 7.45 and 10 most of those are faffing due to the players and management.

GAA players (and clubs) tend to know fcuk all about training methods, nutrition and some day some county will cop on to it and wait until we get strong, fit, big and fast GAA players, then they will dominate. until then though........

Still upset about the swim lane I see

kennyb3

tunney wrote: »

You run 5 days a week? Were I a pure runner I would be running about 9-10 times a week I reckon. Pure running requires, I believe especially for proper marathons and halfs, at least 130km a week.

Bit off topic, but would be interested to know what structure you d use to do this? always interested to know how people can fit in this sort of mileage and on what days they do what

DustyBin

tunney wrote: »

GAA players (and clubs) tend to know fcuk all about training methods, nutrition and some day some county will cop on to it and wait until we get strong, fit, big and fast GAA players, then they will dominate. until then though........

What about the Kilkenny hurlers? Always the biggest, fittest & strongest men on the pitch. Never slack off in the closing 10 minutes - infact that's where they tend to win the big games.

And they're continuing to breed pretty big young fellas over there.

(and I really don't like kilkenny!!)

Edit: Still though, back on topic, not sure how Henry Sheflin or Martin Commerford would get on in Dublin come Marathon time??
If they were allowed bring their hurls and helmets I reckon that it could be an advantage in cutting through the field and getting first dibs at the water stations

--amadeus--

kennyb3 wrote: »

Bit off topic, but would be interested to know what structure you d use to do this? always interested to know how people can fit in this sort of mileage and on what days they do what

The P&D 70mpw+ plan would have that number of sessions in it. Training every day gives you 7 sessions right off the bat. Add in 2 - 3 double days and it's up to the 9-10 sessions per week. Typically they would have a day with 6 easy AM & 4 easy PM, for example although I think they peak at 15 & 4.

Theoretically it's not hard - 6 in the morning can be done before work and 4 in the evening is less than half an hour. People running that sort of mileage would tend to be faster so a 10 miler would take 65 - 75 mins so the time commitment for a real high volume runner isn't always that much greater than the time commitment of a slower, lower volume runner. There are plenty of people on here who would run 10 mile training runs in the same time that others would do 6 miles, for example.

And if you are doing 7 - 10 sessions per week with one LSR and one medium length run then mileage adds up pretty quickly. Those two sessions alone would be a minimum of 26 to a max of 39 miles with a further 5 or 6 runs of 4 - 10 miles on top of that.

All easy to write but a lot harder to do!

wizwill

DustyBin wrote: »

Henry Sheflin or Martin Commerford would get on in Dublin come Marathon time??

I know he is recently retired from inter-county but Peter Canavan did 4.56 last year in Dublin

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1028/1225061111322.html

Some famous tipp hurler pulled out at 19 miles also.

As a (29yo) soccer player in 2007 having completed a tough pre-season and very little specific training i did 1.53 for dublin half (old course) and 4.35 for dublin marathon. I had one long run behind me for the marathon.

tunney

wizwill wrote: »

I know he is recently retired from inter-county but Peter Canavan did 4.56 last year in Dublin

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1028/1225061111322.html

Some famous tipp hurler pulled out at 19 miles also.

As a (29yo) soccer player in 2007 having completed a tough pre-season and very little specific training i did 1.53 for dublin half (old course) and 4.35 for dublin marathon. I had one long run behind me for the marathon.

For the purposes of this arguement I think we need to consider *slightly* faster times in running. 1:20 halfs and 3:00 marathons.

--amadeus--

In fairness that's not a bad indicator of how the average footballer would fare.

In terms of averages and benchmarks:

The average time to complete the marathon distance - using net time where available and gun time where not - was 4:39:33 for all runners with a standard deviation of 1:06:13. For men, the average was 4:26:32 with a standard deviation of 1:02:06 and for women it was 4:59:09 with a standard deviation of 1:07:23. Standard deviation is a measure of how tightly grouped the data is and statistically, 68% of results will be between 1 standard deviation of the mean and 95% of results will be within 2 standard deviations of the mean.

From here and based on US marathons.

So an "ordinary" (no offence Will!) footballer with no training ran a slightly below average marathon, which kind of knocks our argument down a bit!

wizwill

tunney wrote: »

For the purposes of this arguement I think we need to consider *slightly* faster times in running. 1:20 halfs and 3:00 marathons.

Original Post asked how comparable running/tri was versus balls sports. I gave my running times at a point when i had recently come from a ball sport background with very little run training, so i feel this is far more relevant to the argument than 1.20 hm or 3 marathons.

tunney

--amadeus-- wrote: »

In fairness that's not a bad indicator of how the average footballer would fare.

In terms of averages and benchmarks:

The average time to complete the marathon distance - using net time where available and gun time where not - was 4:39:33 for all runners with a standard deviation of 1:06:13. For men, the average was 4:26:32 with a standard deviation of 1:02:06 and for women it was 4:59:09 with a standard deviation of 1:07:23. Standard deviation is a measure of how tightly grouped the data is and statistically, 68% of results will be between 1 standard deviation of the mean and 95% of results will be within 2 standard deviations of the mean.

From here and based on US marathons.

Comes back to definition of running a marathon.
For a man (assuming 20-40 good health) I would consider 3:30 to be the cut off point over which its not "running a marathon" but completing a marathon. There is achievement in completing don't get me wrong but i wouldn't say they "ran a marathon"

This is another problem you can run or complete a running/triathlon event. Those outside the sport view them as the same.

pgibbo

My own personal opinion on this until recently was that most athletes and triathletes were actually looked down on by Soccer, GAA or Rugby players. A lot of them are/were of the opinion that if you're not doing one of the main stream sports that you sucked at it and were taking an easier minority sport. I feel a lot of the decent team sports guys had this type of mentality - especially the better ones.

My own background is:

Soccer - 8 to 14 years of age and then a few years playing lower division in Galway;
Rowing - 4 years in secondary school;
Karate - still doing it (15+ years);
Triathlon - 18 months.

When seeking advice on running and triathlon I can't say that I found people being snobby or looking down their nose. Nearly everyone was very encouraging and liked to hear how you were progressing.

I think all the looking down the nose aspect is changing with the running boom. More and more soccer/rugby/gaa folks are running now or doing relays in triathlons, etc. Maybe they are finally appreciating that although they are minority sports, they take a huge committment and effort to be half decent at them. About time too!

wizwill

tunney wrote: »

I would consider 3:30 to be the cut off point over which its not "running a marathon" but completing a marathon. There is achievement in completing don't get me wrong but i wouldn't say they "ran a marathon"

This is another problem you can run or complete a running/triathlon event. Those outside the sport view them as the same.

Could be a controversial one! glad to say i have run a marathon (in your eyes) since my first marathon.

griffin100

Comes back to definition of running a marathon.
For a man (assuming 20-40 good health) I would consider 3:30 to be the cut off point over which its not "running a marathon" but completing a marathon. There is achievement in completing don't get me wrong but i wouldn't say they "ran a marathon"

This is another problem you can run or complete a running/triathlon event. Those outside the sport view them as the same.

At the risk of being abused, taking a sprint distance tri as an example, assuming you can swim, its actually not that hard to complete one i.e. if your not worried about time, just about getting around, then most people with minimum enough training could complete one (I did). However, if you want to compete or do a quick time i.e. sub 1hr5-10mins, then a SD tri is a bloody hard event. Difficulty is relative, I've found trying to get a sub 2.30hr OD tri in a race this year (I failed miserably:)) was much a much harder experience than my only HIM which was done a a slower pace. Similarly, the hardest race I ran all year was a 5 mile road race because I had a time I wanted to beat and ran as hard as I could the whole way.

getfit

tunney wrote: »

LOL - poor GAA players 7.45 arrival 10 finish? Thats a weekday long run or cycle? Where are the 5:30 am starts for the 1.5-2 hour swims before work?

No Saturday night out? Boo hoo - are they athletes or alcos? Drink goes out the window full stop if anyone is halfway serious.
Sundays a right off? What do yoy think happens after a 5 hour bike with a one hour run off it?

You run 5 days a week? Were I a pure runner I would be running about 9-10 times a week I reckon. Pure running requires, I believe especially for proper marathons and halfs, at least 130km a week.

The level of commitment to GAA is pathetically low. One more of the reasons I binned it, I was sick of turning up on time and waiting why everyone faffs around. of those hours between 7.45 and 10 most of those are faffing due to the players and management.

GAA players (and clubs) tend to know fcuk all about training methods, nutrition and some day some county will cop on to it and wait until we get strong, fit, big and fast GAA players, then they will dominate. until then though........

Jaysus I don't think I've felt as chastised since my mother caught me dipping my finger in a birthday cake when I was 5 .

I commend your 9-10 day a week commitment, I know how gruelling it can be, but being fair, 90% of runners would consider a 5 session week pretty solid commitment. I did the 9-10 sessions a week when I was in College and had the time, but it's not a possibility for me if I want to focus on my job, my marriage, my baby and my extended family. To knock someone for making the effort to put in 5 days is pretty snobby of you.

When I commented on the 7.45 arrival and 10 oclock finish it wasn't the 2+ hours I was pointing to it was the "must turn up (with a lot of faffing as you stated)" element that many athletes don't have to worry about. You can fit the 5, 7 or 10 sessions a week around your life, whereas with a team sport you must arrange your life around the training and matches - which is a massive headache if you have a lot of responsibilities. If I want to do a 2+hr run on a Sunday I can be on the road by 7 in the morning, home and fed by 10 and the day is ahead of me to spend with my family. With GAA I can't go anywhere with my family as the match pretty much dictates the day for you!

I agree GAA fitness/nutrition and general sport science is abysmal but a few on this post are taking a poor marathon time as indication of a poor level of fitness - that's not the case. I would guess that during my deceant training I would not have had the fitness to run a 3.30 marathon, but i could knock out a 54 sec 400 a 2.02 800 and 4.13 1,500. They were my events and my training (speed, speed endurance, short hills, tough V02 max sessions) were tailored to that end. Being able to kick out a solid marathon was no major benefit to anyone when I was running a 400 leg of a relay...

My final point will address your athlete or alco comment :rolleyes:. After 5/6 days of work, sleepless nights, early mornings and endless life agro my wife and I like to go for a meal on an odd saturday night (at best once every 6 weeks), there are literally no other nights in the month available to us. To enjoy it we like a bottle of wine with the meal and possible a few pints afterwards. As a runner I can build my week around that night out. As a GAA player a match on a Sunday means the night out is a non runner as a fun alcohol included event .

RacoonQueen

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Or are we just being snobbish about how tough our sports are in comparison to thiers?

Well a person I ehh know(I'm going to word this as loosely as I can just in case anyone is reading and knows who I'm slagging) is a rugby player, you'd know he was a rugby player by looking at him etc... started running a bit back did a half marathon in a decent time(sub 1:45) then the 5 mile and 10 mile in the park, missed the half last weekend and is out of the marathon due to 'injury' is he feck injured. Who pulls out of a marathon with over 5 weeks to go due to injury unless they're in a cast/laid out on a bed incapable of moving? :pac:

Running and Tri takes a LOT of commitment. I know someone posted earlier that they can run at lunch etc and not take any family time, well nice for you. I can't fit in a 13 - 15 mile run at lunch, funnily enough. I train at least 5 days a week be it running or the gym. I strive for doing something every day unless I have something else to do or I just need a rest. I think it would be much easier to get out there some days if you were part of a club(like GAA players have to go to train etc) than actually having the option as we do.

thirtyfoot

tunney wrote: »

GAA players (and clubs) tend to know fcuk all about training methods, nutrition and some day some county will cop on to it and wait until we get strong, fit, big and fast GAA players, then they will dominate. until then though........

I'm afraid this is wrong as the top GAA county teams are very advanced training wise. Jim Kilty has worked with many GAA county teams and I would even say any half decent coach in Ireland who is trying to make a living from sport as a coach will have to work with the GAA at inter-county level to make money. I'm thinking Dan Tobin, he worked with the Dubs and is now the strength and conditioning guy at Leinster Rugby and their Academy, John Coghlan works with Dublin GAA, there are more if we thought about it up and down the country. Are you saying that a GAA team conditioned by Jim Kilty, coach to maybe a dozen Olympians, have not copped onto proper training methods?

Yes we base many of our assumptions of the GAA on the loacl GAA club and I'll agree with you if we are talking about it at club level as they are like the recreational runner who trains maybe 2 or 3 times to do a 10k. But the top GAA players are from the same gene pool as you, compete in a much more competitive sport in relative terms in this country than you, have access to better coaches and development monitoring than you, fully financed medical needs, fully financed nutritional advice, get a grant and they have reached the pinnacle of their sport. How can you say that the top GAA players on the top teams have not copped onto proper training methods similar to someone like yourself. Crazy. Agree with you on the talk of "they train like professionals" though, many individual athletes do at club level in Ireland in many sports yet don't get a grant or campaign for one.

tunney

so perhaps I am igorant of the coaching and training methods used by the big GAA counties. Apologies. Something is missing though when you compare their speed, strength and stamina to that of Aussie rules and super 14s.

Anyways perhaps everyone underestimates other sports than that that they do.

Tingle wrote: »

I'm afraid this is wrong as the top GAA county teams are very advanced training wise. Jim Kilty has worked with many GAA county teams and I would even say any half decent coach in Ireland who is trying to make a living from sport as a coach will have to work with the GAA at inter-county level to make money. I'm thinking Dan Tobin, he worked with the Dubs and is now the strength and conditioning guy at Leinster Rugby and their Academy, John Coghlan works with Dublin GAA, there are more if we thought about it up and down the country. Are you saying that a GAA team conditioned by Jim Kilty, coach to maybe a dozen Olympians, have not copped onto proper training methods?

Yes we base many of our assumptions of the GAA on the loacl GAA club and I'll agree with you if we are talking about it at club level as they are like the recreational runner who trains maybe 2 or 3 times to do a 10k. But the top GAA players are from the same gene pool as you, compete in a much more competitive sport in relative terms in this country than you, have access to better coaches and development monitoring than you, fully financed medical needs, fully financed nutritional advice, get a grant and they have reached the pinnacle of their sport. How can you say that the top GAA players on the top teams have not copped onto proper training methods similar to someone like yourself. Crazy. Agree with you on the talk of "they train like professionals" though, many individual athletes do at club level in Ireland in many sports yet don't get a grant or campaign for one.

thirtyfoot

tunney wrote: »

Something is missing though when you compare their speed, strength and stamina to that of Aussie rules and super 14s.

.

Yes, thats where your 'they train like pros' argument comes in and I agree with you. They don't train like pros, they train like you or me or anyone who takes their sport seriously. If they trained like pros, they would maybe have 3-4 hours to eat and sleep after their AM session and return in the afternoon for their 2nd session. You do see the physical difference when they are up against the Aussie rules guys. You also saw the difference when they were up against or competing alongside our pros in Hession, Gillick and O' Rourke at the sprint relay thing in Croker in August. For amateurs the top ones train to a top level much like any amateur sportsperson in Ireland. Thing is most are spoonfed it and its easy to do it when its laid on and 30 others guys are doing it, most others in individual sports who train as hard do it off their own initiative, many times on their own and out of their own pocket (but still enjoy it as much, if not more!).