INTERESTING READ

hurdles1

A lot of coaches SAY that they would like to improve their coaching but in my experience, when genuine "coaching gold" takes place,in front of their eyes, often at the very same track as they themselves operate, very very few seem to possess the inquisitive nature, time or perhaps courage to find out about the methods employed to produce success. I simply do not understand this and I am genuinely perplexed by it when I, all too regularly encounter it. I admit that some coaches are not the most welcoming of individuals - especially some very successful ones - but this is not universally the case.

Perhaps then, coaches who are the product of our current system, believe that good coaching is enormously complex?

Judging by conversations I have with some coaches, we seem to be breeding a whole generation of practitioners with their heads full of nonsense about such rubbish as periodisation for 12 year olds, ineffectual core strength exercises and how to place physiotherapy tape on U17 Sprinters whilst ignoring that fact that their athletes can't break 14.0 seconds for the 100m, can't get out of the blocks efficiently or can't align a javelin correctly before they throw it.

Some years ago I was faced with a young athlete who wanted to improve from a 250+ ranking to a place in the ESAA Championships. I was fortunate enough to be able to ask for advice from a friend of mine who had produced multiple World-Class athletes on a diet of no more than 4 hours per week of simple, focussed training. He had often worked, what might be described as coaching miracles, with less than obviously talented athletes. Within 2 years IIRC the young man - in a testament to his application and the methods employed - had climbed to no 6 in the UK and had made his beloved ESAA Team and TJ Final. On FOUR HOURS A WEEK OF TRAINING! No core strength work, no weights, no silly physio balls - just basic work designed to improve performance.

Now how many coaches do you think have ever asked me how that was done? Yup..you got it - none. And if I tell them (bore them.. !) they don't believe me! Oh and in the meantime the athlete in question had progressed from 12+ in the 100 to knocking on the door of sub 11 seconds this year. No sprinter currently in our club has ever run that fast and he doesn't even specialise in sprinting!

Now..we can all point to our successes in coaching but I mention this case only to make the case for the promulgation of more basic coaching methodology, rather than for the unfiltered (by deliverer or receiver) and contextually irrelevant training programs of Olympians. There are steps on the way to an Olympic team place and those are the steps where most of us operate. If we can't get a kid to the ESAA Championships (the realistic but respectable zenith for a lot of them) then the rest of it is just talk and dreams.

A casual glance through the Po10 stats. reveals countless "athletes" coming into our sport and leaving 4 years later, having achieved not a fraction of the improvement I was able to achieve with just one guy on 4 hours a week! What are we doing with them??!! What is a realistic "conversion rate" that a coach might aspire to? Do we even have the data? Football managers have very public personal statistics relating to amount spent on players versus results - as amateur athletics coaches our variables are perhaps more complicated?

Holly Bleasdale walked in to this sport less than half a dozen years ago - by 2012 she was an Olympian - look at her stats on Po10:

In 2010 there were 134 kids faster than her over 60m, there were 428 faster over 100m, 74 jumping higher in the HJ and in 2009 there were 92 better U20 long jumpers. So there were hundreds of kids more physically talented than she, who were not lucky enough to encounter a coach/coaching environment as effective as that provided by Julien in Manchester.

Why?

Having said that - I have attended one or two coaching sessions in my life where my initial horror at the level of coaching or teaching being delivered was soon replaced by a realisation that the coach was playing a major role in keeping a group of children away from trouble & off the streets - something which I think we should all admire and acknowledge. There's more to what we do than producing champions...

My sympathy for the task of coach educators in track and field athletics is genuine, regarding the methods for delivery of material and the creation of an engaging environment for true education. However, strict regard MUST be given to the imparting of useful, practical and contextual knowledge, mixed with a healthy amount of wisdom from people who have actually DONE it, BEEN there and bought the t-shirt.

The best budget travel guide books are always written by people who have actually been there - not to some luxury hotel down the road...

pconn062

Is your issue with juvenile coaching in Irish running clubs or coaching on a larger scale?

RoyMcC

Hurdles, in my limited experience I've also observed that coaches are unwilling to learn from other, more successful coaches. This is even as the coaching is happening right under their noses. I honestly believe that this is because they are frightened of learning something that will contradict what they themselves are comfortable with.

Example - Jersey (population 100,000) has produced half a dozen Commonwealth Games standard throwers in the last 10 years compared to one in all the time before that. This is totally down to one visiting, elite throws coach who has connections to the Island. Every other coach will routinely walk by his sessions without giving a second glance.

Example - I attended a Paddy McGrath hammer clinic at Santry a few years back. There were more aspiring athletes than you could throw a stick at. Observing coaches? About three of us.

It's certainly not an Irish thing. Coaches - even beginner coaches - get into a routine, learn some drills, plan some sessions. They are comfortable with them. Maybe they achieve moderate success. Precious few are prepared to think or observe beyond that. I don't know the answer.

Rocket Science

Surely one should look at the coaches who achieve excellent results on a continual basis. Asking advice from someone who tells you how it is best done but has never produced it themselves is questionable in my opinion. any one can polish a diamond if one comes along but repeated success doesn't happen by chance......lets learn from those who produce the results!

PVincent

Totally agree with all you have said. I would go even further to say that any coach who has all the knowledge and ability, may well be a good coach but if you lack the people skills, the ability to motivate and the willingness to listen to your athletes, then you will never be a great coach. It is those traits that set them apart. These are the people who are inspiring athletes, the people that athletes want to do well for. And it applies to coaching in all sports. There are great coaches out there who have never been at the top of their sport . brother Colm Oconell being the obvious one

RoyMcC

OP that was a great post. You've identified a key problem area. What are your suggestions as to how we can solve it?

PVincent

Roy,
I'm sure that a degree of understanding of sports psychology and its benefits to both coach and athlete might just help . But I am not talking about rocket science here. I mean simple stuff like the benefits of positivity at all times, installing a strong hard worth ethic in your athletes and team,the power of fun and banter at the training session,making your athletes comfortable and relaxed,making sure the athletes understand why they are doing certain things, the importance of rest....
There is not much of that stuff that you will find in coaching manuals other than the last two.
A lot of it is down to experience . And a lot of it is learnt from life and personal experience .