What is coaching ?

peter kern

Sounds a bit stupid me asking this. But having just read the post about the poster looking for a coach...

I said to myself you are not looking for a coach you are looking for what Chris jones would call a prescriptor .

We are always talking about road bike mountain bike and tt bike
But when it comes to coaching we never distinguish different types ( or I miss it)

prescription , coaching , and hands on coaching ,mentoring ,advising.



Like with bikes non of them terms is really better as they all serve a different purpose , but we do distinguish them so why do we do not do the same with coaching ?
The poster in the other thread has defined it well that he looks for a prescribtion but most people don't.

Btw oryx thanks for including me in your list but I am not a good prescriber so I would not be a good fit for the poster in the other thread.

Anyway i thought it might not be wrong to discuss coaching and it's differences rather then the thousand and first. discussion polar vs garmin pros and cons.
And I would be very interested how people think about this

Oryx

Are there really such strict gradations between how you approach this? By prescriptive, do you mean just assigning a schedule with no other input? How does this differ from the more hands on types (mentor, advisor)? I would have thought the personality of both the coach and the athlete come into play. Some need a lot of hand holding, others dont. Cant one coach adapt his work to suit the client?

pgibbo

Persoanlly I wouldn't regard it as coaching unless there's a good feedback loop and the coach is educating the person as to why they are training in a certain way. I also think it's critical that it's not just a one size fits all model. We all have different needs, histories and tolerances for load.

I like your prescription definition Peter. :cool:

I also think it's very interesting that a lot of people think they aren't good enough for a coach. The reality is that when there are 3 sports involved outside oversight is very important in striking a balance between the 3 sports, the intensity across them and balancing them with your available time.

peter kern

Hm we distinguish between dura ace ultegra 105 etc ... So why not at least a bit of distinction in coaching ?

Oryx wrote: »

Are there really such strict gradations between how you approach this? By prescriptive, do you mean just assigning a schedule with no other input? How does this differ from the more hands on types (mentor, advisor)? I would have thought the personality of both the coach and the athlete come into play. Some need a lot of hand holding, others dont. Cant one coach adapt his work to suit the client?

peter kern

By the way I did put in commas between hands on coaching , mentor , advisor as they are also different

peter kern wrote: »

Hm we distinguish between dura ace ultegra 105 etc ... So why not at least a bit of distinction in coaching ?

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

Hm we distinguish between dura ace ultegra 105 etc ... So why not at least a bit of distinction in coaching ?

Because its easy to quantify what works and what doesn't in groupsets.

One mans "best coach ever" is another man's "total díckhead".
Personality comes into coaching, it doesn't components.

I loved working my coach for years and would work with him again in a heart beat, so did Carbo. Tango didn't like working with him as much.

At best one could come up with categories and similar but hard to pigeon hole people.

Oryx

I also think there has to be a lot of overlap between the definintions given above.

peter kern

Yes there is an emotional aspect but we have this with campagnolo and shimano etc to some extend to... Or let's use I phone vs samsung

tunney wrote: »

Because its easy to quantify what works and what doesn't in groupsets.

One mans "best coach ever" is another man's "total díckhead".
Personality comes into coaching, it doesn't components.

I loved working my coach for years and would work with him again in a heart beat, so did Carbo. Tango didn't like working with him as much.

At best one could come up with categories and similar but hard to pigeon hole people.

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

One mans "best coach ever" is another man's "total díckhead".

Can substitute 'watch' or 'runners' in there too

peter kern

Oryx wrote: »

I also think there has to be a lot of overlap between the definintions given above.

Yes I do agree i can do a triathlon on a mountain bike a road bike or even on a Dublin bike
They all get me from a too b

Oryx

Peter, how do you decide who you do (or don't) coach?

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

For me coaching is more than just setting programmes or sessions. For me its about the development of the person, understanding them and knowing what makes them tick to get the most out of them.
In order for it to work there needs to be total trust given to the coach with the coachee knowing full well that there is good and solid reasoning behind what they are telling them.

As already mentioned if the relationship between coach and coachee is not there you can be Brett Sutton for all i care it will simply not work. People need to think long and hard about what they want from a coach as its not for everyone. The one thing i will say if you are not committed and trust the process then you are wasting your own time and not making best use of the coaches.

I will never do a "hard sell" on someone for coaching, if they are not a fit or i do not see a relationship that will work it gets called very early on. Coach and coachee relationship is a bit like courtship, you will know if its a right fit early on.

mossym

a year ago i was one of the "not good enough to need a coach". if that was the requirement i still don't.

what i had was hunger and desire, and a strong interest. a prescriptive coach would have killed that in the year, i'd have had a plan that burnt me out as i'd have done everything and enjoyed nothing.

at the same time i'm a sponge for reading and knowledge, so likely to go off on every fad mentioned if i thought it looked good. so an advisor wasn't going to work.

i needed a blend of the two. someone to listen to my thoughts, take what worked, but keep me within reasonable limits that delivered as well.

looking at some of the other guys on here i know are coached, none are the same, all have different needs in a coach. trying to put them into silos of presciptive, advisor, mentor over simplifies it if you ask me. a good coach can blend as needed, and even change the mix when needed.


that's coaching.

rodneyr1981

mossym wrote: »

a year ago i was one of the "not good enough to need a coach". if that was the requirement i still don't.

what i had was hunger and desire, and a strong interest. a prescriptive coach would have killed that in the year, i'd have had a plan that burnt me out as i'd have done everything and enjoyed nothing.

at the same time i'm a sponge for reading and knowledge, so likely to go off on every fad mentioned if i thought it looked good. so an advisor wasn't going to work.

i needed a blend of the two. someone to listen to my thoughts, take what worked, but keep me within reasonable limits that delivered as well.

looking at some of the other guys on here i know are coached, none are the same, all have different needs in a coach. trying to put them into silos of presciptive, advisor, mentor over simplifies it if you ask me. a good coach can blend as needed, and even change the mix when needed.


that's coaching.

Hi mossym,
Did u see much performance improvements? Also how did u find a coach that suited your requirements? Word of mouth etc?
I'd be interested in going down this route as I feel I've left some of my performances on my training days and not race day. Cheers

peter kern

mossym wrote: »

a year ago i was one of the "not good enough to need a coach". if that was the requirement i still don't.

what i had was hunger and desire, and a strong interest. a prescriptive coach would have killed that in the year, i'd have had a plan that burnt me out as i'd have done everything and enjoyed nothing.

at the same time i'm a sponge for reading and knowledge, so likely to go off on every fad mentioned if i thought it looked good. so an advisor wasn't going to work.

i needed a blend of the two. someone to listen to my thoughts, take what worked, but keep me within reasonable limits that delivered as well.

looking at some of the other guys on here i know are coached, none are the same, all have different needs in a coach. trying to put them into silos of presciptive, advisor, mentor over simplifies it if you ask me. a good coach can blend as needed, and even change the mix when needed.


that's coaching.

the underlined is coaching
but as you say its not prescribtion and not advisor its a different way of coaching.
and yes coaching relaionships usally flow they can start with hands on coaching move to coaching and then adviser role.
and to be honest this is what one would expect from coaching that there is a progressions .
kind of the way pigbo wrote it
Persoanlly I wouldn't regard it as coaching unless there's a good feedback loop and the coach is educating the person as to why they are training in a certain way. I also think it's critical that it's not just a one size fits all model. We all have different needs, histories and tolerances for load.

ps i like to add and for some people prescrition is the best way but in my mind its the least efficent way of coaching ( bit like a dublin bike is not the best to do a triathlon) and like in triathlon you do not find an athelte that is really good in erverything they all have pros and cons so not every coach fits everybody ( even if they are world class coaches )

Dory Dory

peter kern wrote: »

kind of the way pigbo wrote it

This made me laugh.

Best. Typo. Ever.

Dory Dory

"What is coaching?"

Coaching is being both a communicator and a listener. It's teaching while learning. It's being flexible and keeping things in perspective. It's extracting the best out of each athlete through positive means, thus getting the athlete to believe in him- or herself. It's tailoring the plan to fit the needs of the individual athlete. It's understanding the athlete's needs and goals. It's being a friend. It's being interested. It's recognizing the signs when things may not be going well, and asking the right questions. It's being there for the big moments. It's cheering the loudest, even if it's under your breath. And it's having the passion and unselfish desire to provide another individual with the tools to succeed.

That, to me, is coaching.

peter kern

Dory Dory wrote: »

"What is coaching?"

Coaching is being both a communicator and a listener. It's teaching while learning. It's being flexible and keeping things in perspective. It's extracting the best out of each athlete through positive means, thus getting the athlete to believe in him- or herself. It's tailoring the plan to fit the needs of the individual athlete. It's understanding the athlete's needs and goals. It's being a friend. It's being interested. It's recognizing the signs when things may not be going well, and asking the right questions. It's being there for the big moments. It's cheering the loudest, even if it's under your breath. And it's having the passion and unselfish desire to provide another individual with the tools to succeed.

That, to me, is coaching.

nice one ! but that sounds almost like ones husband or wife ;-)
with some you can be a friend with some its important to keep distance.with some you have to be friendly with some harsh .

peter kern

Dory Dory wrote: »

This made me laugh.

Best. Typo. Ever.

ups sorry
at least i have a new scrabble word ....

peter kern

"I want to be fast, if I give someone money I can get fast without doing anything!"

ps that was what a bordie wrote me yesterday ( you are welcoe to claim it )
but this is certainly what some athletes would like .

zico10

I'm sure you remember me asking you to coach me last summer. I get the impression this isn't how you operate, but at the time what I expected was to be prescribed a week's training at a time. But I wouldn't consider a 'prescriptor' a coach. You could just as easily buy a book for a fraction of the cost and you'd get the same thing. If this is all it took to be a coach, then Pete Pfitzinger and Scott Douglas were my coaches at the start of the year, which obviously wasn't the case.

As well as prescribing training, I'd expect a coach to study the training being done, seek from and give feedback to the athlete, and make adjustments to the training as the weeks went by.

Also I think the coach needs to be a lot more flexible than the athlete. I'm not saying you do, but there's no point telling someone to train by heart rate, power, metronomes if the athlete doesn't want to, or is too stubborn to listen. I think the coach needs to be able to find a way around this. That is what they are being paid for after all.

I would also consider it important that the coach sees his athlete train and is hands on for some of the weekly sessions. I know someone who was very happy with an online coach he worked with this year. They had phone contact, but I don't think they ever actually met. I don't understand how someone could go with this and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work for me. I'd find it hard to trust my training to someone I never saw, or who never saw me.

I don't have a specific number in mind when I say this, but I'd also like any coach I worked with not to have too many athletes on their hands. I wouldn't expect the coach to coach just me and me alone, but I think there has to a number when it becomes impossible to give everybody equal attention. This would be another reason I'd be suspicious of online coaching, there'd be no way of knowing exactly how many people they'd be working with.

Just for the record, I respected you for telling me honestly you weren't motivated enough to take me on during the summer, rather than taking my money and not giving it 100%. You know me better than any other coach in Ireland, this is the reason I asked you, and I didn't seek out anybody else after you jilted me. I think I trained well on my own and despite my cock up, I feel I raced well in Mallorca, but I do wonder would I have been a few minutes quicker had I worked with you.

No need to name names, but what attributes would make your ideal athlete to coach?

Dory Dory

And I have a question for Peter -
Since you are back competing with a serious goal of Kona in mind, could you coach another athlete in your gender and age group who is also vying for the same slot, especially if you two will be in the same qualifying race?

sconhome

Dory Dory wrote: »

And I have a question for Peter -
Since you are back competing with a serious goal of Kona in mind, could you coach another athlete in your gender and age group who is also vying for the same slot, especially if you two will be in the same qualifying race?

Great question!!

peter kern

I never started to coach you as In your case you did not take on any feed back so why would you want a coach if you don't take on the feedback.
You had your ideas and it been pointed out that when I say left you say right I asked you not to do a session you did it . I was once uncoachable and it's not that your training is wrong. Also note you have never been charged. Penny for the time I spend with you trying to find out if it could work.

Does a coach to have to be more flexible than an athlete?
I don't know the answer to this the truth might be the middle
As it needs to 2 work . At the end of the day a coach gets paid for results and anything less than hawii quali for you would not be a result.
You contacted me 3 moth before the goal race so I this case I do not have a time to change aspects you can work on . I have followed your block knew how you trained before you contacted me . And if you are not willing to take my feedback than it is better coaching to let one do the want to do as arguing over stuff would not make you a better athlete for you IM I fact it would have likely slowed you down. In the long term I think it's your loss but again if one is not willing to take on advice it's better not using a coach until one is ready.

zico10 wrote: »

I'm sure you remember me asking you to coach me last summer. I get the impression this isn't how you operate, but at the time what I expected was to be prescribed a week's training at a time. But I wouldn't consider a 'prescriptor' a coach. You could just as easily buy a book for a fraction of the cost and you'd get the same thing. If this is all it took to be a coach, then Pete Pfitzinger and Scott Douglas were my coaches at the start of the year, which obviously wasn't the case.

As well as prescribing training, I'd expect a coach to study the training being done, seek from and give feedback to the athlete, and make adjustments to the training as the weeks went by.

Also I think the coach needs to be a lot more flexible than the athlete. I'm not saying you do, but there's no point telling someone to train by heart rate, power, metronomes if the athlete doesn't want to, or is too stubborn to listen. I think the coach needs to be able to find a way around this. That is what they are being paid for after all.

I would also consider it important that the coach sees his athlete train and is hands on for some of the weekly sessions. I know someone who was very happy with an online coach he worked with this year. They had phone contact, but I don't think they ever actually met. I don't understand how someone could go with this and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work for me. I'd find it hard to trust my training to someone I never saw, or who never saw me.

I don't have a specific number in mind when I say this, but I'd also like any coach I worked with not to have too many athletes on their hands. I wouldn't expect the coach to coach just me and me alone, but I think there has to a number when it becomes impossible to give everybody equal attention. This would be another reason I'd be suspicious of online coaching, there'd be no way of knowing exactly how many people they'd be working with.

Just for the record, I respected you for telling me honestly you weren't motivated enough to take me on during the summer, rather than taking my money and not giving it 100%. You know me better than any other coach in Ireland, this is the reason I asked you, and I didn't seek out anybody else after you jilted me. I think I trained well on my own and despite my cock up, I feel I raced well in Mallorca, but I do wonder would I have been a few minutes quicker had I worked with you.

No need to name names, but what attributes would make your ideal athlete to coach?

peter kern

It's not really part of this thread but my ideal athlete I see at least 4 times a week. And I have three athletes at moment I often see for 9 sessions a week at least 3 sessions with them are in a environment with less than 5 people . ( right now we are doing loads do technique work later on that will change a bit and be less but it will still be 5 sessions I would want to see them)That is what my ideal athlete would be . For many that is not a real world scenario but they have to make an effort .
Also one does not want to have an athlete that always says yes without thinking but one should not have to argue all the time as then Iam sure there is better compatible people . The most important is a drive to want to improve and if they have that they can be as slow as they want and I would prefer them to somebody that says no all the time and is really good . They also need to understand that Rome wasn't built in one day and it's a long process and in an ideal way they give something positive to the group by being helpful or encouraging to other people and make trainig a bit of fun while working hard. If one can point that out Zico while you work very hard you are not helping the people around you as you only think about yourself ( which is very important too but there is time to also give energy to other people) . You obviously have the work ethic which makes you brilliant to have around a session but being a bit positive at sessions also helps other people. And I do think it's an important part at group training
To have an environment that works for most people. As it's not always about one person but a group .


.

peter kern wrote: »

I never started to coach you as In your case you did not take on any feed back so why would you want a coach if you don't take on the feedback.
You had your ideas and it been pointed out that when I say left you say right I asked you not to do a session you did it . I was once uncoachable and it's not that your training is wrong. Also note you have never been charged. Penny for the time I spend with you trying to find out if it could work.

Does a coach to have to be more flexible than an athlete?
I don't know the answer to this the truth might be the middle
As it needs to 2 work . At the end of the day a coach gets paid for results and anything less than hawii quali for you would not be a result.
You contacted me 3 moth before the goal race so I this case I do not have a time to change aspects you can work on . I have followed your block knew how you trained before you contacted me . And if you are not willing to take my feedback than it is better coaching to let one do the want to do as arguing over stuff would not make you a better athlete for you IM I fact it would have likely slowed you down. In the long term I think it's your loss but again if one is not willing to take on advice it's better not using a coach until one is ready.

peter kern

It's obviously something one has to consider where ones priorities are . And as you see most of the times my training partner are not my clients as my coaching and my training is two seperate aspects( this is why I look for training partner during the day Iwould be very happy to take 4th place in kona behind 3 of my athletes . I fact I would me much happier to be beaten by a client .When I hear Craig alexandr saying. I still want to beat my client than we know that this coach is sttill an athlete first in first place and it's not bad but not the way I would see it. I would be delighted if somebody beats me and it is actually the best thing when it happens because in a way you see that their and your work are producing the desired results. I am a decent triathlete but it's my goal to produce athletes that are at an higher level and let's face it the level of triathlon in Ireland is still quite low and it would be bad for any athlete or coach to be happy to be a big fish in a small pont . I am for instance very happy that Kevin Thornton is opening the eyes of some people that were happy to be big in a small pont . Kevin is changing that perception and his coach is doing a very good job there. Ireland needs more people that challenge themselves and get out of their comfort zone and this should be the goal.

AKW wrote: »

Great question!![/qu

speedyj

This is IMO the best thread ever in this forum, thanks! Plenty to think about for both athletes and coaches.

zico10

I don't want to make this thread about me, but I did and do listen to you Peter. I can see why you'd get the impression I didn't, but I did.

I probably do only think about myself, but I think most driven triathletes do. That's the nature of individual sport. If somebody asks me for advice, I'll happily advise them, but if I'm going to a session to be coached I don't feel it's my place.

I should also add a coach needs to be able to convince an athlete that their methods are best. One's reputation alone might be enough to do this, but coaches have to earn reputations.

Tom__JNR

Great thread!

It is very complex issue to have good / two-way relationship with your couch however you should trust him.

Easier for me, same couch since day one

P.S. I am helping / mentoring / sharing my training my friend to get back in proper shape and I would be over the moon if he beat me!

zico10

Tom__JNR wrote: »

It is very complex issue to have good / two-way relationship with your couch however you should trust him.

Easier for me, same couch since day one

A lot of people I know have a great relationship with their couch. I can't see how it could be two way though.

MojoMaker

Oh I dunno, a couch is only as good as the potato.