Views on my son's 5k time

Lex Luther · 25-06-2015 10:27AM

interesting debate and sorry if I've unintentionally started a barn fire..
just one more comment ..actually the main reason I posted in the first place wasnt just about the time my son posted but more his very good form (relaxed and graceful) in the last 1/2 k which I observed as I ran back down the road to check on him (and which was remarked on by several less biased observers than I am)

Lex

HelenAnne · 25-06-2015 10:28AM

RayCun wrote: »

A 5k race? The fact that its a race means they'll be running as fast as they can, and they can't sustain that, so they are going to spend half the race running badly.* Where is the benefit?

*I see this a lot. There are some kids around my son's age who compete with him in XC and 600/800 on the track. I've also seen them run some road 5ks. On the track they're graceful. At the end of XC they're tired but strong. At the end of a road race they look like they have a bag full of bricks on their backs.

Doesn't it depend on the kid? I saw two young girls at a parkrun last week, I think under 10 and under 11. One of them was in 2nd woman position after the first lap (less than halfway) and I thought 'Good for her, but I wonder can she hold that pace?' -- she finished as second woman, under 21 mins, and finished strong. the next little girl was a bit behind her (but under 22 mins I'd say), and still running well coming up the final hill. She even put on a spurt over the last couple of hundred metres when a man was closing on her. I was pretty impressed!

walshb · 25-06-2015 10:30AM

The main point about kids wanting to always just explode and run fast is spot on. They are best suited to the shorter distances. No doubt. They have not yet gained the maturity and relaxed attitude to pacing and easing up and thinking as they race/run, hence the longer distances results in a real drop in quality and form and technique. I still wouldn't discourage 10/11/12 year olds from going on longer runs for cardio workouts!

RayCun · 25-06-2015 10:50AM

HelenAnne wrote: »

Doesn't it depend on the kid? I saw two young girls at a parkrun last week, I think under 10 and under 11. One of them was in 2nd woman position after the first lap (less than halfway) and I thought 'Good for her, but I wonder can she hold that pace?' -- she finished as second woman, under 21 mins, and finished strong. the next little girl was a bit behind her (but under 22 mins I'd say), and still running well coming up the final hill. She even put on a spurt over the last couple of hundred metres when a man was closing on her. I was pretty impressed!

Those are good times for 9 and 10 year old girls, I won't argue with that!

RayCun · 25-06-2015 11:03AM

just for an analogy, I understand that in soccer there are lots of debates about how small a pitch kids should be playing in at each age, how long each half should be, things like that. Because, although 11 year olds could play on a full size pitch, and some of them might prefer it, it doesn't help them develop footballing skills

RayCun · 25-06-2015 11:32AM

Lex Luther wrote: »

just one more comment ..actually the main reason I posted in the first place wasnt just about the time my son posted but more his very good form (relaxed and graceful) in the last 1/2 k which I observed as I ran back down the road to check on him (and which was remarked on by several less biased observers than I am)

that's good, you should try to get him into a club

Notwork Error · 25-06-2015 11:47AM

RayCun wrote: »

But whatever you do with an 11 year old, you should be thinking about how this is going to benefit them 10 years down the line. Improving their technique as a runner is going to keep paying off for the rest of their running lives. A steady 10/15 minute run at a controlled pace has its place in building strength. 800-1500m races, sure, and the future distance runners will enjoy them more than a sprint.

A 5k race? The fact that its a race means they'll be running as fast as they can, and they can't sustain that, so they are going to spend half the race running badly.* Where is the benefit?.

I think the problem with the looking out for their best interest in 10 years by running fast is flawed to be honest and I think it's a generalisation that all kids want to run fast. Bad pacing has the exact same consquences in any race from 200m up, fast running will actually expose more flaws in a runners technique. To see that, all you have to do is look at 400m runners coming down the stretch who went out too fast. If a kid can learn to pace an 800m race, they can learn to pace a 5k in my opinion. And I really don't believe once off races ingrain bad technique. As long as they are doing some sort of speed drills or workouts, long slow running will not have a damaging effect on their form.

As for looking in their best interest 10 years down the line meaning focusing on speed now, I don't agree with that at all, Aerobic endurance takes a lot longer and has more of a performance benefit than speed training. Aerobic running will give them more opportunities to make a decision down the line on whether they want to run middle distance or longer distance because of how muscle fibers work.

Speed is controlled predominantly by muscle fibre type, you are born with only a certain amount of slowtwitch and fasttwitch fibres and they cannot be changed. There is another fibre type called the intermediate fibre which can be trained to be recruited by either fasttwitch or slowtwitch depending on whether you are training for speed or endurance. These muscle fibers can be changed to work for endurance or speed very quickly so while you may lose speed while endurance training, it's very easy to convert them back if you focus on speed so a runner has never lost their speed with the exception of ageing or medical problems. Speed is a far more limited avenue for improvement than endurance as the fiber type rules the roost.

The aerobic engine is far more difficult to build but still needed by both middle and distance runners abd the gains can be huge. Not to mind that aerobic fitness is the foundation of all running from 800m up and why periodisation is the way it is currently. You build a base first and you work on speed after and I don't see why that should be reversed for kids.

By confining kids to middle distance and speedwork, I think coaches are stunting the progress as they have specialised them early in their life because if speed doesn't dissapear fully with distance training, it only temporarily goes due to training focus, why not focus on something that takes a decade or more to build which is endurance first? Keep it aerobic but always keep that hint of speed.

Renato Canova talks about this at length on letsrun about his elite marathon runners (they aren't kids but the rules still apply in my opinion). He says that he could take one of his marathon athletes and turn them into a 10k machine in a few months if that was what they wanted to do. He says it's a lot more difficult to take a 10k runner and turn them into a marathon runner because of the lack of an aerobic house as he calls it and all of the lactate training they have done.

Speedwork is just roof on the fully built aerobic house. Thats my take on it anyway. Take it for what it's worth!:)

RayCun · 25-06-2015 12:36PM

I wouldn't describe it as concentrating on speed, but as concentrating on form. In some ways its easier to study form when someone is running at a decent speed because everything is heightened, but you're trying to teach them things that they will apply in an easy-paced or steady run too. And maybe when putting together your training plan think less about the intervals they are going to run and more about the work you can do to improve their balance and coordination during those intervals.

You say it takes a decade or more to build endurance. Well, these are 11 year olds! They have a decade or more! They have plenty of time to run shorter distances and build up their strength, and the older they get the more capable they are of handling an increased load. But the older they get, the harder it is to change their running style, and the more they run the more that style becomes ingrained. So make them good runners first, and then they can be good sprinters or good middle distance runners or good endurance runners

(the distances they run aren't that short by the way, boys under 12 run 2k in the county XC so a lot of them will run that regularly in training)

Notwork Error · 25-06-2015 01:01PM

RayCun wrote: »

I wouldn't describe it as concentrating on speed, but as concentrating on form. In some ways its easier to study form when someone is running at a decent speed because everything is heightened, but you're trying to teach them things that they will apply in an easy-paced or steady run too. And maybe when putting together your training plan think less about the intervals they are going to run and more about the work you can do to improve their balance and coordination during those intervals.

You say it takes a decade or more to build endurance. Well, these are 11 year olds! They have a decade or more! They have plenty of time to run shorter distances and build up their strength, and the older they get the more capable they are of handling an increased load. But the older they get, the harder it is to change their running style, and the more they run the more that style becomes ingrained. So make them good runners first, and then they can be good sprinters or good middle distance runners or good endurance runners

(the distances they run aren't that short by the way, boys under 12 run 2k in the county XC so a lot of them will run that regularly in training)

I've to hit the road but I think aerobic development is a far more significant long term training ideal than form. Form cqn be worked on by running a few hills every week. Aerobic development is something that takes years of long slow distance. I don't think you understood the point I was making about a decade or more to max out aerobic capacity, theoretically it you can always improve it, I mean that it is the foundation of all running and the key to longterm improvement and why not start now when the kids are young if speed in middle and distance runners can be developed quickly later. By developing it early, you won't have to spend an extra 4-5 years developing it when you could be spending 6 months developing the speed on top on the endurance you have built. It's a lot easier to step down in distance than it is to step up is what I was saying so a kid who runs 5k's etc isn't as specialised and has more options available to them.

It's like when someone base trains for a 5k, they always run the miles to for a 10k but they up the speed and intensity and drop the miles for the specific/specialised phase. Running is a pretty simple sport at the end of the day and one of the biggest rules is distance first, speed later and I don't see why that rule doesn't apply to kids.Base training phase is always longer than the specific phase because it is the foundation. Speed training is always shorter than it because early peaking and burnout is likely. This is periodisation over one cycle but can be applied to longer Macrocycles (over a year) and running as an even longer and bigger picture. It's structure.

There's a reason Kenyan and Ethopia dominate running from 800-marathon. They all ran long as kids and developed endurance first, even the 800m runners.

RayCun · 25-06-2015 01:07PM

I think one point you're missing is that children are not just shorter adults.

If we were talking about 20 year old beginner runners and arguing about the best way to prepare them for a shot at qualification to the 2028 Olympics, the situation would be different. But kids can do things that adults can't, and can't do other things that adults can. They are more flexible, have better reactions, and are better learners than adults, but they are much weaker.

Chivito550 · 25-06-2015 01:21PM

Notwork Error wrote: »

I've to hit the road but I think aerobic development is a far more significant long term training ideal than form. Form cqn be worked on by running a few hills every week. Aerobic development is something that takes years of long slow distance. I don't think you understood the point I was making about a decade or more to max out aerobic capacity, theoretically it you can always improve it, I mean that it is the foundation of all running and the key to longterm improvement and why not start now when the kids are young if speed in middle and distance runners can be developed quickly later. By developing it early, you won't have to spend an extra 4-5 years developing it when you could be spending 6 months developing the speed on top on the endurance you have built. It's a lot easier to step down in distance than it is to step up is what I was saying so a kid who runs 5k's etc isn't as specialised and has more options available to them.

It's like when someone base trains for a 5k, they always run the miles to for a 10k but they up the speed and intensity and drop the miles for the specific/specialised phase. Running is a pretty simple sport at the end of the day and one of the biggest rules is distance first, speed later and I don't see why that rule doesn't apply to kids.Base training phase is always longer than the specific phase because it is the foundation. Speed training is always shorter than it because early peaking and burnout is likely. This is periodisation over one cycle but can be applied to longer Macrocycles (over a year) and running as an even longer and bigger picture. It's structure.

There's a reason Kenyan and Ethopia dominate running from 800-marathon. They all ran long as kids and developed endurance first, even the 800m runners.

There's an awful lot of distance running bias here. Kids should be kept open to all disciplines, and see what they enjoy the most and are best at, then specialise when older. The above is a nice way of killing off having any future decent sprinters, jumpers and throwers. How does all these long runs benefit these disciplines?

Ray is right. Good form, along with lots of variety are the most important things at that age.

Enduro · 25-06-2015 01:42PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

There's an awful lot of distance running bias here. Kids should be kept open to all disciplines, and see what they enjoy the most and are best at, then specialise when older. The above is a nice way of killing off having any future decent sprinters, jumpers and throwers. How does all these long runs benefit these disciplines?

If kids should be kept open to all disciplenes (which I agree with), should that not include longer distances as well?

I know in my day there was no sporting outlet for a slow-twitcher like me. Everything (athletics and ball-sports) was all about speed and sprinting, which put me off all of them (as I was crap, having less speed than almost everyone). It would have been nice to have had the opportunity to try out longer distance running (never done at my school), and would probably have gotten me into athletics a lot earlier.

Ultrapussy · 25-06-2015 01:42PM

RayCun wrote: »

I think one point you're missing is that children are not just shorter adults.

If we were talking about 20 year old beginner runners and arguing about the best way to prepare them for a shot at qualification to the 2028 Olympics, the situation would be different. But kids can do things that adults can't, and can't do other things that adults can. They are more flexible, have better reactions, and are better learners than adults, but they are much weaker.

And exactly how do 'you' as a parent and coach train good running form, Ray? Drills and plyometric exercises? Are these really a good idea for kids? Remember Ray, their bodies are growing: do you or any Irish club coaches have the necessary and very important understanding of the musculoskeletal development of children? On the whole, I'd guess you or most don't and in fact, most shouldn't be allowed within a mile of kids.

Look at the drop out rates. Kids are getting hammered in the clubs and then by the time they turn 13/14 they're out. Club coaches/parents living vicariously through kids is the big problem and 'coaches' who really don't have a clue. Some coaches even give kids sweets after and during sessions; some coaches are runners and don't even know how to structure their own training and yet they are let loose on kids.

Aerobic development with (as your man says) a hint of speed and a good mix of sports, where fun is the driving force and not the parents' egos is the right way to go.

The system of getting kids to run the 600m in community games and County Champs etc is a big problem: coaches have the kids doing intervals in prep for these races - some/most of these kids haven't even hit puberty. Stop and think about what's happening to those little 11-12 yr old girls as their bodies prepare for the huge structural and metabolic changes - no wonder they all start dropping out around the age of 13/14; who wouldn't?

RayCun · 25-06-2015 01:54PM

Enduro wrote: »

If kids should be kept open to all disciplenes (which I agree with), should that not include longer distances as well?

Just like to repeat that the kids do run cross country, and that is pretty long

Ultrapussy wrote: »

And exactly how do 'you' as a parent and coach train good running form, Ray? Drills and plyometric exercises?

Drills yes, plyometrics no, not for 11 year olds.

All the things you complain about - do you think introducing 5k races to the mix will improve them? Or if kids are being worked too hard, would 5k races not add to that problem?

Overflow · 25-06-2015 01:56PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

11 year olds should not be running 5k races IMO. By all means sign him up with an athletics club and let him try out all the various disciplines, and he'll find the ones that he likes the most. 11 year olds should be running 100s and 800s, and jumping into sand, leaping over a bar, and throwing a spear as far as possible, not slogging it out through miles.

Why ?

Notwork Error · 25-06-2015 02:12PM

RayCun wrote: »

I think one point you're missing is that children are not just shorter adults.

If we were talking about 20 year old beginner runners and arguing about the best way to prepare them for a shot at qualification to the 2028 Olympics, the situation would be different. But kids can do things that adults can't, and can't do other things that adults can. They are more flexible, have better reactions, and are better learners than adults, but they are much weaker.

Never said they weren't different and that's why I said the focus should be on running aerobic and not focusing on intervals. Kids are weaker than adults and that's an argument for why they shouldn't be focusing on running intervals and be more focused on easy running at that age if they like middle distance or long distance. It's more about cardio strength than intervals and kids have great cardio strength but not much anaerobic strength. Regulary out testing long term adults in Vo2max tests which while they may be useless as a predictor of performance, are a great predictor of overall health and strength in the heart and lungs.

Chivito- you picked me up completely wrong. If the kids want to throw, sprint or run middle or long distance, they should and they should try all events as I hve already said a few times in this thread. The debate I'm having with Ray is why kids should/shouldn't run long distance. Nothing to do with sprinting or throws. I was merely discussing why I disagreed that running long distance ruined kids which I think is a valid debate.

You seem to think that they shouldn't and have said so already, am I not allowed to share my thoughts on the subject if I think differently. You are ruling something out which is not what I've done. I'm debating the case to why I see long slow running as a better training method to middle and long distance runners. Not discouraging them from actually running middle distance. I clearly said that training long and slow could be better for young kids who ran over MD or over as they will not be specialised in a couple of years and can go up or down more easily.

Ultrapussy · 25-06-2015 02:28PM

RayCun wrote: »

Drills yes, plyometrics no, not for 11 year olds.

All the things you complain about - do you think introducing 5k races to the mix will improve them? Or if kids are being worked too hard, would 5k races not add to that problem?

You say that you train-in good running form using drills. What type of drills? High knees, butt kicks, skipping etc?

If 5k's were added on top of the 'things' then yes, it would compound the problem. If, however, kids are doing aerobic activities and are not getting into distress, then this is perfectly fine. In fact, the window of opportunity for aerobic development is between the ages of 8 and 12 (give or take a few days). Of course, aerobic development should be appropriately monitored and fun should be the 'guvnor'. A weekly session of relaxed strides would take care of speed development, especially if the kids are playing other sports/doing other activities that combat the problems of muscular imbalances that come with athletics.

It's a complex area and needs addressing. Too many of the few kids that come into athletics (at way too young of an age) are being driven out of the sport (at an age when they should be just starting) because the sport is mismanaged and by extension, miscoached.

Chivito550 · 25-06-2015 02:35PM

Overflow wrote: »

Why ?

Maybe read through the thread.

Ososlo · 25-06-2015 02:53PM

Enduro wrote: »

If kids should be kept open to all disciplenes (which I agree with), should that not include longer distances as well?

I know in my day there was no sporting outlet for a slow-twitcher like me. Everything (athletics and ball-sports) was all about speed and sprinting, which put me off all of them (as I was crap, having less speed than almost everyone). It would have been nice to have had the opportunity to try out longer distance running (never done at my school), and would probably have gotten me into athletics a lot earlier.

god I couldn't agree with you more. I wish wish wish running hadn't all been about going out at 100% effort from the off. I hated running with a passion due to the fact that my poor little lungs and legs were in a world of pain within about 10 seconds of every race we did.
Memories still haunt me....

sorry, back on topic...

Chivito550 · 25-06-2015 03:04PM

Ososlo wrote: »

god I couldn't agree with you more. I wish wish wish running hadn't all been about going out at 100% effort from the off. I hated running with a passion due to the fact that my poor little lungs and legs were in a world of pain within about 10 seconds of every race we did.
Memories still haunt me....

sorry, back on topic...

Your lungs should not be in agony after 10 seconds. 10 seconds is pretty much 100% anaerobic. You'd only feel it afterwards over such a short distance.

I assume you are referring to how kids run all distances. Just pelt it from the gun and try hang on. Kids will do this over 5km too. If you let them run 10km they'd still go out at suicidal pace. This is just how they run. It's stupid, but they are kids, they can't help but go like the clappers.

Ososlo · 25-06-2015 03:11PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Your lungs should not be in agony after 10 seconds. 10 seconds is pretty much 100% anaerobic. You'd only feel it afterwards over such a short distance.

I assume you are referring to how kids run all distances. Just pelt it from the gun and try hang on. Kids will do this over 5km too. If you let them run 10km they'd still go out at suicidal pace. This is just how they run. It's stupid, but they are kids, they can't help but go like the clappers.

small exaggeration there on my part possibly.

I just wish (I've had this conversation with some RL people too and they agree) that in school we were encouraged to go for a pressure-free jog now and again rather than ever run being a race. I might have actually liked running then. But then again, maybe I wouldn't... but it would have been nice to have the chance to try it.

It took me a few decades to appreciate that running doesn't have to be hell and can actually be something I might enjoy if a more relaxed approach was taken.
Talking as someone with no natural speed.

Chivito550 · 25-06-2015 03:16PM

Ososlo wrote: »

small exaggeration there on my part possibly.

I just wish (I've had this conversation with some RL people too and they agree) that in school we were encouraged to go for a pressure-free jog now and again rather than ever run being a race. I might have actually liked running then. But then again, maybe I wouldn't... but it would have been nice to have the chance to try it.

It took me a few decades to appreciate that running doesn't have to be hell and can actually be something I might enjoy if a more relaxed approach was taken.
Talking as someone with no natural speed.

I get what you are saying, but most kids like to be competitive, in a fun environment. I was rubbish at all sports as a kid, yet like all my peers, I wanted to try win in whatever I did. Pressure free runs as you call them, are like playing a football match with your friends and not keeping score. We never did that, and I doubt too many did. Kids seem to thrive on the competitiveness of sport.

The sport is becoming very much a case of "everyone's a winner" at adult level. Kids wouldn't find this "cool". They'd just pick another sport, where there are shiny medals and trophy's available and a chance to compete against their peers.

walshb · 25-06-2015 03:17PM

In my primary school we went to athletics meets and I was selected at the long distances as I was the best in the school at this. It felt long, but it was only 800 meters. Aged 12 that feels quite long. I remember going to the meet and thinking I'd get a medal. I almost got lapped by some of the other 12 year olds. Last I came. They must have ended up winning golds at the Olympics later on some of them.:pac:

kit3 · 25-06-2015 03:21PM

Ultrapussy wrote: »

It's a complex area and needs addressing. Too many of the few kids that come into athletics (at way too young of an age) are being driven out of the sport (at an age when they should be just starting) because the sport is mismanaged and by extension, miscoached.

Interested to read this. I've only had very recent exposure to the club scene so my comment should be read in that context. My daughter joined a club in the last 2/3 months. She attends one session a week because she has something else on the second night. I've not analysed their session but it would appear to be a few slow laps warm up, some intervals/drills, maybe some relays if some of the kids have races coming up & a few slow laps to cool down. A nice emphasis on making friends etc with a buddy system in place. While it's not taxing her she has certainly improved even in that short time. I suspect she's hit it lucky with the coach she has - we're away for the summer & he was talking about getting her ready for the cross country season so I asked if there was anything in particular she should be doing (she likes to run with me anyway) - the response was to be a normal kid, bounce on bouncy castles, run on the beach, muck around. I liked that. In terms of the rest of the discussion, she plays camogie & football too (& the fiddle

)

Clearlier · 25-06-2015 03:21PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Your lungs should not be in agony after 10 seconds. 10 seconds is pretty much 100% anaerobic. You'd only feel it afterwards over such a short distance.

I assume you are referring to how kids run all distances. Just pelt it from the gun and try hang on. Kids will do this over 5km too. If you let them run 10km they'd still go out at suicidal pace. This is just how they run. It's stupid, but they are kids, they can't help but go like the clappers.

Poor little helpless kids, totally unable to think for themselves. You'd nearly swear there wasn't a brain cell between them. Of course some kids will start off a race at a ridiculous pace but then so do a fair few adults. If kids were forced to run 5k races then I could agree that it's a bad idea (I'd be heading in that direction for adults too FWIW). If however they decide that they want to do one and have considered what it will take then I don't see any good reason for preventing them.

My wife recently decided that she wanted to do couch to 5k and my 8 year old decided to join her. Are you really saying that that's a bad idea and that we should have told him that he couldn't? BTW he also plays or has played football, tennis, judo, swimming, tag rugby, netball and anything else that has been available that he was interested in. In September he wants to start playing rugby. We offer him opportunities to take part in as many sports as possible. If he decides that he wants to do more of one then we'll give him those opportunities but I'll be pushing him to practice multiple sports until at least the age of 15.

kit3 · 25-06-2015 03:27PM

Clearlier wrote: »

Poor little helpless kids, totally unable to think for themselves. You'd nearly swear there wasn't a brain cell between them. Of course some kids will start off a race at a ridiculous pace but then so do a fair few adults. If kids were forced to run 5k races then I could agree that it's a bad idea (I'd be heading in that direction for adults too FWIW). If however they decide that they want to do one and have considered what it will take then I don't see any good reason for preventing them.

My wife recently decided that she wanted to do couch to 5k and my 8 year old decided to join her. Are you really saying that that's a bad idea and that we should have told him that he couldn't? BTW he also plays or has played football, tennis, judo, swimming, tag rugby, netball and anything else that has been available that he was interested in. In September he wants to start playing rugby. We offer him opportunities to take part in as many sports as possible. If he decides that he wants to do more of one then we'll give him those opportunities but I'll be pushing him to practice multiple sports until at least the age of 15.

Must agree that I would give kids a but more credit too. My kids school takes part in a cross country series that SDCC organise - I regularly hear them talking 'strategy' as in should they hang back at the start, stay with the leading group etc - think they actually learnt fairly early that tearing off at the start doesn't always work. Distance increases by class from about 300m for 3rd class to 600m for 6th

walshb · 25-06-2015 03:32PM

I suppose if the children are spoken to and advised and encouraged they can get the hang of the long distances that bit better, but naturally they will not have the maturity and experience to tackle these races with any real plan or intelligence.

Enduro · 25-06-2015 03:36PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

I get what you are saying, but most kids like to be competitive, in a fun environment. I was rubbish at all sports as a kid, yet like all my peers, I wanted to try win in whatever I did. Pressure free runs as you call them, are like playing a football match with your friends and not keeping score. We never did that, and I doubt too many did. Kids seem to thrive on the competitiveness of sport.

The sport is becoming very much a case of "everyone's a winner" at adult level. Kids wouldn't find this "cool". They'd just pick another sport, where there are shiny medals and trophy's available and a chance to compete against their peers.

I agree absolutely with you on the competitiveness bit... I was a competitive little fecker who wasn't competitive at sprinty events. The end result was that I had to find a non-sprinty outlet for my competitive desires, and due to the non-availability of long distance racing, I spent about 10 years having golf / pitch and put as my main sport :eek::eek:, as that was the first sport I found where not having sprint speed was no drawback to being competiveness (Before you say it, I didn't have much muscle mass either, being a classic slow-twitcher, so throwing things was out too). That was 10 years of my life where I could have been developing as a runner if I had had the opportunity.

Thread wise, my main point is that there are kids out there with potential to thrive and really enjoy longer distance running/racing who will hate athletics if all you let them experience is speed or power based disciplines. And the better they are likely to be as distance runners, the more likely they are to reject athletics if it becomes purely about speed ability.

Notwork Error · 25-06-2015 03:38PM

walshb wrote: »

I suppose if the children are spoken to and advised and encouraged they can get the hang of the long distances that bit better, but naturally they will not have the maturity and experience to tackle these races with nay real plan or intelligence.

Not true, never had a problem pacing myself in a 10k as a kid and nobody ever told me about it. After my first one, I knew well not to make the same mistake again.People are seriously undunderestiming a childs intelligence.

Just go back a few months and a young kid from Limerick got kick of the week on flotrack. He sat on the guy ahead shoulder for 450m before unleashing a blistering finishing kick to come from behind. Tactically flawless.

menoscemo · 25-06-2015 03:42PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

I assume you are referring to how kids run all distances. Just pelt it from the gun and try hang on. Kids will do this over 5km too. If you let them run 10km they'd still go out at suicidal pace. This is just how they run. It's stupid, but they are kids, they can't help but go like the clappers.

I see kids every week at parkrun, some blast out and are wrecked after one lap but the ones who come back every week generally learn how to pace themselves much like any adult.
There are loads of kids at our parkrun who start off slowly and pick up places in the 2nd and 3rd laps.

Views on my son's 5k time

Comments