Camillus NY - After the success of Jim Vermeulen's XC Journal
in the many falls of Cross Country, we've asked again for him to
provide some news and notes once a month this summer. Think of these as
the thoughts that cross the mind of your average coach. Up from Section
3, we present you with "Thoughts From Three."
The Mornings After
On a recent Sunday, I was spending some quality time with my athlete's. No training contact-time rules were being broken, however. My middle-distance runners were just checking in with their weekly Race Analysis e-mails, so with a cup of coffee and some drab upstate winter weather outside, my next few hours were set.
Both teams, boys and girls, had raced under the Friday night lights at Utica College's Hutton Sports Center, so that meant long bus rides to and fro. Not the longest trip of all the teams competing, but long enough that most of the athletes looked forward to sleeping in on a Saturday recovery day, with light work scheduled in later on.
Our Race Analysis' follow the K.I.S.S. formula. Three simple questions with an occasional variation. I ask them to describe what they thought were their race strengths, their race weakness and then what would drive improvements. The method it presumes is likewise simple. Analyze, plan and move on.
A few of the runners typically go long-winded, as though welcoming an opportunity to either get something off their chest or to celebrate again a successful race. A select few are almost too harsh with themselves, negative to the point where I have to remind them no college scholarship or future career choice hinged on that one race.
Most, though, keep it short and sweet. The shortest Race Analysis I ever received was nine syllables. Mia managed that in six words. Such brevity means someone is either getting right to the point or just slapping something down to meet the requirements. Mia, in this case, had zeroed in on her point, which was to do a better job maintaining pace with improved threshold training efforts. Cogency simply amplified her intent.
A race analysis is, I suppose, another way of reinforcing commitment. Commitment of the best kind requires that you do more than show up, 'try your best' and see what happens. It's not news that too much of present culture gravitates in that direction. Don't take anything too seriously, it declares, always have fun. The instance gratification that technology delivers doesn't help matters. A current challenge for many coaches, then, becomes not simply how to effectively mold individual talents but to forge teams that can cope with conflicting commitments. Unlike other sports, we agree to take on whoever walks in the door Day 1. And unless coaches have found methods for 'weeding out' team members with limited or destructive levels of commitment--and have been condoned by administrations to do so--a range of commitment levels is exactly what most coaches confront.
Our race analysis' do their little bit in suggesting that a committed team begins with committed individuals--and that committed athletes are what's expected. It's not a choice, like what tune to dial up next on your portable device.
Possibly my best Race Analysis of the season, however, came early. At that Friday night meet, in fact. Abby was standing on the infield after her race, starring at the floor as though deep in thought. Approaching her, I held up my hand to offer a high-five. She had, after all, just run her seasonal best time in that event. But she shook her head no and refused to meet my gesture. "That was awful!" she blurted, quickly explaining dissatisfaction with both her race tactics and her time. "I can do much better!" I lowered my hand, gave her a pat on the shoulder and walked away. There was nothing to add to that.