World Cross Country

There is very good talent in junior fell running. Bofra in particular, and Woodhead races, and I expect the local club round here, Rossendale Harriers to show some great talent at Liver Hill tomorrow. But it is a minority thing - most kids can't run a hundred yards - and I know that because they challenge me when I am out for a run.

A couple of years ago I was surprised at the forum's apparent indifference to encouraging juniors into the sport whe I posted something about it.

I would prefer to be involved in a sport with credibility rather than one without it. I can't really be arsed only to be running with oldies all the time.

Youtube,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQZSK_2Xij4

There seems to be 5 clips of each race if you dig around the related links. Quality is errrr....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

There is very good talent in junior fell running. Bofra in particular, and Woodhead races, and I expect the local club round here, Rossendale Harriers to show some great talent at Liver Hill tomorrow. But it is a minority thing - most kids can't run a hundred yards - and I know that because they challenge me when I am out for a run.

A couple of years ago I was surprised at the forum's apparent indifference to encouraging juniors into the sport whe I posted something about it.

I would prefer to be involved in a sport with credibility rather than one without it. I can't really be arsed only to be running with oldies all the time.

---

I tend to agree with you Chris.

I've just started reading Arthur Lydiard's book, and he ascribe's the African's abilty in things like the Worlds, to the kids concentrating on mileage, and not racing or doing formal speedwork. He believes it builds up a better endurance base, running efficiency etc. This contrasts with UKA's (and most of the western world's) dictum of concentrating on speed and track work with youngsters, and doing very little endurance. Certainly puts a different perspective on Gaz running a marathon when he was 13 :eek: (how come he's not winning the worlds?)

Since I know nothing about the African's training (and next to nothing about western training), I don't know how valid any of this is, but kids were certainly running further in the 80's and we were having more success (no idea how many are now crippled though)

[QUOTE=Chris;117323]There is very good talent in junior fell running. Bofra in particular, and Woodhead races, and I expect the local club round here, Rossendale Harriers to show some great talent at Liver Hill tomorrow. But it is a minority thing - most kids can't run a hundred yards - and I know that because they challenge me when I am out for a run

Cheers for recognizing that Chris ,up at the Harriers we have something like 16+ uk;athletics coaches of various levels. Next month 12 of our level 1's are doing the level 2 award, the club pays for these courses as an investment in the future.
On another point the club had it's 40th 'birthday' last year, and part of that was a foto exibit of past members. The thing that stood out to me was how much leaner they were then, even 10 years ago. Perhaps we suffer from a 'convenience' lifestyle?

Mr Pudge - out of interest - Arthur Lydiard's book - which one is it please? There are many.....

Cheers

Pudgy - Mileage / effort are a big, big issue. There is an arrogance amongst many Track and Field people - in fact I know one senior coach who has referred to track athletes as thoroughbreds and fell runners as donkeys - I would just counter with names like Laura Park, Jamie Crompton, Josh Moody - look how Annika Jarman U17 from Lancaster and 2nd in the current Inter Counties has come from nowhere in less than 12 months. She had a summer on the Fells, and along with her team mate Hannah Bateson, there's two top fell runners, cutting it on track and XC.
And in my own Club, TomCee - Fell International, Sub 15 mins for 5K and still only 22 years old.

I remember in the late 70's in football at school that they started grid training for the first time. I was about 12. I wanted to enjoy myself and along with many others hated it.
Are the Brazilians playing 3 against 2 in a 5m x 5m grid? I think this mentality has taken over many sports in the UK & Europe and particularly athletics.

We let all these Sports Science "experts" plot out new methods, trial them on our kids, fail, come up with a new idea, trial it again, fail etc and ultimately the answer for endurance runners is as it has always been.

Roll up your sleeves and get on with it - up hill, down dale, cross country, but what do we do? 6 x 400m at Cross Country pace!!

My daughter is a good athlete - best race probably last year when 21st in the U13 Inter Counties, but whilst at U13 she could run a 3K XC race, on the track they limited her to 1200m races in the National Young Athletes League.

She could run a 10K now no problem, in fact trains around the Winter Warmer course in Blackburn and could do about a 41 - 42 minute race on there, but will not be able to race it until 2010!! She can't even do the Chorley 4's until next year and the Chorley Park 5K's until 2010.
Yet in the "Fun Run" that is the Sue Ryder 5K last year against the seniors she won the senior ladies race in 20:15, when still 13. This is no mickey mouse race - Lee Passco won it in just over 17 minutes.

I fully understand how the sport has to be mindful of pushy parents and coaches overdoing it, but I think until we release some of these shackles on the younger endurance athletes, we will not progress.

Well that's my cunningly hidden forum identity outed :rolleyes:

"Running To The Top", as borrowed from Penguin.

I totally agree re this 'protection of kids' its gone barmy.

We think its unsafe/barbaric/unethical* (delete any 2) for youngsters to be running too far at a young age yet as a society we 'allow' kids to spend hours on end playing on playstations, computers, video games etc. getting obese. I know whats gonna hurt em more in later life and its not the former!!!

I also don't think 'we' a sport do enough to encourage kids into athletics or keep em in it. I now live down south and our kids infants school occasionally has Wycombe Wanderers players come in to coach em football and Wasps players to coach rugby. Plus there's all the usual 'summer camp' type things. They get virtually nothing in cross country/athletics apart from me doing a weekly cross country session...and I bet they're more impressed by the likes of Phil Vickery than me!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrisU

Around 490 photos from the Edinburgh World Cross Country added here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisupson/sets/

---

Fantastically colourful set of pictures there Chris. Very nice!

Found this interesting-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/solpda/ukfs_sp...00/4927604.stm

Just read that article:

"We used to train three times a day, 200 miles a week, and it's very clear that if you have that sort of commitment - and can stay clear of injury - then you will run very fast. But you have to be prepared to commit."

I'd gladly put that level of commitment in, but cannot due to the following:

1. Full time employment
2. Age
3. Speed

Hats off to anyone who does put that level of commitment in though, thats some mileage a week that.

How many pairs of trainers would you go through a year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steadyeddy

Found this interesting-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/solpda/ukfs_sp...00/4927604.stm

---

Another very interesting article, it gets better by the day. Bedford has the gall to say our runners are not commited or dedicated enough because we don't put 200 miles a week in?

Sinatra has summed it up well.

Yes, us poor Brits have to work full time to pay all the stealth taxes!

If I didn't have to work I may well have been a great marathon runner, being able to give a greater level of commitment!

Comments like Mr Bedfords really annoy me! And don't get me started on Mr Fosters!!!

Bedford was a student when he did 200 miles a week (actually I'm not sure he did that much but he did a far bit.) Gordon Pirie trained fantastically hard for periods and worked full time as a bank clerk. Ron Hill held down a successful career.

Ok. I'm not saying necessarily that you can train three times a day and do a demanding job.

There is funding out there for every single athlete who wants to take advantage of it. Yes, seriously. It is called welfare benefits. Why not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Bedford was a student when he did 200 miles a week (actually I'm not sure he did that much but he did a far bit.) Gordon Pirie trained fantastically hard for periods and worked full time as a bank clerk. Ron Hill held down a successful career.

Ok. I'm not saying necessarily that you can train three times a day and do a demanding job.

There is funding out there for every single athlete who wants to take advantage of it. Yes, seriously. It is called welfare benefits. Why not?

---

I guess it depends on the type of job and hours worked. Also, forgot to mention that I had a wife and family, that restricts the mileage somewhat.

If your well enough to run your well enough to work, therefore I don't think we'd qualify for welfare benefits lol.

I we could live off Welfare benefits we could all be like Forest Gump and run and run and run. Its tempting.

I think he (Bedford) is partly responsible. He could start by making this London Fun Run a race and banning pantomime horses, deep see divers and Bernie Clifton.
And when you have drummed in to kids, and coaches through all the propaganda that they give out on the courses, not to over-train, how do you expect athletes to then start training in the way that he recommends?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

I think he (Bedford) is partly responsible. He could start by making this London Fun Run a race and banning pantomime horses, deep see divers and Bernie Clifton.
And when you have drummed in to kids, and coaches through all the propaganda that they give out on the courses, not to over-train, how do you expect athletes to then start training in the way that he recommends?

---

Spot on, well said Witton.

Long wait

Neither does Bedford envisage a quick solution to the problem.

"If you go back 20 years, we probably had 15 men who could run faster than 2 hours 12 minutes, but now we only have one.

He's not talking about the Canadian feller is he? You know, the one who had the lottery funding taken off him 'cos he's hardly raced for about 3 years.

i've got a BF book just called Brendan Foster (by BF and Cliff Temple), anyways, he has excerpts from his training diary at the back, i'll write down some (i'll summarise or i'll be typing all night)

February 1968 (blue period in Brighton when things were going badly)
69 miles in 10 sessions

February 1969 (finding he had iron deficiency anaemia and corrected it with pills)
64 miles in 7 sessions

May June 1972 (contender for 1500 olympic team)
80 miles total

December 1974 (preparing for euro champs in rome)
110 miles total

April 1976 (bulk winter work been done preparing for montreal)
131.5 miles

week after
136 miles

week after
126 miles

can always break down further if people interested but shows the miles he put in

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinatra

I guess it depends on the type of job and hours worked. Also, forgot to mention that I had a wife and family, that restricts the mileage somewhat.

If your well enough to run your well enough to work, therefore I don't think we'd qualify for welfare benefits lol.

---

I don't know if that is the point though. I don't think Bedford or Nerurkar are talking about the likes of you or me - I don't mean this disrespectfully - I just mean that I think they are talking about the athletes who probably could choose to be great or not.

In regard to your second point you don't need to be ill to spend a year on Job Seekers allowance and you don't need to try all that hard to seek a job. Besides that there must be a million young people on "gap" years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

In regard to your second point you don't need to be ill to spend a year on Job Seekers allowance and you don't need to try all that hard to seek a job.

---

If you claim Job Seekers Allowance you only actually get paid anything for the first six months, after that they just pay your National Insurance contribution. When i was claiming it 18 months ago the Allowance was £57 a week so anyone spending a year on Job Seekers would receive approx £1500. You cant fund much of a lifestyle on that unless you have some savings behind you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Head

If you claim Job Seekers Allowance you only actually get paid anything for the first six months, after that they just pay your National Insurance contribution. When i was claiming it 18 months ago the Allowance was £57 a week so anyone spending a year on Job Seekers would receive approx £1500. You cant fund much of a lifestyle on that unless you have some savings behind you.

---

There is also Income based Job Seekers Allowance (or was). Quite a few years ago, I was out of work briefly, and so was my wife.
There were 2 options of JSA.
1. Contributions based - as long as we had the stamps up to date we could get the base payment which I think was about £50.
2. Income Based - where you could really crank it up by demonstrating how much of sob story you were, but if you had a few quid put by for a rainy day, forget it.

I had 3 kids, a mortgage etc but unfortunately I had savings of about £9,000 at the time, which meant I was inelgible for Option 2.

Without the savings, I could have been clocking up a few hundred quid.

I asked the official that if I went out, put my £9000 on a horse, it lost, and came back, could I then claim if the horse lost.
No was the answer, a technicality!!

It doesn't pay to be prudent ( I hate that word now) or honest.

It would be intresting to see what people like RR say about this, i am sure he was out running over Woodhead at 5.00 am then going to work full time, coming home to a family and then going out training in the evening ?
UKA seem to want everything but offer very little in terms of funding compared to a lot of other sports

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FREDDIE

UKA seem to want everything but offer very little in terms of funding compared to a lot of other sports

---

Fully agree Freddie.

I often try to put in perspective the performance level of my kids at events. You get an U13 first season coming in 37th of 42 in a XC race and they feel a bit disappointed.

I explain that if they were performing at that level in football, they would be in the top 5 or 6 in their area, probably signed up by one of the local professional clubs, and admired by all the mates at school.

I would like to see an extensive prize money list instead of this lottery funding bestowed on the chosen ones and I would structure it something like this (figures are just for illustration and I am using XC as an example, but this could be applied through other disciplines.

County Champs XC 1st £100 with further award for 2nd, 3rd and first 3 teams.

Regional XC Champs eg. Northern 1st £500 with further award for top 6 and 1st 3 teams.

National XC Champs 1st £1000 with further awards for Top 10 individuals and 1st 3 teams.

The events to be covered could be open for debate, the scale of awards through the age groups, etc, but my principle would be to take the pot of money available to fund athletes and make it's distribution results orientated and that way all athletes at all levels would have a fair crack of the whip.

Pudgy - thans for the info.

Some good stuff on this thread. I watched the BBC Sunday coverage form Edinbugh last night. As has already been mentioned, there was no coverage whatever of any GB mens team runners finishing the race. No post-race (or pre-race) interviews with GB runners. Brief highlights of the junior races and no mention whatever of where ANY of the junior GB runners finished, despite some pretty impressive performances, especially in the junior ladies. This is extremely disappointing from the BBC - they should be actively promoting this to other young(ish) runners - not showing 4 or 5 replays of Bekele crossing the line in slow motion, however good he is.

World Championships in our own backard and the BBC practically ignore British competitors. I'm getting more annoyed the more I write.

Alan

UKA / UK Sport won't fund non Olympic sports such as cross country. It's a crap system.

I think part of the 'problem' with our 'strength' in cross country is that in years gone by all our middle distance and long distance track runners ran on the country in the winter as part of their training regime. The likes of Peter Elliot, Steve Ovett, Steve Cram, Tim Hutchins etc were all either winners or very highly placed in the National and/or Inter Counties. Nowadays our middle distance athletes are often off on warm weather training/altitude training and for want of a better word dont seem to want to 'slog' it out on the country.

A cynic might say they'd rather spend a couple of weeks in Australia/ South Africa in the sun rather than running through 9 miles of mud in the National!!!

Coe's jumping in the act now,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mai...2/socoe102.xml

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FREDDIE

It would be intresting to see what people like RR say about this, i am sure he was out running over Woodhead at 5.00 am then going to work full time, coming home to a family and then going out training in the evening ?
UKA seem to want everything but offer very little in terms of funding compared to a lot of other sports

---

Another one in full agreement with you Freddie. Half seven Buzzer has posted a good comment that the more we write and think about it the more annoyed we feel.

A now we have Seb Coe pitching in as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bladerunner

A cynic might say they'd rather spend a couple of weeks in Australia/ South Africa in the sun rather than running through 9 miles of mud in the National!!!

---

If only that were true. The National ain't 9 miles anymore. And more's the pity, I never really understood why it was shortened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

Bedford was a student when he did 200 miles a week (actually I'm not sure he did that much but he did a far bit.) Gordon Pirie trained fantastically hard for periods and worked full time as a bank clerk. Ron Hill held down a successful career.

Ok. I'm not saying necessarily that you can train three times a day and do a demanding job.

There is funding out there for every single athlete who wants to take advantage of it. Yes, seriously. It is called welfare benefits. Why not?

---

Chris do you consider it moral to build a running career off the sweat of others?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinno

Another one in full agreement with you Freddie. Half seven Buzzer has posted a good comment that the more we write and think about it the more annoyed we feel.

A now we have Seb Coe pitching in as well.

---

Coe as well guys !, he wants bloody concentrate on the Olympics or he will have the Country in financial ruin !!

Spot the forumite: http://www.ukathletics.net/ ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christopher leigh

Chris do you consider it moral to build a running career off the sweat of others?

---

What on earth are you going on about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FREDDIE

Coe as well guys !, he wants bloody concentrate on the Olympics or he will have the Country in financial ruin !!

---

The country is already in the process of financial ruin!Coe wrote that article without really giving an opinion on the brits poor showing.

Coe, Bedford and others know why our athletes can't compete with the Africans, but they either pretend not to know or are truly ignorant of the truth.

There seems to be a 'see no evil, hear no evil' mentality amongst those who should or do know better.A sort of 'if we all pretend it isn't, then it really isn't' attitude.The truth is 'it is' and the sooner people start dealing with it the sooner our sport can recover.

I was listening to a radio program about athletics yesterday. One bloke said our sport(athletics) was the most corrupt.Perhaps thats the real reason why kids want nothing to do with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris

What on earth are you going on about?

---

Why should I work hard to pay for somebody elses sporting aspirations?

Thats what welfare is.Feeding off the energy of others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christopher leigh

I was listening to a radio program about athletics yesterday. One bloke said our sport(athletics) was the most corrupt.Perhaps thats the real reason why kids want nothing to do with it.

---

....and want nothing to do with football either I suppose as the England head coach is being charged with corruption.... :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dominion

....and want nothing to do with football either I suppose as the England head coach is being charged with corruption.... :confused:

---

Don't follow football, who's that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christopher leigh

Don't follow football, who's that?

---

It's irrelevant who it is. If the problem in athletics is corruption, then kids must be turning away from football in their droves. England head coach being investigated for witholding evidence in a trial, clubs being investigated for illegal payments to agents, no proper drug testing program.... It's hardly a model sport?