Development of Young Athletes

So that we don't contaminate another thread, let's have one about this. Let's keep it free from cynicism if we can and make contributions that are with a purpose.

There are lots of questions and the answers are probably even more numerous, so rather than getting in to a debate on the rules and race lengths which is a relatively minor issue perhaps we should try and answer some of the questions first.

The first minute a junior athlete walks through the doors for their first session what is the end goal? Should we even have one? What would be deemed success? When can that success be judged.

Should coaches have more say in the competitive structuresif they are those with most responsibility for the outcome.

What is the FRA role in this as the governing body?

Dealing with the first point, when I first get an athlete I try to engage with them and their parents. Enthuse them about how much fun they can have and the wide range of positive experiences out there for endurance runners. They can take part in events as varied as National Young Athletes League, Road and Cross Country Relays and Junior Fell races as well as the wide variety of Championship races out there in all disciplines.
Then we have the relationships. Best friends can be made for life, not just within your own club, but with athletes from other clubs. Travelling to some of the most beautiful places in the country - and eventually perhaps the world.
If I can enthuse them and immerse them in the sport, there is then a much better chance of achieving success. Success for me is seeing that athlete and perhaps their family still involved and loving the sport in to adulthood.

As a coach, I do think we should have more say. We should be consulted - but that's as far as it goes. We will have too many differing ideas. That's the nature of coaching. But there will be some common threads and the custodians of the sport should put more faith in coaches than they do at present.

The FRA is doing more or less what it should. Itr provides a framework for the sport and in most areas it does a fantastic job. Unlike many other governing bodies I also feel that it looks to improve, listens and adapts. Perhaps because the FRA is made up of people who also have a love for the sport, there is a greater link to the grass roots than you find with UKA/EA where paid officers seem to be of the opinion that their degrees and salary count more than years of experience.

Bravo. 1) agree - enjoyment and long term involvement, 2) agree - provide knowledgeable consultation, and 3) agree - provide a suitable framework.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

The first minute a junior athlete walks through the doors for their first session what is the end goal? Should we even have one? What would be deemed success? When can that success be judged.

---

Great question WP.

- Is it to bring youngsters into fell running so that they are still involved as adults?
- Or to support their potential in the sport as youngsters, as an end in itself, with no relationship to their adult life?
- To share our own joy of the sport and of racing with youngsters, so that they can enjoy the physical, emotional and social benefits, develop their resiliance, self-confidence, etc?
- To bring new blood into a fell running club - bringing talent through from a young age, from the club point of view?
- To support the wider goal of bringing talented youngsters into competition and thus raising competitive standards of endurance running in the future (finding the minority who are naturally talented at this age)?
- To encourage them to enter and enjoy endurance events even when they are not naturally talented runners (most members of the population fall into this category)?

All these possible answers have merit and I wonder if the background / talent of the coach themself has a bearing on their own point of view? I know it does on mine.

To have fun and enjoy themselves first and foremost. About 70-80 children from 6-18 come on KCAC nights, some for competitive training, others to keep fit, some as their parents are running, others because their friends are going, no children are 'forced' to be competitive, there is a club fell championships it is encouraged but not compulsory. (and yes, I know WP you don't force people at BBH, I just can't think of a better word!!).

Those who want to succeed are shown how to get better by club coaches but we aim to deal with all children. There is a written coaching itinerary and now, all are 'graded' after lots of tests. Specific coaches work with each group based on ability, same caoches, with same group every week. But if children are not enjoying it, they wont come back and you will have wasted your time.

So far we seem to agree fun, social etc.

But there comes a time that we have to realise we are all in athletics clubs. We compete, we go as a club and our athletes compete individually and as team members.
That is in reality the purpose of our existence.

Should we expect any athlete that comes to us to work to get better?

40 plus juniors turning up at CVFr every Tues regardless of weather and with only fell running to tempt them. I believe that when they come for their first session then we should have agoal straight away. The goal should be that they turn up for their second session. They wont if they havent enjoyed themselves.
From that number of kids we have just a handful who race regularly and not many more who race at all. That isnt the reason they come. Having fun getting muddy and just a little bit tired is enough. I make them aware of races both locally and nationally and we have a junior championship series fo 10 races each year to encourage them to try to develop. When they show an intereste then i support them all I can, engaging with parents has to be important in terms of getting them to races making sure they know what they are letting themselves in for. Positive feedback is good and always finding out how they have done to be able to let them know that I know how they are doing is good. Always for me its about telling them to go out and enjoy it. Even with ours juniors who are on the edge of national success, achieving national success and international success my last words to them before any race once the planning is done is to go out and enjoy the experience.

Agree with lots of CCR post, enjoyment is the thing that is paramount. More and more juniors are attempting our club champs but it is not the be all and end all. Yesterdays stanbury splash rat run had loads of juniors out, it was wet, very windy and pretty cold, but seeing a hell of alot of smiling faces made it a success. Juniors smiling when you shout encouragement and clap them through, that is a success. Yes, they should want to improve but improvement through having fun and 'not realising' they are working hard is to me, what it is all about.

If they enjoy the juniors, they are more likely to go into the seniors. I always want little biara to finish smiling and having enjoyed the race, I want her to still be doing sport when she is grown up (only 9 now). To me, I think I am hitting the balance right as after 3 years, she is still involved and still wants to do more. As CCR says, the experience is what it's all about.

Is it too simplistic to discuss it as juniors / seniors?

In fell terms, up to and including U12, they can get by with what I would call part time commitment. As they move through the U14s if they don't up their game they will lose ground and we will lose them by the time they get to U16s.

Don't get me wrong, there has to be fun all along. You cannot turn out in all weathers to train and race if you aren't enjoying it. But by the same token, part of the enjoyment is based around achievement.

If you look at the current 2011 U18s table and go back to 2005 when they were U12s and chart the progress it makes interesting reading in both Boys and Girls categories.
Quite a large number, the large majority of athletes of whom I can say "I wonder what happened to them".

Some are mine, or were friends of mine or my athletes. A fair portion were those that failed to up their game when it was needed.

That transition from fun to serious has to be managed by coaches, parents and athlete. It's key to keeping them in the sport, whatever level they are at.

I certainly don't think I've got the balance right yet - not sure I ever will :/

I agree WP there is a point where success that was easily achieved young due to the kindness of the gene pool begins to be eroded through other athletes who are less gifted but are beginning to work harder and it is this age that is critical because it becomes hard for those who have enjoyed success to come to terms with losing. If its only been about the winning then this is harder to take. It is obvioulsy at this point that we begin to lose juniors. Losing juniors is inevitable whatever we do as parents coaches clubs. History shows as you point out with the fell scene over the last few years that the vast majority chose another route through life. The balance tha Biara seeks is right. Whilst I have a talented son who is amassing county honours for track and Xc who started on the fells and is targetting fells more this year I wnat him to succeed what parent wouldnt but more than that I want him to be running when is my age because he still loves the whole idea of just sticking a pair of trainers on and getting out there. Look at he power of 10 for any sport/discipline and track the juniors through from years ago and you will see names drop of the lists as the age groups progress. Very few make it through to the senior ranks and even less remain record breakers/holders. Seniors are more likely to come from runners who have come to the sport later those that start really young are done with it by then. Is this because we assume that progression is needed all the time and the whole competetive process is built around improve or remove?
As noted on the old thread I am not suggesting that we protect juniors from defeats its the nature of racing that only one person can win unlike team sprorts so the sooner kids get used to that the better. Thats life. But we have to come up with a better way of keeping kids in the sport. Who knows how many potential world beaters have gone aged between 14 and 18.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clash City Rocker

I agree WP there is a point where success that was easily achieved young due to the kindness of the gene pool begins to be eroded through other athletes who are less gifted but are beginning to work harder and it is this age that is critical because it becomes hard for those who have enjoyed success to come to terms with losing. If its only been about the winning then this is harder to take. It is obvioulsy at this point that we begin to lose juniors. Losing juniors is inevitable whatever we do as parents coaches clubs. History shows as you point out with the fell scene over the last few years that the vast majority chose another route through life. The balance tha Biara seeks is right. Whilst I have a talented son who is amassing county honours for track and Xc who started on the fells and is targetting fells more this year I wnat him to succeed what parent wouldnt but more than that I want him to be running when is my age because he still loves the whole idea of just sticking a pair of trainers on and getting out there. Look at he power of 10 for any sport/discipline and track the juniors through from years ago and you will see names drop of the lists as the age groups progress. Very few make it through to the senior ranks and even less remain record breakers/holders. Seniors are more likely to come from runners who have come to the sport later those that start really young are done with it by then. Is this because we assume that progression is needed all the time and the whole competetive process is built around improve or remove?
As noted on the old thread I am not suggesting that we protect juniors from defeats its the nature of racing that only one person can win unlike team sprorts so the sooner kids get used to that the better. Thats life. But we have to come up with a better way of keeping kids in the sport. Who knows how many potential world beaters have gone aged between 14 and 18.

---

Clash City, this is really interesting. I agree there can be danger for talented youngsters for the reasons you suggest. Conversley, those children who enjoy fell running but who struggle to do well in terms of winning (ie. they work really hard but still come near the back in a race), they gain a lot in terms of emotional resiliance, working hard to make small gains, etc, and this is a fantastic benefit for their later life. It takes a special character to be slow or average in races time-and-again, and to keep turning up. I think these youngsters are more likely to stick with the sport because coping with the work and the pain involved will have become second nature - they have lived it already and they will not be fazed by coming up against better runners later - they are used to it! With children this is specially admirable because at this age racing IS about winning (nothing wrong with that) so if we can get these children into our clubs, they have lots to gain and probably lots to contribute to our clubs later.

For me it is similar to the problems of child prodigies in any field - outside sport too. Extra-clever or talented children get used to being admired and being on top, winning or being in sight of trophies, etc. So yes, for many it is such a big fall once the world stops saying how brilliant they are, and once 'being on (or near) the top' needs a work ethic and resiliance to failure, not just the luck of genetics.

And there is a gap between success in childhood and success in adulthood (again, in anything, not just sport). Maturity, late starters, etc. Some kids can run faster when they are young, and others catch up later. Average juniors can be top seniors, also through the luck of genetics.

I think about this a lot (it's interesting!).

It is acknowledged that we lose juniors as they go up to seniors but is this at a greater rate than other sports? How many thousand get scouted for football teams but how many make it through to professional ranks or even to serious non-league.

I think that many keep running, but actually consider themselves as a participant in another sport. The 'fun' footballer who goes out for a run a couple of times a week but considers themselves a footballer. As stated on the other thread by i think felljunior, quite a few medals at elite level in mountain running and team medals to, we can't be doing too much wrong. Are we as coaches wanting too much? Not implied as a criticism of anybody at any club, but is this an unconscious thought that we have?

I do feel sorry for little biara though, she seems to have inherited my speed!! Her aim at pendle this year, to actually get over the gate before all the others have come down the other way.

Sorry just posted this in the elite vs muppets thread but its priobably better here:

Quite honestly I don't think it matters what sports kids take up - its just brilliant if they turn out sporty. And then, should they happen to find out that they are good at a sport or sports, they can take it from there. And if they want to be really, really good they need to be prepared to take a sport they are good at and turn it into an absolute obsession... which is definitely not for everyone.

Obviously if you coach running you want the kids to take it up I'm sure but don't lose sight of the bigger picture.

I do feel sorry for little biara though, she seems to have inherited my speed!! Her aim at pendle this year, to actually get over the gate before all the others have come down the other way.[/QUOTE]

Dont feel sorry for her help her achieve her aim. Its a brilliant target to have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eleanor

Clash City, this is really interesting. I agree there can be danger for talented youngsters for the reasons you suggest. Conversley, those children who enjoy fell running but who struggle to do well in terms of winning (ie. they work really hard but still come near the back in a race), they gain a lot in terms of emotional resiliance, working hard to make small gains, etc, and this is a fantastic benefit for their later life. It takes a special character to be slow or average in races time-and-again, and to keep turning up. I think these youngsters are more likely to stick with the sport because coping with the work and the pain involved will have become second nature - they have lived it already and they will not be fazed by coming up against better runners later - they are used to it! With children this is specially admirable because at this age racing IS about winning (nothing wrong with that) so if we can get these children into our clubs, they have lots to gain and probably lots to contribute to our clubs later.

For me it is similar to the problems of child prodigies in any field - outside sport too. Extra-clever or talented children get used to being admired and being on top, winning or being in sight of trophies, etc. So yes, for many it is such a big fall once the world stops saying how brilliant they are, and once 'being on (or near) the top' needs a work ethic and resiliance to failure, not just the luck of genetics.

And there is a gap between success in childhood and success in adulthood (again, in anything, not just sport). Maturity, late starters, etc. Some kids can run faster when they are young, and others catch up later. Average juniors can be top seniors, also through the luck of genetics.

I think about this a lot (it's interesting!).

---

Your right it is an interesting area. I have no evidence but I suspect that WP may have that it is the also rans who come through on the whole. I know all about the special type of person who is slow in races time and again. Thats me which is why I very rarely race as I dont enjoy it but I love to run. If we assume progression is so very importnat then we are always looking to measure it and prove it. There has to be a large part of what we do that ignores this impulse and just coaches (works with) juniors to be good at running because its good to be good at running. Is it better to be FRA U12 champion or V40 champion. I dont know but i suspect that there has never been anyone who has been both or ever will be.

What are our goals? A good question. I'm pretty much with what CCR has already said.
When I first decided to get involved with coaching it was because I went to the track with my youngster and remembered all the hours that volunteer coaches had given me when I ran competitively (aged 11 to 23). I just wanted to put something back...as much as anything else it was "to be there" for them...a commitment of time and to help them in any way possible.
Now that I'm pretty much immersed in it I can see other agendas at play. It seems to me that EA are interested in delivering podium/medal winning athletes...my role is somewhere in the bottom half of that pyramid that has Fundamentals at the base. The club wants to have good numbers of kids able and willing to compete in team events. Fair enough, that's the "raison d'etre". Personally, my goal is to encourage as many kids as I can to "have a go", to try different things, to enjoy the broadened social contact, to enjoy competition, to want to come back every week. As individuals I want to try to help them improve in any way that I can. That means that I'm interested in the kids who have not found the event that they are particularly good at yet just as much as those who are already at the front of the pack. Their needs are different. The goals with them are probably different too....given that one group tends to be more "driven" than the other.
When the kids are well into their teens and competing at a high level I think things change again...coaching becomes more about performance, though "enjoyment" must still underpin participation.

As has been said already, the kids who excel as juniors don't often figure in the senior ranks. These are the best under 15 boys in the (limited all time) Power of 10 rankings for the 800m. There is only one name (Tom McKean) who you could say went on to become a household name. http://www.thepowerof10.info/ranking...ex=M&alltime=y

Football is similar. Pro clubs are taking kids of 5 and 6 now. Most will be discarded. Oddly enough, there isn't the same pressure to produce "excellence" in Junior Football clubs as there is in athletics. It really is about playing football with your mates. You try to help them improve their skills and encourage them to play their best, but the "fun" is much the biggest part of it. It's the parents who take it too seriously.

I digress...what I'm trying to say is that there aren't any general goals other than to help each individual athlete get as much out of their participation as they want. If that happens to coincide with the agendas of EA, club. parents or whoever, all well and good. At the top of page one of the coaching manual it says "It's all about the athlete". That goes whatever their age.

A new teacher has just taken over little biara's class, as a target for the year, she has actually put down, not to finish last in any races (I'm rarely above 3/4 way down the field) and to improve her times.

As Stolly says, I think it is great she is doing sport and wants to improve, I don't care what sport she does as long as she is having fun. She likes cycling at KJRCC, running at KCAC and does any sport they offer to her at Stanbury. For me, her enjoyment and the time spent outside doing stuff is of main importance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manothemoors

As has been said already, the kids who excel as juniors don't often figure in the senior ranks. These are the best under 15 boys in the (limited all time) Power of 10 rankings for the 800m. There is only one name (Tom McKean) who you could say went on to become a household name. http://www.thepowerof10.info/ranking...ex=M&alltime=y

---

An element of that is because athletes then were more likely to become household names than they are these days. Michael Rimmer is still running now and his PB is 0.01 seconds off that of McKean.
But everyone knows McKean, certainly of the over 40s.

It's also likely that an U15 800m runner will be running 1500 - 10K when they are older.

But I take your point.

I think Team is very important. It allows athletes of all abilities to have a taste of and a stake in success. Athletics does involve lots of difficult conflict areas to resolve though.
I'm posting an article I wrote here for our local paper a few years ago that touches on the difficulties encountered and the way Team Spirit can be important to all levels of athlete in the club.
I use this a lot. An athlete who may not feel they can achieve, can in a team. It can give them that buzz, that taste to push for a little more and hopefully create that first spark to push themselves.


Together Each Achieves More – TEAM!

As a coach and team manager, I often have to grapple with the athlete / club conflicts of interest. This is usually an issue that is encountered at a Club fixture such as a League Track and Field match where 30 – 60 athletes can be involved in a variety of disciplines, or a Cross Country League or Championship event where several athletes are required in each age category to complete a team.

It isn’t always easy to reconcile. An athlete may well have a personal, individual goal perhaps to perform well at a particular major championship. The Club’s fixtures may not be at convenient times or be at the appropriate level of competition required for that particular athlete.

I am sure that many of you will be familiar with this situation. I have found myself at times frustrated by coaches and their athletes pulling out of fixtures, for what I as a team manager may feel are spurious reasons, but to them may be totally logical. Or perhaps requesting an event that they would not normally do within that fixture, in order to help them better prepare for their target, but by doing this, inadvertently ensuring that other athletes are inconvenienced to accommodate them.

In discussions on this matter at my own club and with others, I have been told that the individual should be put first, that each athlete must be dealt with in the best way possible for them.

However, I feel that this is too simplistic a stance to take as it can rarely work in practise. My counter argument is that place one athlete first, and you line up several behind them, creating a two tier structure; the athletes that matter and the athletes that don’t. Of course all athletes matter, it is a perception that can be created not a reality.

Athletes are in most instances club members, and therefore part of several groups within what can be a complex social structure.
On the first level they are an individual with their own personal targets. On the next level they are part of a training squad, under their coach, and then they are part of various teams within the club structure.
You can see quite easily how the agenda and actions of one athlete can impact significantly on the whole club.

I feel that athletics is about more than just the physical and technical skills of the athlete. As club members, all athletes benefit from the mutual support within the club environment. All members have an extended responsibility to each other. The individual referred to above would be less competitive without the training squad colleagues that push them week in week out, or without the back up of the club infrastructure that raises funding, provides officials and trains the coaches.
They learn teamwork, respect for their club mates and fellow competitors from other clubs. Athletics helps young athletes develop their personality and social skills to enable them to deal better with life as they move from education in to employment. The sport assists in creating good human beings and roll models for others.

I feel that Team events are extremely important. If you have a vibrant club, with a good team spirit, then the talented individuals will thrive within that environment. Most athletes do not have the ability to achieve individually at a high level, but often as part of a team pulling together the results attained can exceed the sum of the parts.

Individual club athletes should try to tailor their programme to meet the demands of the club as well as their own individual targets, because without the club behind them, they would not be the athlete that they are.

Clubs have to try and tailor their fixture demands to enable their athletes to get the right balance and quality of competition, whilst trying to build a base of members that can manage the demands of team competition without relying on everybody being available.

Team competition has to be given a high priority by all at the club as it is the foundation of the club. All the members have a stake in the success or failure. Team competition is the creator of the excitement and momentum that can move the whole club forward.

Do none of the big club have links with local football teams? I bet there are lads, who won't make the grade at football, but would make great distance runners.

Don't schools send their talented kids to clubs any more? I was sent to a local athletics club as a kid, but the track was within a velodrome and I ended up getting poached by the cycling club instead!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dynamo Dan

Do none of the big club have links with local football teams? I bet there are lads, who won't make the grade at football, but would make great distance runners.

Don't schools send their talented kids to clubs any more? I was sent to a local athletics club as a kid, but the track was within a velodrome and I ended up getting poached by the cycling club instead!!

---

You're right. At our local inter-schools cross country, three of the first four home in the year 4 race were members of the junior footie team that I coach....the Keeper won it. :thumbup:

A few years ago, my daughter's school got to the final of the English Schools Cross Country Cup. The Year 7/8 Girls was won by a girl from Harrogate who plays for Leeds called Leah Galton who still plays for Leeds but no longer runs the XC that I can see.

There's another Lancs girl who won the County Schools Inter Girls XC last year who is a footballer.

But my experience is that the football coaches are delighted for them to train with us until around 13-14 for fitness, they are reluctant to let them compete and as they get beyond 14 they actually block them competing.

I have many experiences of football for boys and girls where the athlete is told that :-

1. If they miss the football training they will not be considered for selection.
2. If they are selected and don't go, even if on the bench, they will not get selected next time.

It's a real pressure - a pressure that we do not exert on our athletes.

To what end as well? The vast majority get thrown on the scrap heap and playing for a pub team.

Does athletics have to get more ruthless? I don't like the idea of it, but I also don't like being used.

Take the example of a young footballer, been with us for 2 - 3 years. They have yet to take part in any club race. Always the excuse is a match or training. Yet on a Saturday morning at 12:30pm just before Xmas (the same time as our league XC races) that same athlete was able to compete for the school in the Town Schools XC Champs.
Coincidence that the only 2 Saturdays between October and March for 2 seasons so far have been the town schools where football has not been an issue.

I bet they manage to run at the County Schools a week on Saturday as well.

It makes me feel like a mug sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

A few years ago, my daughter's school got to the final of the English Schools Cross Country Cup. The Year 7/8 Girls was won by a girl from Harrogate who plays for Leeds called Leah Galton who still plays for Leeds but no longer runs the XC that I can see.

There's another Lancs girl who won the County Schools Inter Girls XC last year who is a footballer.

But my experience is that the football coaches are delighted for them to train with us until around 13-14 for fitness, they are reluctant to let them compete and as they get beyond 14 they actually block them competing.

I have many experiences of football for boys and girls where the athlete is told that :-

1. If they miss the football training they will not be considered for selection.
2. If they are selected and don't go, even if on the bench, they will not get selected next time.

It's a real pressure - a pressure that we do not exert on our athletes.

To what end as well? The vast majority get thrown on the scrap heap and playing for a pub team.

Does athletics have to get more ruthless? I don't like the idea of it, but I also don't like being used.

Take the example of a young footballer, been with us for 2 - 3 years. They have yet to take part in any club race. Always the excuse is a match or training. Yet on a Saturday morning at 12:30pm just before Xmas (the same time as our league XC races) that same athlete was able to compete for the school in the Town Schools XC Champs.
Coincidence that the only 2 Saturdays between October and March for 2 seasons so far have been the town schools where football has not been an issue.

I bet they manage to run at the County Schools a week on Saturday as well.

It makes me feel like a mug sometimes.

---

Yep, we get a bit of that too (at the track). To be honest, I can't really blame the kids and enjoy working with them even if they are not allowed by their footie team to compete. I know that it upsets some of the Harriers coaches though.

WP and MOTM thats about choice on one level but its also about bigger forces. The lure of the big money. My middle son is a decent footballer and I have done some fitness work with his team of u13 who havent a clue to be honest. They have been conditioned already into believing that they are going to be successful (rich) footballers and behave as such. Some of his team are for the most part rude and untalented and supremely unfit yet and deluded. Its sports such as football and to be honest I cant really think of another that have the control. If a kid does both athletics and football then they will chose football every time because they are told to not just by coaches and parents but by society we are constantly told of the high life footballers and theyre wags live which is sadly pushed as something to aspire too. Its hard to challeneg that "choice"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manothemoors

Yep, we get a bit of that too (at the track). To be honest, I can't really blame the kids and enjoy working with them even if they are not allowed by their footie team to compete. I know that it upsets some of the Harriers coaches though.

---

TBF running anywhere other than the track and Xc can upset some coaches. I do feel that some athletics clubs and coaches can be too much for the team and not enough for the athlete. Team success should never outway the needs of the individual

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clash City Rocker

WP and MOTM thats about choice on one level but its also about bigger forces. The lure of the big money. My middle son is a decent footballer and I have done some fitness work with his team of u13 who havent a clue to be honest. They have been conditioned already into believing that they are going to be successful (rich) footballers and behave as such. Some of his team are for the most part rude and untalented and supremely unfit yet and deluded. Its sports such as football and to be honest I cant really think of another that have the control. If a kid does both athletics and football then they will chose football every time because they are told to not just by coaches and parents but by society we are constantly told of the high life footballers and theyre wags live which is sadly pushed as something to aspire too. Its hard to challeneg that "choice"

---

Indeed. I know parents who have ££s for eyeballs already as their child football star is "Signed" to a Premiership club.,,,aged 9!!! He is very very good, but, heavens above...he's 9. He can no longer play Junior football with his mates or with school. It stinks.
I'd love to see athletics holding some glamour again (was Nick Rose ever that glamorous??? not sure) but I'd hate for the sport to end up as dominated by the promise of mind-boggling riches as football is. However, it is shuffling in some middle ground between amateurism and professionalism at the moment...perhaps the Corinthian spirit has been lost somewhere, whilst the opportunities for at least earning a crust at the sport are still limited to a small pool of athletes worldwide.
Look at road cycling though. It only takes for one or two home nations athletes to rise to the top and suddenly everyone wants to know. Maybe, if the Brownlees win Gold we'll be inundated with young tri-athletes wanting to improve their off-road endurance running. Mo mania might take hold. Jenny Meadows/Paula might get it right this time.

One thing I do know is that the children at the track are generally pleasant, polite kids...like you say CCR, that can't always be said of the footballists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clash City Rocker

TBF running anywhere other than the track and Xc can upset some coaches. I do feel that some athletics clubs and coaches can be too much for the team and not enough for the athlete. Team success should never outway the needs of the individual

---

I think I said something similar earlier. With regard to the "some coaches" comment, as you know I work with a coach who has an outlook that might be interpreted like that....however, I know that his "reasoning" has the individual athlete very much at heart, not the club....whether we agree with him or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

Is it too simplistic to discuss it as juniors / seniors?

---

It's all gone quiet here! I think most of us are reading from the same script, one of enjoyment, participation, and giving any kids we get to work with mental and physical skills they can apply to fellrunning, to other sports, and to other areas of their lives.

If we're looking to define and improve the framework, perhaps a 4-way split is better:
Juniors > Teenagers > 18s-U20/23s > Adults

Teenagers need a gradual increase in all aspects of their training, within limits for their age and abilities, otherwise there's nothing to hold their interest, and nothing for them to learn from coming along to training. This is when most will drop out, and I wouldn't hesitate to stop teenagers coming along if they weren't taking it seriously (they are allowed to have fun as well of course!)

18s-U20/23s have a lot to deal with, leaving school and many going to uni. Also, those that stay in athletics are more likely to look outside of fellrunning. This is partly a result of prestige competition options, partly the priorities of many running clubs, especially at Uni, and partly (say if you disagree here!) that they're put off by the adult fellrunning scene, where ALs are generally seen as the most important races.

I think the idea of making selected Medium races were available to U18s, given a reputable coach's letter, is a very good one.

I'm also reminded of a thought I had a year or two ago, triggered by my answer to the 'What's your favourite kind of race?' question. The answer is Lake District AMs, which I see as the Half-Marathons of fell-running. As such, they're hard, but there's nothing wrong with doing quite a few of them in a year. I counted about 15 serious contenders for my list, and thought a series based on these would be fantastic ~ taking only the best 5 or so results, and maybe a small bonus for doing another 2 (possibly a penalty for doing over 10!). A series like this might be more appealing to U23s than the Lakeland Classics or the FRA champs?

But against even that idea, many of the newly- or not-quite-18 year olds I've talked to in the last 2 years have strugged even in longer Short category races.

Is anyone else of the opinion that the U23 category in the FRA championships isn't quite working? Especially not for the women?

LissaJous is Lauren Jeska

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LissaJous

I'm also reminded of a thought I had a year or two ago, triggered by my answer to the 'What's your favourite kind of race?' question. The answer is Lake District AMs, which I see as the Half-Marathons of fell-running. As such, they're hard, but there's nothing wrong with doing quite a few of them in a year. I counted about 15 serious contenders for my list, and thought a series based on these would be fantastic ~ taking only the best 5 or so results, and maybe a small bonus for doing another 2 (possibly a penalty for doing over 10!). A series like this might be more appealing to U23s than the Lakeland Classics or the FRA champs?

LissaJous is Lauren Jeska

---

Lauren I really like that idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LissaJous

I'm also reminded of a thought I had a year or two ago, triggered by my answer to the 'What's your favourite kind of race?' question. The answer is Lake District AMs, which I see as the Half-Marathons of fell-running. As such, they're hard, but there's nothing wrong with doing quite a few of them in a year. I counted about 15 serious contenders for my list, and thought a series based on these would be fantastic ~ taking only the best 5 or so results, and maybe a small bonus for doing another 2 (possibly a penalty for doing over 10!). A series like this might be more appealing to U23s than the Lakeland Classics or the FRA champs?

But against even that idea, many of the newly- or not-quite-18 year olds I've talked to in the last 2 years have strugged even in longer Short category races.

LissaJous is Lauren Jeska

---

I agree that AM class racing is much more accessible than AL. I also agree with your earlier comment regarding the (unwelcome/macho/masochistic) obsession with AL races. There are parallels with Triathlon, which I'm also involved in. Tough middle distance races (similar to half-ironman) are proving much more popular with age group athletes (as opposed to elite nationals) than long distance (Ironman type) events; again because you can compete in several of them in a year, rather than target an entire year against one or maybe two races.

I'd be a bit worried about coaches being allowed to recommend U18 runners for M class races, even if they are 'reputable'. It opens the doors for parents to apply unwelcome pressure with potentially unpleasant and/or litigious consequences. The advantage of fixed rules, set by a third party is that they are backed by insurance underwriting and are unarguable.

Some clubs can be obsessed with competition and it can put juniors off, whether U18 or U8. It frankly wouldn't worry me if our U8-U12 runners never did any races, as long as they turn up regularly to training, work hard and have a good time. It's all about building a sound base so that they can compete and be competitive when they do get older and more capable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LissaJous

But against even that idea, many of the newly- or not-quite-18 year olds I've talked to in the last 2 years have strugged even in longer Short category races.


LissaJous is Lauren Jeska

---

On this particular point Lauren, when you look at the Junior FRA, they are usually 4 milers (as they are in with the U16s for convenience) and the senior race attached is sometimes over the 6 mile limit.
In the last couple of years the introduction of Clougha and Pendle have meant there have been some separate and longer U18 races.

But they go from U18 where they run typically 30-35 minutes and mix it with 20-25 min XC races and 1500m/3K track and then turn 18 and often aren't prepared for the step up.

Part of that is the messages from on high that come out preaching the LTAD and creating an impression that we can become world beaters of 3 or 4 days a week and low mileage.

The proposal I mentioned to allow some U18 and perhaps U16s to do selected over distance races with coaches approval would help to address that, but ultimately the athletes in these ages need to be doing more earlier in my opinion.

I sort of like the idea of the Lakeland AM series for 18 - 23s, perhaps with 3 races. Certainly Anniversary Waltz would be a good introductory race and I intend to make use of it for Beckie this year all being well, just for her to treat it as a training run for experience.
Fairfield would be another that I think would be a good race for a 18 year old.

I could set off an argument here, but I'm just posing the question from an innocent position with no hidden agenda BUT, why does it have to be Lakeland AMs? Would it be more 'all-inclusive' to have some from other areas as well, if there are decent AMs elsewhere (which I'm certain there are) could it be 1 from each area plus one other. Bit like some of the FRA champs, (where the rule is 1 from S, M and L plus one other, I think). This might allow more people to be involved and if there are 'local' races fro more people there might be a larger take up. Might need tinkering but just a thought, hardest AM I have done is Noonstone (RIP!!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biara

I could set off an argument here, but I'm just posing the question from an innocent position with no hidden agenda BUT, why does it have to be Lakeland AMs? Would it be more 'all-inclusive' to have some from other areas as well, if there are decent AMs elsewhere (which I'm certain there are) could it be 1 from each area plus one other. Bit like some of the FRA champs, (where the rule is 1 from S, M and L plus one other, I think). This might allow more people to be involved and if there are 'local' races fro more people there might be a larger take up. Might need tinkering but just a thought, hardest AM I have done is Noonstone (RIP!!)

---

I think because it proposed as an alternative to the Lakeland Classics which are all ALs.

What you are talking about is basically the current U23 Champs format.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyA

I'd be a bit worried about coaches being allowed to recommend U18 runners for M class races, even if they are 'reputable'.

---

Why?

We have races now that are listed as "ER" - so a RO makes an assessment and advises that.

If the FRA Junior Committee picked out 10 races in the calendar that are currently for 18 year olds and added a new category which was 18(U18) where the bracketed age was with coach consent, how would that be a problem.

Firstly the races are selected carefully eg Fiendsdale is one I suggested. Great terrain, only slightly over distance, but certainly manageable. The Half Tour, Wardle Skyline would perhaps also be ones that spring to mind.

Are we saying that coaches aren't to be trusted to use this leeway effectively if it were to be brought in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

I think because it proposed as an alternative to the Lakeland Classics which are all ALs.

What you are talking about is basically the current U23 Champs format.

---

Okay my post was a bit misleading upon reading it again. I meant if you had groups of AM races, 3 from the lakes, 3 from Peaks, 3 from North east (or similar) do 1 from each plus 1 other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biara

Okay my post was a bit misleading upon reading it again. I meant if you had groups of AM races, 3 from the lakes, 3 from Peaks, 3 from North east (or similar) do 1 from each plus 1 other.

---

It depends. For the runners looking at the international scene, the lakes are in many respects more representative. There are some pennine areas such as Darwen where the moorland tracks are similar, but certainly we are not talking Winter Hill or Reservoir Bogs as the ideal races for them to take part in :D

For runners looking towards the English Champs, then we have the English Champs and a wide array of other races available to them. I think Lauren is looking at one thing - a U23 version of the Lakeland Classics, which she can come on and explain if that's not the case.

What I am looking for is the opportunity every now and again to take in a race which might be slightly outside what is currently allowed.

Let me give you a comparison for those who may think I'm of the "pushy" inclination.

Some of you may just have seen that a young lady called Holly Bleasdale who at 20 has just Pole Vaulted 4.87m to break the GB record again (by 16cm) and go 2nd on the all-time list indoors and 4th all time anywhere.
In Pole Vault they use the same spec at 15, 16, 17, 18....35....

There's another young lady called Sophie Hitchon from Burnley who's world junior hammer champion. She has used the ladies spec hammer since she started in the U17s which was in her year 10 when she was 14 going on 15.

Yet we limit endurance runners in FRA terms until 18 and in UKA terms often until older than 18. If you try and counter that opinion you are looked on as if you are a Daily Mail reader ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

Are we saying that coaches aren't to be trusted to use this leeway effectively if it were to be brought in?

---

I actually said;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyA

I'd be a bit worried about coaches being allowed to recommend U18 runners for M class races, even if they are 'reputable'. It opens the doors for parents to apply unwelcome pressure with potentially unpleasant and/or litigious consequences. The advantage of fixed rules, set by a third party is that they are backed by insurance underwriting and are unarguable.

---

....which kind of answers the question.

I coach juniors (not in this age group though) but I know that I'm simply not experienced enough to make that decision, not by a long way.

Other similarly inexperienced coaches may not be so honest with themselves or may have an overinflated opinion of their own ability/importance.

Equally, being experienced is not the same as being competent; one does not automatically follow from the other. That's not a dig at anyone btw, just stating a fact. Who gets to decide if a coach is 'reputable' enough to be trusted with that decision?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not set against the idea, it just needs very careful thought. Maybe if you had one national coach (perhaps from the UKA coaching squad) who had been appointed to adjudicate, then a club coach could apply to them for an opinion on a particular athlete. That way you'll hopefully get an opinion that is impartial and immune to athlete/parent/coach pressure.

Also; the distance that a 16-18 yr old chooses to run in training is entirely up to them. Maybe the tiny minority of runners (in this age group) that would be capable of coping with an AM event would be better served by training hard at that distance (perhaps using known race routes) and building a solid performance base, before entering these races when they turn 18.

And finally; I'd never call anyone a Daily Mail reader; that's just going too far!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyA

I actually said;



....which kind of answers the question.

I coach juniors (not in this age group though) but I know that I'm simply not experienced enough to make that decision, not by a long way.

Other similarly inexperienced coaches may not be so honest with themselves or may have an overinflated opinion of their own ability/importance.

Equally, being experienced is not the same as being competent; one does not automatically follow from the other. That's not a dig at anyone btw, just stating a fact. Who gets to decide if a coach is 'reputable' enough to be trusted with that decision?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not set against the idea, it just needs very careful thought. Maybe if you had one national coach (perhaps from the UKA coaching squad) who had been appointed to adjudicate, then a club coach could apply to them for an opinion on a particular athlete. That way you'll hopefully get an opinion that is impartial and immune to athlete/parent/coach pressure.

Also; the distance that a 16-18 yr old chooses to run in training is entirely up to them. Maybe the tiny minority of runners (in this age group) that would be capable of coping with an AM event would be better served by training hard at that distance (perhaps using known race routes) and building a solid performance base, before entering these races when they turn 18.

And finally; I'd never call anyone a Daily Mail reader; that's just going too far!!

---

I did specify a Level 2 coach. We have a system that approves level 2s to coach a group of athletes. That is approval to guide them through their athletics life. That should be sufficient to make a judgement call such as the one we are discussing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyA

I coach juniors (not in this age group though) but I know that I'm simply not experienced enough to make that decision, not by a long way.

Other similarly inexperienced coaches may not be so honest with themselves or may have an overinflated opinion of their own ability/importance.

Equally, being experienced is not the same as being competent; one does not automatically follow from the other. That's not a dig at anyone btw, just stating a fact. Who gets to decide if a coach is 'reputable' enough to be trusted with that decision?

---

and this suggests that you doubt your self, as well as doubting others. Nothing necessarily wrong with some self reflection, knowing one's limits adnd trying to learn something before applying it.
I will not do things like plyometrics - I do not feel competent to do it and done incorrectly it would put my athletes at risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrump

I never realised pole vault and hammer were endurance events.

---

The point that I am making is that we have 2 champions and record breakers here at 20 years old that would not have been where they were had they not pushed from mid teens.
Let's look at Triathlon then - we know of the Brownlees of course - I wonder when they did their first tri?

I've seen a young lady competing in Triathlons for a while now - Sky Draper age 16. Probably someone on here will know the age rules for juniors to compete in senior triathlons, I don't. But she has taken part at 16 as have one or two other kids that my daughter has raced over recent years.

I also know a young girl of 15 who has contested the Womens Senior National Swimming Champs. Her Dad's a local fell runner coincidentally. I think she was 14 the first time.

Are those sports endurance enough for you Smiley?

Hi all, I was mixing up two separate ideas, one for seniors and one about juniors, so just to make absolutely clear:

The Lakeland AMs Series was a plan for all us V35s who enjoy that kind of race! The U20 or U23 category in it could easily count fewer races, but the idea is a real head-to-head between senior runners of whatever age that felt like it. As it was simply a fantasy idea including my favourite races, it was set in the Lakes (to which we'll have to add Cader Idris now that I'm up there almost every weekend!). There was no plan for it to have official FRA / national status, maybe think of it more like the North/South Wales series.

Comparing AMs to half-marathons brings it into perspective very well: some of the students here at Aberystwyth (where I live) are aspiring to run ONE half-marathon. The distance expectations of the majority of ~20 year olds are much shorter than you'd imagine. Think 10Ks at most!

For our (official/FRA championships) purposes, we'd want to:

1. Help bridge the gap between shorter and longer races
2. Provide options allowing athletes to pursue either distance or shorter races
3. Prevent any arbitrary/outside pressure towards longer races

If I was reworking the U23 champs I would make it 4 out of 6 races, by using the Shorts and Mediums from the senior champs, and adding two more Shorts (which could be from the U18s races, or other short races). At least one Medium to count. The extent to which (most) young athletes are put off even by the medium races is phenomenal. Using the U18s races would provide more continuity, and athletes looking at distance can go for the Longs in the Senior Champs (which a few of them already do).

If selected AMs were open to U18s (no-one is saying it would be all AMs), might it be best if each athlete applied in advance to a designated committee member? And definitely not be left for the RO to work out on the spot. Anyone without suitable fell-running experience and abilities would then easily be spotted. I think the officer responsible would be under-whelmed rathr than over-whelmed with applications!