Should I still run Mystic?

[danm]

Let that be said.

Now I don't claim to be a marathoning guru but my coach is and I feel I have a pretty good handle on it but still tons more to learn.  But I have entered 5 and finished 5.  I have stepped off the course a few races in my lifetime too and it happens.  But it has never been from lack of preparation or running too fast.  Typically it is from an injury or upset stomach or cramp, etc.  No one likes to quit.

Using a training tool that simply gives you more information than what you feel just seems right to me.

If someone came up to me and asked, "Dude, we need you to drive this car from Chicago out to the suburbs some 26 miles away, but... we removed all the gauges like the odometer, speedometer, gas gauge, etc, could you do it for us?"

Sure I could.  I could drive by feel and probably do a pretty good job of it.  But think of all the speed zones I would go thru on the way there!  That would require some serious guesswork.  And what about gas?  Is it full, half empty, what?  Man, it would just be so much easier if I could get the feedback from those missing gauges!

More and more of the top world runners use some sort of scientific device(s) for training/feedback.  It is just being plain stubborn to not acknowledge this.  Even Wetmore uses them on the guys.

The key is not to be so closed to the idea as to ward off potential good runners by trying to make them feel it is not necessary.

Like the gauges in the car, they aren't necessary.  But who'd be a fool not to use them?

Dan

[Ed 1]

As right as you may be about it having some use for some people it does not warrant misquoting some one for personal gain.

[danm]

I don't get what you are talking about Ed

[Ed 1]

Dan I apologize but I read some of the posts out of order and it came off like you claimed that Ryan stated that he was all knowing - when Ryan never stated that.  If this was not your intention then I do indeed apologize.  

But if you were quoting Ryan as stating that he was all knowing I would like to see info where to find that thread.  

Again if that was not your intention then I am sorry.  

BTW why does your wife not want you posting here?

[Zeke]

...it came off like you claimed that Ryan stated that he was all knowing - when Ryan never stated that.

Usually people that are "all knowing" don't come out and state that claim themselves.  It's usually an impression other people get by their actions.

[danm]

Look Ed, what I said way back when was out of line.  No excuses.

Don't try to get into or start a mud slinging fest.  Just not worth it.

The key here is to try and give constructive advice about running.  I have managed to eek out a few decent times on the low miles I have run for my lifetime average. (Started running in 1990 at the age of 27).  As of late I have been averaging about 50 a week.  Probably more like low 40's overall.

I don't claim to know it all but have had the good fortune of training with and under the guidance of some of the world's best coaches. Mostly during my tenure as a speedskater/cyclist.  Now in running.

The point is, my ability to "walk the talk" is more than justified.

Dan

[Zeke]

the guidance of some of the world's best coaches... Now in running.

Hmmm, I'm glad you like him and are happy, but  I'm not sure if I'd label your coach as one of the "world's best."  Who has he coached to great success?  I'm still waiting to see some results.  About every 2 weeks someone on letsrun.com ask about specific results under this program and no ever provides any hard data.  Maybe because you've all sworn yourselves to some brotherhood oath or something.  I'm not sure.

[danm]

As soon as the world discovers who "he" is I don't think there'll be any questions.

Thanks, Zeke.

[Ryan]

If someone came up to me and asked, "Dude, we need you to drive this car from Chicago out to the suburbs some 26 miles away, but... we removed all the gauges like the odometer, speedometer, gas gauge, etc, could you do it for us?"

To be a fair comparison, at least for some people, it would be more like (but, of course,  not exactly) "you get all your gauges but your tachometer." You know what? Even when I drove my manual transmission vehicles, I didn't need a tachometer and it didn't even help me when I did look at it. Once I drove the vehicle a bit, I knew when to shift. The tachometer just confirmed what I already knew, much like what I personally found with the HRM. On a vehicle with an automatic transmission, is there any benefit to a tachometer? I have yet to find a benefit to the tachometer on my current vehicle.

More and more of the top world runners use some sort of scientific device(s) for training/feedback.  It is just being plain stubborn to not acknowledge this.  Even Wetmore uses them on the guys.

First off, Wetmore uses them about once or twice per season. To suggest that's really using them for any significant purpose is ridiculous. Trust me, I'm watching the use of everything out there. I'm lucky enough to have a bit of an inside track on the devices used by the group that probably uses more devices than anyone else out there. I find it all fascinating but the more I watch this stuff, the more I realize it's the training that matters and everything else out there, at least at this time, has limited benefits at best and much of it is just window dressing.

The key is not to be so closed to the idea as to ward off potential good runners by trying to make them feel it is not necessary.

Just because someone says something has limited, if any, benefit for some people doesn't mean they are closed to the idea. Sometimes, it means they are open to the idea but have actually found out that the results are not as impressive as some would like to believe.

Like the gauges in the car, they aren't necessary.  But who'd be a fool not to use them?

Unless they are unnecessary gauges like a tachometer on a car with an automatic transmission.

[Ed 1]

Danm did you miss the three apologies in my thread?  If so here is another - if you had no intention on being slanderous then I Apologize.

[U. Ben Hadd]

...it came off like you claimed that Ryan stated that he was all knowing - when Ryan never stated that.

Usually people that are "all knowing" don't come out and state that claim themselves.  It's usually an impression other people get by their actions.

Well, Dan said in his own words and in no uncertain terms that the person in question did make that claim, in his post in this thread from 11:38 a.m. yesterday.

From another thread:

Perhaps all 6 posters on this site want to be informed of the "Ryan method. The only way known to man to train.  Run a 120 miles a week like me and you too can run a 35 minute 10k."

Tweaking a the numbers to account for percentages of visitors to koolade drinkers, the exact same could be said for Dan's "coach" and the moronic site he enjoys immunity on.  I've never seen anyone other than hacks scrambling for that guy's input.  Wake up, bub.

[Zeke]

Well, Dan said in his own words and in no uncertain terms that the person in question did make that claim, in his post in this thread from 11:38 a.m. yesterday.

Ben,

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.  That Ryan is a know-it-all, that Ryan is not a know-it-all, that Dan claimed Ryan is a know-it-all?

Tweaking a the numbers to account for percentages of visitors to koolade drinkers...

I'm not sure what this means either.

I've never seen anyone other than hacks scrambling for that guy's input.

 

While I only know a few people using this program, I wouldn't go so far as to call them hacks.  I believe one guy is like a 1:10 half marathon guy.  I wouldn't call Dan and Woody hacks either.  While I'm sure you've run 1:04 for a half - we can't all be blessed like you.

[Ryan]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.  That Ryan is a know-it-all, that Ryan is not a know-it-all, that Dan claimed Ryan is a know-it-all?

I don't even know why I'm getting involved in this but it was obvious that Dan stated that I claimed to be all knowing. Of course, when I asked him to reference where I made that claim, I got no response. Come to think of it, that's the same response I got when I asked him to reference where I made the claim that HRMs were useless for everyone, even though he stated that I also made that claim. It's amazing how easy it is for people to say someone else claimed something but how hard it is to actually reference those claims. Makes you wonder if the claims were actually ever made.

[Zeke]

...it was obvious that Dan stated that I claimed to be all knowing. Of course, when I asked him to reference where I made that claim, I got no response.

Yeah and I wrote... "Usually people that are "all knowing" don't come out and state that claim themselves. It's usually an impression other people get by their actions."  

Just because you don't come out and say "I know it all" doesn't mean that others can't perceive you to be that way. Things like "Trust me, I'm watching the use of everything out there. I'm lucky enough to have a bit of an inside track..." are good indicators.

[Ryan]

Yeah and I wrote... "Usually people that are "all knowing" don't come out and state that claim themselves. It's usually an impression other people get by their actions."

He stated I claimed something. That's different than stating that people got an impression of something, whether right or wrong, based on reading into words I post in a forum. I have little control of what impressions people get of me because of impresonal forum posts. I have every bit of control over what I actually state or claim. Don't you think it's possible that Dan has given people the impression that he thinks he's all knowing? I never stated that he claimed he was because he didn't but some of his statements could give one the impression. Nearly every one of us here has probably stated something on this forum that one could take as a "know-it-all" type of comment but we don't go around telling each other that we claim we are all knowing.