I used to think talent in track and field was solely straight line speed. There is certainly big correlation between speed and performance and that is an easy talent indicator to judge an athlete off of, but by far not the only one.
The more I work with different types of athletes, the more I understand that talent can vary and manifest itself into vastly different forms. I've worked with athletes who had horrible sprint mechanics and were slower than their distance counterparts, yet could reel off great splits in the distance races and be highly successful. I've also seen athletes that had a high tolerance for work without necessarily the fastest footspeed or great endurance. These athletes excelled at the 400 and 800. And then you have the field events where speed may be just a very small portion of the recipe needed to to excel.
So what exactly is talent? Is the guy who seems to never get injured no matter the training considered talented? Is the kid who is mentally tough and doesn't mind hurting in a race talented? And then what about the kid who drops thirty seconds off his mile time his senior year despite doing nothing different? Is he talented?
My premise is that talent is not necessarily a myth, but the myth that speed is the sole indicator of talent should be cast aside. Everyone is an outlier for a specific aspect of training. The key is finding out what that aspect is and addressing it. This is what makes talent identifying a major aspect of coaching. The best coaches won't press an athlete in a bad event for his talents. Learn to find your athletes talents.
No comments:
Post a Comment