|
|
Post by pq on Oct 29, 2009 11:07:35 GMT -5
I guess what I'm wondering, specifically, is whether early specialization carries demonstrable incremental risks over that associated with later specialization. We all know of young prodgies who have burned out, but I wonder whether this phenomenon can be attributed to early specialization, or rather is a natural occurrence regardless of of when an athlete takes up the sport.
Like I said, I have no opinion on the subject, nor any relevant experience, but I think the question is valid.
|
|
|
|
Post by journeyman on Oct 29, 2009 13:19:41 GMT -5
I think in this specific instance, the sample size is too small to predict anything. It was one week.
When I was 12, my club coach forbid me from running a 10k road race. She said it would ruin me. I ran anyway (54min, so clearly not a prodigy) and I was kicked out of TOC. I didn't care because I was going to high school the next year at a school that had a program that was as good or better than most clubs.
Anyway, my points are just that 1) an isolated incident is not indicative of the future and 2) kids are very likely going to do whatever they want--especially in distance running where kicking them off the team doesn't really do much, as they can still go run in the park if they want to. If it were 4 races every week, that would be another story. If the coach hadn't come on here and shown an awareness of the situation, that would be another story as well.
Overall, let kids play. Play is a subjective term. If playing is running a couple races, so be it. Even if a kid is ultra-competitive, hey, there are other ways to teach them that lesson. A long and successful track and field career is not necessarily the most desirable outcome. Just because a kid loves running at 12 does not mean she has to love it at 20. Certainly we should teach a sense of sacrifice and long-term planning, but that's got to be done in much subtler ways than holding 11-12 year old kids back for the good of their athletic career.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Oct 29, 2009 15:09:12 GMT -5
I think in this specific instance, the sample size is too small to predict anything. It was one week. When I was 12, my club coach forbid me from running a 10k road race. She said it would ruin me. I ran anyway (54min, so clearly not a prodigy) and I was kicked out of TOC. I didn't care because I was going to high school the next year at a school that had a program that was as good or better than most clubs. Anyway, my points are just that 1) an isolated incident is not indicative of the future and 2) kids are very likely going to do whatever they want--especially in distance running where kicking them off the team doesn't really do much, as they can still go run in the park if they want to. If it were 4 races every week, that would be another story. If the coach hadn't come on here and shown an awareness of the situation, that would be another story as well. Overall, let kids play. Play is a subjective term. If playing is running a couple races, so be it. Even if a kid is ultra-competitive, hey, there are other ways to teach them that lesson. A long and successful track and field career is not necessarily the most desirable outcome. Just because a kid loves running at 12 does not mean she has to love it at 20. Certainly we should teach a sense of sacrifice and long-term planning, but that's got to be done in much subtler ways than holding 11-12 year old kids back for the good of their athletic career. I take your general point re: kids running not always being about becoming the best adult running they can be, and, I would actually never absolutely forbid a kid from going for a run if it was entirely on his/her own initiative. Such kids, however, are extremely rare. However, most kids like the one in question (and their parents) tend to dream about competing at the highest levels when they get older. I've never spoken to one of these prodigy kids (or their parents), or heard one interviewed, and heard them say: "I don't care what happens to me when I get older; I don't care if I don't go to the Olympics; or, I'm only doing this to win age-class races". They almost always talk about winning scholarships or going to the Olympics, and they almost always have an adult elite as a hero, just like other kids who are into sports. Also, while this incident may have only been a one-off thing, I have a very strong gut feeling that this will become a pattern for this girl. If the parents don't think it's a problem to do it once, and she gets away with it physically, my bet is they will let her do it again; that, or else they will let her race 2x per week and think of it as moderation. |
|
|
|
Post by ronb on Oct 29, 2009 22:07:52 GMT -5
Damn....
Lost into cyber-space - hammered out a good post, tried to send, and I was no longer connected. I hate when that happens...
So, I'll try and recapture, in smaller chunks.
Is the issue here the racing, or the training? I think most of us agree that racing 4 times in a week is not a good idea, but I don't think we should lose the larger picture here.
And the "age" of an athlete is a very subjective measure. Chronological, physiological, psychological, emotional, intellectual, social, etc., - which age are we talking about?
The range between early and late maturers can be 5 years or more in some of these variables, so I think that we need to know more about the individual concerned before we pass sweeping judgements.
And then, what is the perspective we are looking for. Healthy kids, elite athletes, something in between, because they often aren't the same.
I'll just send this for now...
|
|
|
|
Post by ronb on Oct 29, 2009 22:25:36 GMT -5
Okay, I'll try one more post for tonight...
We (Canada) are currently well behind the best in the World in the longer distance events.
So, can we compete at that ultra-level, or not? If so, how?
I would hazard a guess that the folks running very fast in our events at the World level, are not doing so because they have a better Long Term Athlete Development Plan. Just a guess.
They are just fitter than us.... So, here's a few ideas....
1) Our younger athletes need to do a lot more aerobic training. And I do believe in the benefits of cross-training to increase volume, or minutes of movement. I would love for all of our kids to be running, cycling, swimming, running up and down the soccer field, skating, cross-country ski-ing, etc. If we have any chance of competing, our fittest 15 year olds have to be much, much fitter (aerobically) than they are now.
2) During the critical development years, about age 16 to 23, (High School/University), we need to have more coaches focused on long term development. Yes, competition is great, but too much, over too many seasons, and without enough time developing the base, will not work for us. That is one of the many reasons that a solid winter/spring cross country program is so important ---- athletes can run really well at these distances and on these surfaces, without doing too much specific training....They just need to get really fit...
3) We need more Post-Collegiate Centres or Nests, where our top athletes can go and get real support and motivation to keep their running careers going through their 20's and 30's.
And of course, the support and motivation involves being able to access National and International Competitions, that will keep the momentum going.
If we do those 3 things right, there is no reason we can't compete on the World Stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by HHH on Oct 30, 2009 0:18:11 GMT -5
Okay, I'll try one more post for tonight... We (Canada) are currently well behind the best in the World in the longer distance events. So, can we compete at that ultra-level, or not? If so, how? I would hazard a guess that the folks running very fast in our events at the World level, are not doing so because they have a better Long Term Athlete Development Plan. Just a guess. They are just fitter than us.... So, here's a few ideas.... 1) Our younger athletes need to do a lot more aerobic training. And I do believe in the benefits of cross-training to increase volume, or minutes of movement. I would love for all of our kids to be running, cycling, swimming, running up and down the soccer field, skating, cross-country ski-ing, etc. If we have any chance of competing, our fittest 15 year olds have to be much, much fitter (aerobically) than they are now. 2) During the critical development years, about age 16 to 23, (High School/University), we need to have more coaches focused on long term development. Yes, competition is great, but too much, over too many seasons, and without enough time developing the base, will not work for us. That is one of the many reasons that a solid winter/spring cross country program is so important ---- athletes can run really well at these distances and on these surfaces, without doing too much specific training....They just need to get really fit... 3) We need more Post-Collegiate Centres or Nests, where our top athletes can go and get real support and motivation to keep their running careers going through their 20's and 30's. And of course, the support and motivation involves being able to access National and International Competitions, that will keep the momentum going. If we do those 3 things right, there is no reason we can't compete on the World Stage. Good post Ron. |
|
|
|
Post by schester on Oct 30, 2009 1:47:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nscoach67 on Oct 30, 2009 6:45:11 GMT -5
If we do those 3 things right, there is no reason we can't compete on the World Stage. I think after 3 pages of posts, we've finally gotten to the heart of the matter. So is shortening the track distances to under 1500m going to help or hurt this goal? Is racing 4 times a week helping or hurting? Is education the key? Aerobic development, I'm all over it. Let's make sure though that we temper the intensity as the volume goes up. Now our next goal is to agree on how to build an LTAD model that maximizes our goal - and then figure out how to do it in real life. Whole new topic. |
|
|
|
Post by CTaylor on Oct 30, 2009 14:33:17 GMT -5
I guess what I'm wondering, specifically, is whether early specialization carries demonstrable incremental risks over that associated with later specialization. Great discussion, and good question. Jean Cote at Queen's University does some work in this area. You can always find exceptions to the rule, but young athletes who specialize early tend to drop out early compared to their peers who specialize a bit later (age ~14+). That finding is based on the sports of rowing, tennis, basketball, netball, triathlon and ice hockey, but it's probably valid for most sports. That may be slightly different than the 'risks' you might be referring to, but it's a bad outcome all the same. Gymnastics seems to be an exception - early specializers don't drop out more than kids who specialize later - but kids who specialize earlier have more injuries in their mid-to-late teens than their late-specializing peers.....and maybe that's very relevant to your question about demonstrable risks. |
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Oct 30, 2009 21:29:20 GMT -5
I guess what I'm wondering, specifically, is whether early specialization carries demonstrable incremental risks over that associated with later specialization. Great discussion, and good question. Jean Cote at Queen's University does some work in this area. You can always find exceptions to the rule, but young athletes who specialize early tend to drop out early compared to their peers who specialize a bit later (age ~14+). That finding is based on the sports of rowing, tennis, basketball, netball, triathlon and ice hockey, but it's probably valid for most sports. That may be slightly different than the 'risks' you might be referring to, but it's a bad outcome all the same. Gymnastics seems to be an exception - early specializers don't drop out more than kids who specialize later - but kids who specialize earlier have more injuries in their mid-to-late teens than their late-specializing peers.....and maybe that's very relevant to your question about demonstrable risks. Very interesting, coachct. Would you mind posting a couple of citations, if you have them handy? (If not, Google is probably our friend here). |
|
oldbones
Full Member
And so it goes ...
Posts: 244
|
Post by oldbones on Oct 31, 2009 9:18:19 GMT -5
www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3277853Was at the Victorian Primary School state finals last Monday and watched a young girl run 2 state records a 2min26 sec 800m earlier in the day and then about 3hours later produced a stunning 4min55.68 in the 1500m breaking the record by just over 20seconds. I was happy with the perfromance of the girl that I have been helping who ran 4th in 5min33.86. I doubt there have been many 10yr olds faster anywhere in the world??? Girls 9-10 1500 Meter Run ================================================================ V.P.S.S.A.: 5:15.81 2003 Brigette Healey, Eaglehawk Name Age Team Finals ================================================================ 1 Laura Powell 10 Ruyton 4:55.68 Record 2 Alex Mathisen 10 South Geelong PS 5:20.91 3 Lara Kolar 10 St Thomas the Ap 5:25.23 4 Akuot Aluong 10 Wallarano PS 5:33.86 5 Lexi Barlow 10 St Peter Apostle 5:37.19 6 Maddison Caulfield 10 Lowther Hall Ags 5:42.84 7 Hannah Bain 9 Sale 545 PS 5:47.63 8 Taylor Vasilgevic 10 Oatlands PS 5:53.45 9 Faith McKenzie 10 Horsham PS 6:02.53 10 Maxine Paholek 10 Seymour East PS 6:08.00 11 Chelsi Old 10 Haslem Street PS 6:09.65 12 Shae Copley 10 Ringwood North PS 6:14.33 13 Rachel Devine 10 St Jospehs PS W 6:18.82 14 Caitlin Pickett 10 Star of the Sea 6:20.41 15 Ashleigh Mohorovic 9 Knox Gardens PS 6:46.08 -- Shania Clarke 10 Specimen Hill PS DNF
|
|
|
|
Post by SI on Oct 31, 2009 10:27:06 GMT -5
Just throwing this out for conversation-from that link:
"Great time.
I hope she still enjoys running and is healthy eight years from now. It just seems like for every phenom that makes it, there are ten that just fade away."
Couldn't you make that statement about any group of runners at any age?
|
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Oct 31, 2009 11:28:46 GMT -5
Just throwing this out for conversation-from that link: "Great time. I hope she still enjoys running and is healthy eight years from now. It just seems like for every phenom that makes it, there are ten that just fade away." Couldn't you make that statement about any group of runners at any age? You probably could, SI; but, wouldn't we expect the drop out rate among runners younger than the average peak development years (15-25) to be much lower than the rate for runners at or past their peak development years? Wouldn't we expect young runners age 14-17, particularly ones who are close to the top of the age group ranks, to be more likely to stick with it than, say, the average 20-25 year old runner? Talented young teenage runners, all other things being equal, should be among the most enthusiastic about racing and training of all runners, I would think; and yet, this doesn't seem to be the case for runners in this age group who are former stars at ages 10-13. Whatever it takes to do well at ages 10-13 doesn't seem to help much, and may every hurt, when it comes to doing well when it really counts. In my experience, if you look at two top 15 year olds of identical speed, where one was a former 10-13 year old standout and the other was not, the latter is the one you're more likely to see doing well as a junior and beyond. Does this mean the former may have been more likely to succeed long-term he/she had not been a early teen star? Maybe not. But, even if the record of drop out among these kids is only marginally higher than for those who have not been pre-teen stars (and it would appear that it is indeed higher), why in the world would anyone operate a program that tended to produce this pattern of development? There is nothing to be gained from it (except the 2-3year of prepubescent success itself) and quite possibly something to be lost. Kids can still have fun with the sport on much more conservative program, and suffer no additional risks when it comes to their odds of having a full career. At the very least, if a kid does abandon the sport, no one will ever have to wonder if things could possibly have been different on a more conservative program. Now, it's a different story if someone wants to argue that kids are more likely to abandon the sport if they were NOT permitted to become the pre-teen stars they may have been capable of becoming on a more aggressive and specialized program. But, this would be a very hard argument to support, given the number of top adult performers who were not training much at all before the age of 14 (and in some case much later). My main concern, however, is that the pre-teen prodigy phenomenon is NOT the result of any kind of clear thinking about optimal athlete development; it's more likely the result simply of uniformed and over-zealous parents and coaches. It is driven more by the emotions of adults, who are getting off on seeing their son/daughter/athlete doing crazy things on the race course (not to mention all the attention from other adults). These people, for the most part, really haven't thought seriously about, or looked at any of the evidence around, long term athlete development. If they're thinking at all, they're thinking "magically"-- that there's no real science involved, and that their kid/athlete will be different because they so ardently WANT him/her to be. |
|
|
|
Post by CTaylor on Nov 2, 2009 11:59:00 GMT -5
Very interesting, coachct. Would you mind posting a couple of citations, if you have them handy? (If not, Google is probably our friend here). Hi Steve, sorry for the wait, I don't visit the board often, but have enjoyed the conversation. You asked for references. I pulled most of that info from the intro of the following article: Wall, M., & Cote, J. (2007) Developmental activities that lead to dropout and investment in sport, Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 12(1), 77-87. The particular study actually relates to hockey, but the intro and themes are applicable to many sports. The article concludes with the following: "As a whole, the findings of the present study suggest that youth (ages 6–13) sport programs should focus not on developing athletic fitness through intense and routine training, but rather on sport-specific practice, games and play activities that foster fun and enjoyment." You can find a good summary article from Cote, written for coaches at this link: www.sirc.ca/newsletters/september09/documents/s-1086363.pdfUntil recently, Cote's work was freely available on his faculty page, but now you need a Queens ID to access it. Anyone with SIRC or Medline access could get most/all of the articles, too. I've listed some other studies at the end of this post, and I'll e-mail you PDF copies of the ones I have. If anyone else wants copies of a few articles, shoot me an e-mail. thanks, Craig Taylor Email: coachctaylor@gmail.com Baker, J., Coˆte ́, J. & Abernethy, B. (2003) Sport-specific practice and the development of expert decision-making in team ball sports, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 15, 12–25. Baker, J., Coˆte ́, J. & Deakin, J. (2005) Expertise in ultra-endurance triathletes: early sport involvement, training structure, and the theory of deliberate practice, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 71, 64–79. Butcher, J., Lindner, K. J. & Johns, D. P. (2002) Withdrawal from competitive youth sport: a retro- spective ten-year study, Journal of Sport Behaviour, 25(2), 145–163. Helsen, W. F., Hodges, N. J., Van Winckel, J. V. & Starkes, J. (2000) The roles of talent, physical precocity and practice in the development of soccer expertise, Journal of Sport Sciences, 18, 727–736. Law, M., Coˆte ́, J. & Ericsson, K. A. (in press) The development of expertise in rhythmic gymnastics, International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. Klint, K. A. & Weiss, M. R. (1986) Dropping in and dropping out: participation motives of current and former youth gymnasts, Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 11, 106–114. Cote, J., Baker, J., & Abernethy, B. (2007). Practice and Play in the Development of Sport Expertise. In R. Eklund & G. Tenenbaum (eds) Handbook of Sport Psychology (pp. 184-203; 3rd ed) |
|
|
|
Post by coachbarrie on Nov 3, 2009 10:38:00 GMT -5
Understanding many perspectives is always an interesting process. There is no question that Kirsten ran too many challenging races in a short period of time. Because she had just started back to school (and was just starting into a new swim program), I had not seen her for three weeks and was unaware that she was registered for a number of the races until they had already occurred. In the shortest term (a few weeks or a month) 3-4 races while not optimal, is not likely to a long-term problem. Extended periods of time of too many races or hard weeks is really the problem. I have spoken to the family, to properly educate them as to why we need to do less races, keep the stress down and to ensure that technique, stretching and other forms of cross-training are a higher priority. With cross country season done in November, the priority will be swimming, core strength and good technique (with very few races). Optimally, with good future family communication (parent and the athlete in question) I am optimistic that we will never run into another period of time with 3-4 races in such a short period of time. Coaches, parents, and the athlete, all want to make sure we stay away from any unnecessary injuries that can be avoided.
Sincerely
Barrie Shepley
|
|
|
|
Post by moorezy on Nov 3, 2009 10:53:05 GMT -5
im with oldster!
|
|
|
|
Post by ronb on Nov 3, 2009 18:43:54 GMT -5
I'm not against oldster, but I am not totally with him either. I think we all still have things to learn about getting youngsters very fit, while still having a lot of fun, and having a brighter future ahead of them. I hear oldster loudly and clearly when he speaks of overly zealous parents, and in combination with younger, less-experienced coaches, and I agree with his conclusions on that front. Which is why I believe we need to somehow identify exceptional young talented athletes, and have them guided by more experienced coaches, who perhaps can help them miss some of the pitfalls of "too much/too soon", and go on to greater things at a more mature stage of their athletic careers. I think someone such as Barrie could represent that opportunity, in the individual case we are referring to in this thread. |
|
|
|
Post by coachj on Nov 3, 2009 21:22:36 GMT -5
I'm not against oldster, but I am not totally with him either. I think we all still have things to learn about getting youngsters very fit, while still having a lot of fun, and having a brighter future ahead of them. I hear oldster loudly and clearly when he speaks of overly zealous parents, and in combination with younger, less-experienced coaches, and I agree with his conclusions on that front. Which is why I believe we need to somehow identify exceptional young talented athletes, and have them guided by more experienced coaches, who perhaps can help them miss some of the pitfalls of "too much/too soon", and go on to greater things at a more mature stage of their athletic careers. I think someone such as Barrie could represent that opportunity, in the individual case we are referring to in this thread. Well said, Ron - I think one of your key points is to get that young person with a qualified coach - You are preaching to the choir here. That coach is not always ( but there is a few) a world class athlete turned coach but someone who understands youth development....a lot of "new" coaches think they know what is best for that person based on their own situation, that new coach may be a long time world class athlete in that sport but that does not give them instant authority as a coach...this is a vary narrow approach to coaching, Like the years it took to become a world class athlete the same is true to developing as a coach. Many a coaches out there coach world class athletes but they were not the person who developed them, they refer to that athlete as their athlete but they had nothing to do with identifying the talent and developing them to stay with the sport .. This young girl as far as I can tell does not have a history of doing this, it looks like it may have been a one time thing..Give her coach some slack while he gets the situation under control - There was waaaay tooo much condemnation of athlete/coach/parent before being presented with the facts.. Each person is unique and gifted athletes need to be treated as such - anyway, cheers! |
|
|
|
Post by SI on Nov 8, 2009 20:07:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ronb on Nov 8, 2009 22:09:44 GMT -5
Obviously, this story does and will raise a lot of emotions, and opinions. The saddest part for me --- the big goal is to get a scholarship to the USA. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it just makes me sad... Fire away, I am putting my flak jacket on...  |
|
|
|
Post by im on Nov 9, 2009 19:04:41 GMT -5
I love this line from the article. make's it sound like his mom and her brother were running legends.
His mother, Bethany, and her brother, Tom Rypma, were successful runners themselves in elementary school, and Brock obviously picked up where they left off.
|
|
|
|
Post by SI on Nov 9, 2009 20:08:40 GMT -5
I don't think they did too much past elementary school in Brantford. Not as much as, say, Sully.
|
|
|
|
Post by weather on Nov 19, 2009 18:08:26 GMT -5
Is there a minimum age for National events? And if not is this a step that could be discussed?
|
|
AndrePaul
Junior Member
The hills on the way over here were pretty brutal
Posts: 95
|
Post by AndrePaul on Nov 20, 2009 23:17:33 GMT -5
You know what is interessting. This board may have saved this girl's career. Think about it, Barrie was able to sit down and talk with the parents to create an open flow of communication. Now the parents won't be entering her in 4 races in one week. I think the board deserves a GOOD JOB! Honestly, good job. |
|
|
|
Post by lucky13 on Nov 21, 2009 8:11:29 GMT -5
You know what is interessting. This board may have saved this girl's career. Think about it, Barrie was able to sit down and talk with the parents to create an open flow of communication. Now the parents won't be entering her in 4 races in one week. I think the board deserves a GOOD JOB! Honestly, good job. We're going to have to bump this in 10 years. Want to make any bets? |
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Nov 21, 2009 20:57:36 GMT -5
You know what is interessting. This board may have saved this girl's career. Think about it, Barrie was able to sit down and talk with the parents to create an open flow of communication. Now the parents won't be entering her in 4 races in one week. I think the board deserves a GOOD JOB! Honestly, good job. Unfortunately, I think it may take more than this board to do what you're suggesting. Barrie no doubt knows what's best for this girl, but he's working against some pretty powerful forces. If there are races to be won, chances are this girl will want to win them, and likely as many of them as she can. And my generation of parents seems to have a difficult time saying no to our kids, even when we know they need it. We tend to prefer to compromise with them, which in this case probably means she gets to race once a week rather than twice! That said, I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that this medium can have a salutary effect on development in this sport. Letsrun, for all its populist rough edges, has definitely helped to generalize "best practice" in the sport down there, and the results are starting to show. Largely neglected by old media, this sport has now becomes largely internet-based; its serious fans are all here now, as are many of its leading voices. Twenty years ago, I would never have dreamed that one day there would be a place were I could just write a question to someone like Jack Daniels and expect an answer within a couple of days, along with a lot of commentary from a ton of other well qualified people (along with chatter from a ton of anonymous jackasses, but you take it as it comes). I think this site is well on its way to being the Canadian version of Letsrun (the message board part, of course), which can't be a bad thing, as long as we're not too "Canadian" for a little frank discussion. |
|
pmac
Junior Member
Posts: 122
|
Post by pmac on Nov 21, 2009 21:17:29 GMT -5
I think this site is well on its way to being the Canadian version of Letsrun (the message board part, of course), which can't be a bad thing... Careful Oldster. Letsrun may have been an excellent forum for serious discussion once, but the lack of registration, while likely fuelling its popularity, also often ruins any good threads that may arise. I like to think of this site as much better alternative to Letsrun as far as discussion goes. I go to Letsrun for news, and here to read what people have to say about it (as well as anything in relation to the Canadian scene of course). And we have the luxury here of not being bombarded with comments describing the numerous ways a poster will fornicate with our mothers (dead or alive) as a result of him (or her perhaps?) disagreeing with our opinions. We may have trolls here, but they are at least known by username. |
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Nov 22, 2009 10:49:14 GMT -5
I'll admit, I don't actually look at the Letsrun board all that often anymore, so I can't speak to how far it may have deteriorated. When I did used to look at it more often, there was a lot of the graffiti you refer to, but there was also some really great stuff. It seemed that the serious posters had developed a knack for ignoring the trolls and getting on with it. However, I guess I can see how it could have gotten to the point where some of those serious posters, particularly the older ones, might have just decided that it was too much. On balance, however, I still think Letrun's been a very good thing for American running. If nothing else, it's been a good source of history-- and often first-person-- for the high school and college kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachj on Nov 22, 2009 11:30:24 GMT -5
You know what is interessting. This board may have saved this girl's career. Think about it, Barrie was able to sit down and talk with the parents to create an open flow of communication. Now the parents won't be entering her in 4 races in one week. I think the board deserves a GOOD JOB! Honestly, good job. Unfortunately, I think it may take more than this board to do what you're suggesting. Barrie no doubt knows what's best for this girl, but he's working against some pretty powerful forces. If there are races to be won, chances are this girl will want to win them, and likely as many of them as she can. And my generation of parents seems to have a difficult time saying no to our kids, even when we know they need it. We tend to prefer to compromise with them, which in this case probably means she gets to race once a week rather than twice! That said, I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that this medium can have a salutary effect on development in this sport. Letsrun, for all its populist rough edges, has definitely helped to generalize "best practice" in the sport down there, and the results are starting to show. Largely neglected by old media, this sport has now becomes largely internet-based; its serious fans are all here now, as are many of its leading voices. Twenty years ago, I would never have dreamed that one day there would be a place were I could just write a question to someone like Jack Daniels and expect an answer within a couple of days, along with a lot of commentary from a ton of other well qualified people (along with chatter from a ton of anonymous jackasses, but you take it as it comes). I think this site is well on its way to being the Canadian version of Letsrun (the message board part, of course), which can't be a bad thing, as long as we're not too "Canadian" for a little frank discussion. Good post... We have not become "Americanized" & I dont suspect we ever will.. I think Moults does an fair job with adminin' the board - If somebody says something nasty ( Like the false newspaper story ) then deal with it in the background and lets not give it anymore attention.. This way we can leave the board clean.. Otherwise, fire away - You (all of us) want your word to get out? then don't let pissing matches overshadow your message . |
|
|
|
Post by limestonemiler on Nov 22, 2009 22:48:40 GMT -5
If somebody says something nasty ( Like the false newspaper story ) then deal with it in the background and lets not give it anymore attention.. Surely you're referring to the Onion article? Hey, whatever you choose to read / not read is up to you, but don't brand it as useless because of it. After all, some people use this board for other things than finding out what kitchen appliances to install. |
|
