Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 108

Thread: Charlie Francis and his influence

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    181

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    I should add, that I'm sure in this very forum there are people who are very excellent at coaching, working with talent that's scarce within their job, but aren't currently employed by a big outfit program in their countries, and thus they aren't any "good". I'm sure there are completely awful coaches too. You get that in any sector of any field.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    750

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Quote Originally Posted by wermouth View Post
    I can tell you what I know for sure, I don't know about running entirely Charlies based philosophy, UK got very good success running long to short over few decades way before Charlie has published any of his work also don't forget that UKA have employed Pfaff to run the show. Are you saying that Pfaff running CF Program? Having said that they do distribute samples of CF program (graphs with two and three HI workouts) during seminars for young coaches.
    To me Charlies work has influenced many younger generation coaches. Talking here about UK based coaches
    Let me clarify. The key legacy of the UK revamp was their coaching education program which was run by Kevin Tyler, who was obviously massively influenced by Charlie. The classic UK approach of doing tons of nonspecific work and racing the shit out of people was rethought. The model put in place emphasized quality and specificity over endless volumes of running, and coaches like Steve Fudge are the result. Make no mistake, there was great friction to these ideas early on because the UK sprint culture leaned heavily on working hard and working often.

    If you spend any time on the UCoach site the influence is crystal clear. A complete change in the coaching culture was executed. If you get on Youtube you can find a clear example of CF Long to Short (I believe it's week 7) in action with Steve Fudge, Kevin Tyler, and Richard Buck.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Charlotte N.C.
    Posts
    2,249

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Quote Originally Posted by bmarcho1 View Post
    I think one of the problems in evaluating coaches, and this is seemingly what is happening here, is that theres a phenomena of obscurity in the coaching ranks. Very few good coaches actually get the opportunity to coach big talent. Some of the best coaches in the world are unknown because they are coaching at high schools or in small clubs, where recruiting is limited. However, if you look at the increases in their athletes,its staggering. It's just that those people go from being lets say a female who runs 12.5 seconds to 11.70 seconds in a four yr period which is absolutely incredible, yet no one will ever hear of them world wide..... hence no one will hear of their coach. I know plenty of coaches every yr who absolutely get terrific results, among a poor talent pool. But you dont get well known doing that.

    You will however have dozens of coaches who routinely get great talent and they dont get much faster, but they have such a plethora of talent that it gets noticed.

    I think with Charlie you had a guy who was actually a good coach, who actually got to a place where he got ahold of talent. That's probably more rare than you think. I think Tom Tellez, Bobby Kersee, DAn Pfaff, and John Smith are a few others who are really good, and got a chance to coach talent.

    If John Smith had gotten bogged down into a high school program, they would be good, his results would have been great as far as development of kids from point A to B, but the point A would have been so low, that the realistic point B wouldn't show up on the Radar worldwide.

    We could talk about why great coaches dont get moved up to higher programs where talent abounds, but that type of conversation could go on for wks.

    The fact is Charlie was a very excellent coach, and got to coach excellent talent, at the excellent levels of the sport. Then he got shunned as far as his place on the "mt rushmoore" of coaches. But not by me.
    Keep in mind the reality that, in regards to any field, the better you get the less room there is to get better. For this reason, there are many coaches at the high school or collegiate level who may be acclaimed for the results of their athletes/programs; however, the difficulty in assisting in the improvement in physical outputs of a person closer to their initiation of organized training is monumentally less than assisting in the marked improvement of an athlete who is already making an A standard.

    In this way, coaching excellence of the highest order may be defined by the work of those coaches who are working with the highest level athletes; and those athletes have showed marked improvements over time.

    As to the mechanisms involved with which coaches receive the opportunity to work with the highest level talent, I agree with you, a futile endeavor.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    181

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Quote Originally Posted by James Smith View Post
    Keep in mind the reality that, in regards to any field, the better you get the less room there is to get better. For this reason, there are many coaches at the high school or collegiate level who may be acclaimed for the results of their athletes/programs; however, the difficulty in assisting in the improvement in physical outputs of a person closer to their initiation of organized training is monumentally less than assisting in the marked improvement of an athlete who is already making an A standard.

    In this way, coaching excellence of the highest order may be defined by the work of those coaches who are working with the highest level athletes; and those athletes have showed marked improvements over time.

    As to the mechanisms involved with which coaches receive the opportunity to work with the highest level talent, I agree with you, a futile endeavor.
    I agree with the minimal margin among the best to get better. Its a smaller increase and takes a more astute trainer of them. However if you are getting big gains with lesser athletes, I would say you're much much better than 80 percent of the coaches out there, and probably smart enough to make the adjustments of people trying to cut down from 10.00 to 9.80, instead of 11.0 to 10.5. But yes, it actually takes MORE knowledge to coach a fast guy to be faster. How many coaches at the "elite" level actually do that though on a consistent basis, and get people to win? Good points you bring up though. thanks.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    487

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Slow View Post
    Let me clarify. The key legacy of the UK revamp was their coaching education program which was run by Kevin Tyler, who was obviously massively influenced by Charlie. The classic UK approach of doing tons of nonspecific work and racing the shit out of people was rethought. The model put in place emphasized quality and specificity over endless volumes of running, and coaches like Steve Fudge are the result. Make no mistake, there was great friction to these ideas early on because the UK sprint culture leaned heavily on working hard and working often.

    If you spend any time on the UCoach site the influence is crystal clear. A complete change in the coaching culture was executed. If you get on Youtube you can find a clear example of CF Long to Short (I believe it's week 7) in action with Steve Fudge, Kevin Tyler, and Richard Buck.
    You are trying to clarify process which started at the beginning of 2009. Sure Kevin contributed to development of websites such as UCoach. But saying that "was entirely Charlie Francis based philosophically" its just bollocks. Prior to Olympic games there were quite few old dogs running the system on top of that Dan has been employed by UKA, I'll repeat myself again do you believe that Dan was running CF Program?
    You are talking about coaching philosophy in the same way as when people talk about cars, keep it for couple years and then change it just like that?
    It's like Kevin Tyler come gave a one speech BOOOM!!! everyone started to follow his gospel.
    It's take years decades to develop and change the way people think etc... Everyone who is involved in this website knows that, you know that, do you?
    So the process which started in 2009 hasn't finished yet it is ONGOING. And saying that entirely program was run on CF philosophy is just BS.
    Last edited by wermouth; 05-20-2015 at 01:27 PM.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,843

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Quote Originally Posted by bmarcho1 View Post
    I think one of the problems in evaluating coaches, and this is seemingly what is happening here, is that theres a phenomena of obscurity in the coaching ranks. Very few good coaches actually get the opportunity to coach big talent. Some of the best coaches in the world are unknown because they are coaching at high schools or in small clubs, where recruiting is limited. However, if you look at the increases in their athletes,its staggering. It's just that those people go from being lets say a female who runs 12.5 seconds to 11.70 seconds in a four yr period which is absolutely incredible, yet no one will ever hear of them world wide..... hence no one will hear of their coach. I know plenty of coaches every yr who absolutely get terrific results, among a poor talent pool. But you dont get well known doing that.

    You will however have dozens of coaches who routinely get great talent and they dont get much faster, but they have such a plethora of talent that it gets noticed.

    I think with Charlie you had a guy who was actually a good coach, who actually got to a place where he got ahold of talent. That's probably more rare than you think. I think Tom Tellez, Bobby Kersee, DAn Pfaff, and John Smith are a few others who are really good, and got a chance to coach talent.

    If John Smith had gotten bogged down into a high school program, they would be good, his results would have been great as far as development of kids from point A to B, but the point A would have been so low, that the realistic point B wouldn't show up on the Radar worldwide.

    We could talk about why great coaches dont get moved up to higher programs where talent abounds, but that type of conversation could go on for wks.

    The fact is Charlie was a very excellent coach, and got to coach excellent talent, at the excellent levels of the sport. Then he got shunned as far as his place on the "mt rushmoore" of coaches. But not by me.
    Completely agree and even evaluating my best coaching some of it has been done with the lesser talents but no one will notice those. Others typically see only see the top performers as your best work. I often wonder if established coaches at major programs and some of the former athletes who walk into great environments become GAs and eventually full time coaches have any idea just how fortunate they are to have the talent they can work with on a daily basis. I've seen examples of top level high school kids who might not even improve over the course of their college careers (some literally regress) but because they arrived with such impressive h.s. or junior performances their athletes can still contend for championships.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    181

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Quote Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
    I've seen examples of top level high school kids who might not even improve over the course of their college careers (some literally regress) but because they arrived with such impressive h.s. or junior performances their athletes can still contend for championships.
    Yes , precisely.. And ... I'm not discounting recruiting, as that is important, but as far as training, that's a different universe.
    Last edited by bmarcho1; 05-20-2015 at 04:57 PM.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    487

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Quote Originally Posted by bmarcho1 View Post
    I think one of the problems in evaluating coaches, and this is seemingly what is happening here, is that theres a phenomena of obscurity in the coaching ranks. Very few good coaches actually get the opportunity to coach big talent. Some of the best coaches in the world are unknown because they are coaching at high schools or in small clubs, where recruiting is limited. However, if you look at the increases in their athletes,its staggering. It's just that those people go from being lets say a female who runs 12.5 seconds to 11.70 seconds in a four yr period which is absolutely incredible, yet no one will ever hear of them world wide..... hence no one will hear of their coach. I know plenty of coaches every yr who absolutely get terrific results, among a poor talent pool. But you dont get well known doing that.

    You will however have dozens of coaches who routinely get great talent and they dont get much faster, but they have such a plethora of talent that it gets noticed.

    I think with Charlie you had a guy who was actually a good coach, who actually got to a place where he got ahold of talent. That's probably more rare than you think. I think Tom Tellez, Bobby Kersee, DAn Pfaff, and John Smith are a few others who are really good, and got a chance to coach talent.

    If John Smith had gotten bogged down into a high school program, they would be good, his results would have been great as far as development of kids from point A to B, but the point A would have been so low, that the realistic point B wouldn't show up on the Radar worldwide.

    We could talk about why great coaches dont get moved up to higher programs where talent abounds, but that type of conversation could go on for wks.

    The fact is Charlie was a very excellent coach, and got to coach excellent talent, at the excellent levels of the sport. Then he got shunned as far as his place on the "mt rushmoore" of coaches. But not by me.
    Well said mate,

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,843

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    At some places they will simply not attract the top athletes. Lack of tradition, school/program reputation, your admissions standards vs. that of conference schools, etc. all play a part in the decision making process.

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,592

    Re: Charlie Francis and his influence

    Here is the video of Kevin, Steve and Richard. The session has Charlie written all over it, and the track side work is that of Dan. Granted two years ago as well.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsgYX2w8cAY

    As I understand Steve stepped up into the opportunity to work with Kevin and Dan and the like, while other, from what I have heard, resisted. Steve appears open to learning and every time I have heard him speak, which is does and shares freely, I feel there is progression in his coaching philosophy.

    Again, as I understand it, Dan worked solely out of his center he had. Steve was elsewhere. Nonetheless, anyone who spends time under Kevin will see how Charlie influenced his coaching philosophy.

    Going back to Steve, in his talks on Ucoach, he continually talks about how he is figuring out his guys and what makes them tick and function optimally. James appears to be super sensitive and requires a lot of oversight. When Steve hgave a talk, presented about 2 months of James's training leading up to one of his fast races, the crowd of coaches were in disbelief of the amount of work they were doing. Steve has commented that for about a year James did work out to 60m primarily, and has gradually increased out as his technical model has improved. When Steve said 2x90m would nearly kill James, no one could understand and quite a fuss was made in the crowd. When mentioned James squats every 10 days, people couldn't understand why so little. However, those sessions have lead to him running fast. The recurring injuries are an issue they are surely working out, as Steve is a huge fan of various therapies depending on the situation and the athlete's needs.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •