Coaches’ Blog

When I step back and compare our current Jumbo student/athletes to myself at their age, I see a few huge differences.  Mainly, they’re a lot more independent and mature than I was at there age.  For the most part, I actually feel that Tufts does a better job preparing its students for the real world than my alma mater did for me.  Not that I felt unprepared after college.  Although if I told you what I did in that first year out of school, then you’d probably think I was unprepared.  No, it’s more a matter of how well Tufts brings along it’s students.  

In many ways, the Tufts undergrad experience seems more like a graduate program than an undergrad.  The schedule, classes, projects, and approach to the learning process just seem so much more postgrad.  My undergrad years felt more like an extension of high school, just with a little more freedom and less responsibility.  Yeah, that’s what I said…less responsibility.  College is a breeze.  4-5 classes a semester, not 7-9.  2-3 classes a day, not 7 or more.  No travel time.  You basically sleep about a 5 minute walk from everything in your life.  

Now this is the first semester that I’ve really put together the fact that these guys are a lot more self sufficient than I was at their age so I don’t really have a rational reason figured out yet.  Maybe it’s the city.  Maybe it’s the grad school/students.  Maybe I wasn’t as reliant as I think I was.  

I feel as if I maximized my college experience to the best of my ability.  I utilized the academic and athletic side of my school to it’s maximum.  That being said, I’ve worked at Tufts in a number of positions (Residence Hall Director, Teachers Assistant, Tutor, Track/XC Coach, breakdancer) and it just seems impossible to do everything.  If you have a personality where you need to have your fingers in every pie and be involved with everything, then Tufts is definitely not the place for you.  You would lose your mind in the first semester.  There is just way too many options here for you.  You really have to chose your interests carefully, but luckily, can change your mind at a moments notice.  

I know, I know, this blog sounds way to preachy about Tufts.  And you probably think that I’m being incredibly biased and pro-Tufts.  I can’t do anything about that.  I can only speak to what I know.  And I know that there is just a lot more to do here than I had in college.  A lot.  Midd was great for me at that time in my life.  I looked at Tufts and I still ended up at Middlebury.  I was a rural guy who was a little scared of the big city.  

But look at me now.  Now I have umpteen sushi restaurants to pick from.  Sushi didn’t even exist in VT.  Granted, having those umpteen sushi joints won’t change anything…I’ll always end up at Roses.  Best sushi in Boston.  You heard it here.

I don’t know how this went from how mature my athletes are to an advertisement for Rose’s Sushi, but it just did.

I know that I may be being very repetitive (I wrote about this in one of my first blog posts), but this stuff is so scary that it needs another post.  Sure, you may be an 18-year-old runner who feels invincible and that is why the military puts 18-year-olds on the front line.  But just like a bullet or land mine doesn’t care about your age, MRSA really doesn’t care about how omnipotent you feel.  This stuff will literally eat you alive. 

In a recent article on ESPN.com, Dana O’Neil highlighted the fight of Kenny George, UNC Ashsville’s 7’7″ center.  What started out as an infection in his foot led to a partially amputated foot and a fight for his life.  MRSA or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus will seriously mess you up if you’re not careful.  In recent years, it has reared its head in the NESCAC Conference and other large and small colleges, but because of our great training room staff, has yet to find its way to Tufts.  

MRSA is a form of staph infection; however, this form is commonly referred to as a ‘super bug’ and broad spectrum antiobiotics have no effect on it.  Originally, MRSA seemed to primarily attack those with weakened immune systems in hospitals and dialysis centers.  This was referred to as Heath Care Associated MRSA.  As it gained strength and continued to develop its immunity to antibiotics it is now common among otherwise healthy individuals.  This form is called Community Associated MRSA.   Like gangrene, the most common solution to MRSA is amputating the infected limb.  In some patients in can even lead to death.  

The Mayo Clinic has this to say about MRSA…

Staph bacteria are generally harmless unless they enter the body through a cut or other wound, and even then they often cause only minor skin problems in healthy people. However, staph infections can cause serious illness. This most often happens in older adults and people who have weakened immune systems, usually in hospitals and long term care facilities. But in the past several years, serious infections have been occurring in otherwise healthy people in the community, for example athletes who share equipment or personal items. 

Okay, now that I’ve officially scared the pants off you too, what do we do about this?  Risk factors for MRSA include young age, crowded and unsanitary living conditions, association with health care professionals, having a weakened immune system, participating in contact sports, and sharing towels or athletic equipment.  (Some may feel that your freshman dorm room could be considered ‘crowded and unsanitary’ but I don’t know if it meets the Mayo Clinics standards.)  

As a track and cross country athlete, you are not at a terrible risk for MRSA.  That being said, you need to be extremely careful to follow our Training Room’s policies and standards.  If you have an open wound or abrasion then hot and cold baths are out of the question.  These open wounds are what will allow an infection like MRSA to elevate from minor to life threatening.  Also…

Keep personal items personal – this includes training room towels after an ice bath.  

Shower after practices and meets – if you are going to ice bath after a practice or race and will submerge more than your lower legs, then you need to take a shower beforehand.  

Wash towels – make sure that your towels get put in the laundry basket in the Training Room after every use.  

It isn’t hard to protect yourself from something as scary as MRSA.  Anything as nasty as this, that will end in amputation as a best case scenario, is something to watch out for.  The Tufts training staff take this very seriously and sterilize our whirlpools every morning.  I can’t vouch for whirlpools at other schools so it is your responsibility to protect yourself at all times.  Although I would love to work with para-olympians someday, I never want to see them come from my current team.

To be honest I know nothing about tailbacks and who dominates that position, and I especially don’t know about the science and genetics of athletic ability. However I do realize the dangers of something being classified as inherently black or inherently white. When I read the article, the most disturbing part to me was the fact that Sam McGuffie receives letters from fans that call him “The Great White Hope.” This is a phrase that was used in a boxing match between Jack Johnson and James Jeffries in 1910 and racial tensions were extremely high at the time. Remnants of this mentality today scare me into thinking how much people invest in their sports. If racial pride becomes part of a sports definition, then the spirit of competitiveness can easily disintegrate into a spirit of intolerance and sometimes violence. 

Also, a common argument used today is reverse racism. The classification of tailback as something that is “black” could lead whites into thinking that they are experiencing reverse racism by not being given the same opportunity as their black peers. It is dangerous when a dominant group feels as if they are marginalized. Throughout history, action may be taken against the group that is now perceived as the new dominant group. Examples of this can be seen in the years of Reconstruction following the Civil War when blacks were given the opportunity to vote and hold positions of high government. This led to whites feeling threatened, creating Jim Crow laws and organizations like the Ku Klux Klan. Another example can be seen in countries rather than race. After Pearl Harbor, America, a super power, was threatened and many Americans felt unsafe. America’s response was a nuclear bomb…or two I think. Anyways the point is that the effects of these actions are still felt today. Now I’m not saying that there is going to be some huge tailback revolt with white tailbacks trying to take over, but I just want to point out the dangers that occur when the argument of ‘reverse racism’ is used. 

I do agree with you that there can be genetic differences that occur based on the environment one lives in that form specific traits as a basis of survival (nurture), and if this region is inhabited by a member of a specific race, then they may seem to dominate a sport because of that trait that they developed (like Kenyans in distance, or Canadians in hockey…don’t actually know if the Canada one counts). Anyways this does not mean that it is a trait inherently found in a person because of their skin color. I also agree with Fred when he noted the social factors and the feeling of ownership that attributes to the success of specific groups in certain sports. However, when it is acknowledged that someone is good at something because “he’s black” or “he’s white” then issues arise. An individual is not given credit for the work that they have done to attain success as in Fred’s example. Whites may not receive as much recognition in certain sports because they are not black and vice versa. (Example: NBA, how many sneakers can you name after a white man. I think it is because the industry is geared toward a black audience despite the accomplishments of white athletes. Let me know when the new Steve Nash shoes come out and I’ll be first in line.). It is also unfair that the accomplishments of an individual are diminished and only attributed to the genetic accomplishments of their race.

Personally I dislike it when someone says I must be good at track or basketball because I’m black. Similar justifications were used for keeping blacks in slavery because we were blessed with certain innate abilities. I know people aren’t thinking this when they say these statements but I’m all about giving credit where credit is due. And so basically this whole response was meant to give credit to Sam McGuffie for being a good tailback.

I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to post and comment on our ongoing discussion about race, genetics and sport.  I hope you all felt comfortable adding your opinion.  I started to feel like this site became a message board more than a blog, but I think I’m okay with that.  I really don’t want to just sit here and spew out posts from my own head.  I’d much rather be a part of a larger dialogue that teaches me something new.  

I would like to start by echoing the sentiments of Coach Bright.

The first thoughts that come to my head after reading this response is that it would be helpful to question people’s views constructively rather than attempt to belittle them. Asking someone if they truly believe a statement they made is not constructive and discourages others to reply.

It can be difficult to separate emotions from such a potentially loaded conversation, but that makes it even more important to do so.  Having a safe and constructive environment to have polarized conversations is critical to moving forward.  

That being said, I would like to point out exactly how not to make your point in such a discussion.  Another athlete who’s name is imprinted on the wall of my office (sorry, the picture isn’t up yet) brought a website to my attention that is somewhat related to our conversation. The website, Caste Football, makes some very polarizing comments and I’m not 100% sure what type of reaction they are looking for from putting together such a website.  

Are they looking to jump-start a controversy and get their opinion any and all possible attention.  They seem to work with the mindset that “negative attention is still attention” and “there’s no such thing as bad publicity.”  In the ‘About Us’ section of their website the posit

We respect the fact that blacks make good football players. But we believe that by looking at football and sports overall through an objective lens rather than simply accepting the propaganda slant of the media, it is clear and obvious that whites are just as good as if not better athletes than blacks.

To give just one example, even though whites are only 10 percent of the world’s population, they win over 90 percent of the medals at the Winter Olympics and over 70 percent of the medals at the Summer Olympics, including many medals in sprinting and jumping.

Caste Football’s goal is to see that white athletes are respected for their abilities, and that they receive the same opportunities to succeed as non-white athletes.

By making statements of this nature, any semblance of a constructive conversation comes to a screeching halt.  Nothing annoys me more than seeing someone twist stats and figures to fit their best interests.  In this case, it is obvious that the Olympics are dominated by the industrialized world.  That 10% of the world’s population that is caucasian may make up 50% of the industrialized population.  (I’m hypothesizing on the 50% just to make a point.)  

Regardless, I see this same thing happen time after time again in my job.  So many coaches twist and manipulate facts and numbers to make their programs look strong.  What do you see when a program has 4 Srs, 3 Jrs, 4 Sos, and 14 Fr.  One that is “rebuilding and has a great future” or one that brings in 15 freshmen every year and gives them a 25% chance to survive or not quit before their sophomore year.  They both look the same from the outside world. Sorry, that is way off topic, but something that I just wanted to get out there and off my chest.  It really aggravates me to see so many HS seniors straight up lied to year in and year out.  

Back to what you’re hear to talk about.  The same athlete who brought Caste Football to my attention made a good DIII track analogy.  

They’ll point to Andrew Rock and say that he didn’t get an athletic scholarship because he was white, and a black athlete with the same credentials would have. They look at Andrew Rock and see 44.35 World Champ silver medalist and not a 40 point 300 hurdler as junior in high school (amazing what you can find with a simple google search) that had no chance of getting a scholarship. Furthermore, people on that site claim that blacks excel in sports because of frequent use of performing enhancing drugs, or that somehow these drugs do more to aid black athletes than white athletes (I wish I was making this up). I feel arguments like this accomplish nothing, because when a white athlete begins to run times on par with those dominating the sports, who can say that that person is not on drugs? 

And they can’t.  This is exactly the point.  It is sometimes okay to make unproved or unsubstantiated comments, but realize that they are so and that they carry less weight.  When you make an unsupported statement, but pose it as if you were saying 2+2=4 then you destroy any and all credibility you may have had.

No one has ever posted or tried to post anything on this site like what Caste Football tries to promote; however, I was contacted by a few individuals who had thoughts on the discussion but were hesitant to add to the conversation.  Please, don’t be.  We are all human and all make mistakes.  Fred Jones put it best in his first post with,

No matter what, race is always a tough issue to talk about in a racial diverse setting. We, as leaders, have to create an environment where people can express their real feelings without feeling judged or identified as a racist.  It’s important for ideas to be expressed so that we can know what people really think and move towards a better understanding of one another.

In other words, we all need to be comfortable saying something stupid so that we can all grow together.  We learn more from our mistakes than we do from our victories.  If you’re thinking it, then I can guarantee that there are a bunch of other people wondering the same thing.  That being said, it is imperative that if we ever feel insulted or criticized by someone’s comments that we are able to separate our emotions from the topic.  We need to let others speak their mind and be patient with them.  It’s the only way to learn from each other.

I think that this discussion is very interesting and I have a few points that I believe necessitate comment.

The first thoughts that come to my head after reading this response is that it would be helpful to question people’s views constructively rather than attempt to belittle them. Asking someone if they truly believe a statement they made is not constructive and discourages others to reply. Second, I would try to avoid bringing up personal stories to support your arguments, as written towards the end of your response when I believe you are making the case that a few African American children acquaintances of your own were breast fed, ate organic food, and happened to become Track and Field National Champions.

First, to the point on whether a particular race, ethnicity or culture, develops a sense of ownership or familiarity over a particular sport, and therefore has a larger representation.

I think whether a person argues for ownership or familiarity, it is essentially the same point. I believe that ownership is something that a person or athlete cultivates after becoming familiar enough with a particular activity. Furthermore, I believe that this factor of ownership or familiarity plays into the nurture side of Fred’s argument. Children, no matter the race, become familiar with a particular activity through their surroundings whether it is from their primary care giver, their siblings, neighbors, or region in which they live, among others. As a result, they develop skills in whatever activity they participate in from an early age. Then, depending on the person’s work ethic, personal drive, external support, social characteristics, and to some degree success, a person’s familiarity with an activity quickly changes to ownership. This familiarity or ownership of a race with a certain activity then is ultimately derived from whatever he or she was exposed to as a child.

Second, I do believe that there is some merit to Fred’s point concerning welfare food. Whether or not it creates ‘bigger people’ it does have a high caloric content; therefore, people, no matter their race, will digest these calories differently depending on their daily activities, and to some degree, genetics. A study designed to isolate the bulk of these variables which include race or ethnicity, body mass, caloric digestion, time, and physical activity would allow us to make a clear argument as to whether a person’s build is due to genetics or lifestyle. My guess would be is that it depends, and not on race. To my knowledge, no such study has been completed; however, if it has been, I would love to read it so send it my way.

Finally, I wanted to speak on your last point where you write, “I believe if all things were equal we would see more equal sports talent distribution as well as everything else in the world.” To be honest, I do not know where to begin, but I will attempt to compose my thoughts in a concise manner. I do not believe all things were created equal, which is why I believe that nurture plays a larger part in the success of any person or athlete than nature. I suppose the quickest way to explain myself is this way. There have been athletes that have not ‘made it’ or succeeded for a number of reasons, none of which have to do with the color of their skin, or their genetic make-up. If there were athletically superior people, their background, the resources they have access to when they are young, or the food they eat, should not have any consequence in their success as an athlete. Unfortunately, that is not the world that we live in. Not all children, and teenagers grow up in loving, nurturing, stable homes, and are provided with healthy diets. The effects of these differences are profound and affect not only their ability to mature as social and emotional beings, but inevitably, it affects their physical ability as well. Athlete or not, the source of a person’s success can not be found in their genetic make-up, but from the people that have loved, fed, fostered, and supported them from the very beginning, and the will of the individual. There are too many environmental variables for me to believe that only a person’s genetic ability determines their success or prowess in a particular activity or sport, and I encourage other’s to convince me otherwise.

Skye: I think it is more a sense of familiarity more than ownwer ship. If black athletes were exposed to some of the other sports more readily possibly there would be more participation.

Skye: Do yo really beleive that certain races believe they are suppose to dominate certain sports? Hum??? I never heard that before and I belong to one of those groups.

1. I don’t think you can develop a sense of ownerhship without familiarity, as well as other things. So feeling a sense of ownership derives from many vaired experiencses, exposure, familiarity to a sport.

2. I do believe some people from different races/ethnicities feel like they should dominate a sport. Different people have different reasonings for it. But I believe some people feel like that way relates directly to the article and the discussion at hand. (A) I think some ppl feel as though they inherently possess the genetic makeup to perform at higher level than other people (I personally disagree with this). (B) I also think some people have been nurtured from family, friends, and other cultural symbols that makes them believe their race is superior in certain sport (which I also fundamentally disagree with).

So no, I do not believe certain races/ethnicities are suppose to dominate sports, but I do believe their is widespread belief that certain races are more inclined to dominate sports. I think some ppl adopt racial/ethnic genetic philocophy although I do not. If you read the original article Ethan sent out, you will see that scientists, as well as many other people believe ethnic dominance to be true.

Next point
Skye: Where do I begin….If your premise was even remotely true every non-black parent in America would be feeding their new born infants”welfare food” looking for a sports advantage.They are keeping their kids back a year to gain size and strength.

I believe social conditions play a larger role in someone’s athletic ablity than genetic make up, hence why I added in the information about welfare food. The food itself is REALLY UNHEALTHY and should NOT be the way you nurture a kid. Because low income residents many times lack the resources to consume healthier foods or engage in healthier child rearing practices, their babies/children end up bigger. This is one major reason why child obesity is at an alarmingly high rate amongst low income people.

So your arguement why non-black parents are not feeding their kids the food is not the best arguement. For health reasons, you don’t really want to do that. The nutritional intake is poor and other side affects are still unknown. Although the percentage of people benefiting from being bigger (wider) may cause them to have a size advantage in SOME sports, if you have a choice, you don’t really want to go down that route. Secondly, all the food (and other condtitions afflicting low-income folks) does cause children to be bigger not BETTER at sports. Again, I originally wrote this part to speak to the social conditions some people are under and may add to the imbalance in the number of people participating and excelling in sports.

Skye: I believe if all things were equal we would see more equal sports talent distribution as well as everything else in the world.

I completely agree with your last statement. To me, sports reflect are society at large. Things are not equal. We do not have equal access and resources to goods, trainers, facilities, opportunites etc. Because things are not equal, we have an imbalance in the number of athletes participating and thriving in certain sports.

Okay I’m going to do my best to describe my opinions in a simple concise manner. 

When I read the article I sent you, two questions stood out to me.  

1.       Why are there so many blacks dominating SOME sports

2.       Are people genetically predisposed to have certain physical characteristics?

To address the first point, I think there are so many social factors that go into the high numbers of African Americans in sports like basketball, football, and track & Field.  But I think the strongest factor is that races, ethnicities, and cultures develop a sense of ownership over a specific sport.  Jamaicans feel like they are suppose to dominate sprinting, African-Americans feel like they are suppose to dominate basketball, Latin Americans feel like they are suppose to dominate baseball, Russians feel like their suppose to dominate weightlifting, Chinese feel like they are suppose to dominate gymnastics (ping pong).  A group sees its own people dominating a sport and aspires to be glorified in the same fashion.  Children focused on achieving success in a certain sport because they have a tangible symbol to model their success after.  You also have a strong number of individuals hoping to achieve the same success. Everyone uses each other for competition and to get better at their individual support.

Other things like coaching, access to facilities, the media, your family, and other external factors all play a factor and how far you advance.  But I definitely think that, blacks dominate certain sports because they see successful individuals like themselves accomplishing it and it most instances, children understand the Rock Star appeal associated with being a good athlete. 

My next and final point to the first question is early childhood development and environmental circumstances of children. Although I have no scientific evidence, I believe a child’s athletic ability is highly correlated with events in infancy and from ages 3-10. — I have seen horrible affects on children when their mother’s don’t properly nurse them.  Often times, babies who are not adequately nursed, do not properly develop and can have life lasting problems. Hence, babies have a hard time developing muscles that may prepare them for sports.  Secondly, children or families on welfare have an interesting situation. There was a study done on Formula milk, which is artificial breast milk, and welfare food.  There are chemicals in those substances that make babies bigger.   (Side not: Have you ever wondered why so many poor people are bigger, some of it is related to welfare food. It makes sense to think that poor folks would be skinnier because they have less food to eat.  That’s not the case.  Welfare food makes some abnormally big and can enhance someone’s chances to better at a sport like football or basketball.  African-Americans are disproportionally economically depressed and more likely to be on welfare than the average American. This could mean that they are more likely to bigger, taller, and or stronger to turn into a great athlete…

Secondly, I’m a strong believer in physical activity for kids from ages 3-10. In those years you start developing hand eye coordination and understand how to move your body the way you want it to.  I also think the more active you are, the more likely you will be better at sports.  If you have ever been to Jamaica, you will see kids running literally ALL day – all day.  In the US black kids are constantly moving and playing. I would say they are more likely to play outside because they are less likely to have the means video games, computer games, or tv the way other affluent families might have.  I think you find a disproportionate amount of black kids being extremely physically active.  Just a theory….But it holds up against my friends. Those who were very active as children are much more likely to be active in the later part of their life and better at sports.

2)  Now to the genetics part.  Although I hate saying this, but maybe a group of people might have genes that prepares them to excel in sports. You made a good point about Jamaican sprinters and Kenyan runners.  I’m just not sold on this.  Until there is actual evidence that any race is genetically advance, I’m going to side with nurture.

Nonetheless, what really upsets me is not the nature verses nurture debate, but when people dismiss the blood and sweat you put into your sport because of preconceived notions.  For instance, I remember when a runner once said, “All you have to do is go out there and pop a big jump,” after I competed at nationals.  He said it like it was so easy for me just to jump 48 feet and its harder for him to run a good race.  I’m not a distance runner and I don’t understand what they go through.  But I do know it’s not that easy just to go out there and jump far.  With his comment, I felt as though he ignored my physical and mental preparation to excel in high stakes competition.  I think he said it because he thought I was naturally good at jumping not necessarily because I worked for it (though in reality… I have been training my whole life).  Though I may learn and develop skills to jump well, nothing can surpass desire even if a scientist finds that there is some type biological trait associated with ethnicity.

No matter what, race is always a tough issue to talk about in a racial diverse setting. We, as leaders, have to create an environment where people can express their real feelings without feeling judged or identified as a racist.  It’s important for ideas to be expressed so that we can know what people really think and move towards a better understanding of one another.

That’s my two cents.

Is it odd that my favorite aspect of coaching at Tufts has absolutely nothing to do with running or track & field?  I have to say that I enjoy the conversations the most.  It’s funny because I started coaching to teach student/athletes and I sometimes feel that I’ve ended up learning more than I teach.  I was recently recontacted by an alum and we’ve since had a great conversation about the ‘disappearance’ of the white tailback/athlete.  

Although this conversation has been happening for centuries, our most recent take on it was the result of a recent Page 2 article on espn.com by Jemele Hill.  In his own words…

Coach.  I can’t get over this article I saw on ESPN. Look below.

Entine authored the book “Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports And Why We’re Afraid To Talk About It.” In the book, Entine makes the link between genetics, geography and sports dominance.

He suggests athletes with West African ancestors — which would encompass a large percentage of African-Americans — dominate sports requiring speed and jumping because of the body types and other physical characteristics that are typical of people from that region. 

“Once the population designations were set,” Entine said, “there are real differences in the gene frequencies in the east and west African population, which is quite different from populations around the world.”

With your interest and experience in biology, chemistry, and all that science stuff, does this doctor have any legitimacy?

Here is the rest of this article to reference. I am really interested in what you think about this.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hill/080926

I believe that it is both naive and impossible to separate the genetic and sociological aspects of this debate.  Just like it is impossible to separate nature and nurture from one another when discussing cognitive development.  There is obviously a relationship between the two involved.  It is always going to be a mix of genetics (internal factor) and desire, access to coaching etc (external factors).  

That being said, I do agree that there are internal/genetic differences between different groups in sport.  There are no guarantees, but if everyone has a spectrum of innate athletic potential, there may be some subsections of society that have their spectrum shifted for any number of reasons.  Its simply Darwinism.  Now I find the argument that African American athletes are superior because of their struggles through slavery to be completely idiotic.  In the eyes of evolution and darwinism, slavery is negligible.  Evolution is concerned with the big things – food, reproduction, sustaining life.  When we’re talking about genetics, America isn’t even on the map.  We’re only a few generations old and the first African’s weren’t brought to America until the early 1600’s making African Americans even younger in an evolutionary sense, but not too much.  Ultimately, the ‘American’ is still an infant (come on, you know America just acts like a spoiled kid most of the time).  

Lets talk sports though…

1936 – Cobb says that there should be no racial concerns regarding sport because no group has ever held a monopoly or supremacy in any kind of event in track and field.  That is exactly what we’re discussing now; however, tailbacks are a bad example because there are more sociological concerns.  A better example is that western Kenyans dominate distance running and Jamaicans are dominating sprinting right now.  Note that there is even a difference between Kenyans.  It is only one tribe in Kenya that dominates running.  It is the Kalenjin tribe and only makes up 10% of Kenya.  So somehow, of the 6.8 billion people on the earth two groups of 3 million (Kalenjin and Jamaicans) are able to dominate sprinting and distance events.  How is that possible?  

Alright – Cobb is an old guy and probably didn’t know what we know now.  Fast forward.

1978 – Eitzen and Sage say in Sociology of Sport that black dominance in sport is due to occupational discrimination.  They said that African Americans were more motivated to succeed because of a lack of options.  This has historical merit, but not very scientific.  Its the old question about why the boxing heavy weight champion is always a member of the lowest rung of society’s ladder.  Irish, Italian, African, Latino, ???

Why do distance runners train at altitude?  Because it works.  What if you had 500 generations of your children live at altitude?  Wouldn’t it make sense that those with increased lung capacity and O2 processing would excell and procreate easier.  If that is the case, then wouldn’t generation after generation begin to slowly see an ability to function at a higher level.  Is it that big of a stretch that something like this could happen in power/speed sports as well. 

Okay, now that I’ve said all that (and that was more than I set out to say), I believe that people put way too much emphasis on skin tone.  Athletic ability has to do with what is in the muscles, heart, and soul, not how much melanin is in the skin.  There are so many factors involved with being a great athete.  I’ve always believed that talent grows on trees – athletic talent is far more common than people think.  There are so many sociological and psychological factors that must align in order to produce a great athlete.  Some of these factors are individual while others are sociological.  An athlete who feels that a sport is his only chance to succeed, or the only way he gets respect, or that he has some ownership of that sport is obviously going to put a lot more heart, desire, and effort into it. 

Long story short, it isn’t nature and it isn’t nurture.  It is and always will be a combination of each.  

I could talk all day about this.  It really interests me, but I’m sure that I already bored you to death. 

You got any thoughts?

I may be a hurdler and find the races that Xiang and Robles put together unbelievably impressive; however, that in no way means that I can’t be absolutely amazed by what Gebrselassie can do.  Sub 2:04, are you kidding?  Simply running a 1:02 1/2 marathon is scary, but to then negative split and run a 1:01 second half just leaves me without words.  Really, I have no words for this.  Nothing that isn’t completely overshadowed by…sub two oh four?  Wow.  

The negative split must have been because he had a running start already. Yeah, that sounds good?

I once read an article by some sports scientists where they broke down each track & field event and tried to hypothesize what the upper limit of human potential was.  If any of you can find that for me, I’d like to reread it.  No time now for a google search though.  Thanks.

What if you were a recruit and I said that I felt I was a better XC coach because I had never run XC in my life?  You’d probably laugh uncomfortably as you tried to pretend that I was making a bad joke…well, I’m not.  I honestly believe that one of my greatest strengths as a cross country coach is that I never set foot on the line.  Tabula Rasa.  

I’d be the first one to admit that simply because I ran a 14.2 in the hurdles doesn’t, in itself, make me a good hurdle coach.  It would make me a GREAT hurdle coach, if I was coaching myself, but thats not the case.  Every athlete is different.  I don’t know if it’s stubbornness, cockiness, naivety, or simply ignorance that makes coaches feel that they know everything about something because they themselves succeeded at it.  

I guess, I don’t even believe that it’s one of those.  If I had to pick something, I would say that it is simply a matter of human physiology or cognitive development that limited some coach’s growth.  Not to get into the boring specifics, but the majority of accepted theories for cognitive developement follow a framework laid out by Piaget’s Constructivism.  Very, very roughly put, constructivism puts most of the responsibility to learn and grow cognitively on the shoulders of the individual.  It says that we have two major ways to learn – accommodation and assimilation.  In both of these ways, the individual forces the new knowledge onto a pre-existing framework of reality – sometimes it fits (assimilation) sometimes it doesn’t (accommodation).  

Wow, that explanation turn out better than I thought.  And I didn’t even have to use phrases like “developmentally-appropriate facilitator-supported learning.”  Sometimes I’m amazed that I actually find this stuff so interesting.  

Regardless, in terms of me as a coach, I have no pre-existing framework for distance running reality.  I have all of my coaching and teaching skills, but none of the ruts, routines, or rationales that coaches fall prey to.  Every situation, every athlete, every season gets fresh eyes, creative solutions, and innovative thinking.    

In no way do I believe that I will have this forever.  Over time, I, too, will develop my routines and lose some of my creativity.  In fact, maybe I am that way right now with the hurdlers.  Sometimes I feel that way. I find it far more difficult to innovate new drills and teaching methods for the hurdles than I do for the jumps or distance events.  It is much more of a conscious decision to think outside the box that I’ve existed in for 15 years.  

Some people say that “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks.”  With that in mind, I guess I’m an incredibly old dog in the hurdles, but a new pup in XC.  However, I’m always looking for new tricks in both.  If I didn’t, this would all just get boring.  

Constructivism is nice.  It gives me bit of a back door to growing old.  It admits that human nature says that we will eventually fall into a rut and simply repeat what we’ve known and what’s worked in the past. However, by putting the responsibility to learn on the individual, it also gives us the ability to change, to stay young, to stay fresh.  I want nothing more than to believe that coaching is a completely different domain than mathematics.  Every great breakthrough in math happens by someone in their 20’s and early 30’s.  Once you hit 35, you’re out-dated in the math world.  Your likelihood for a huge breakthrough is diminished to a negligible size.  

I never want that and I have to hope that thinking that way will be enough.  I need to believe that my desire to always be creative and never fall into a set routine is enough to make it so.  Regardless of how much success we have, if you’re not growing or changing, then you’re dying.  The athletes change every year and each one is a new challenge that deserves a fresh approach.  No athlete is exactly like anyone else.  Ikenna, Trevor, and Jared are nothing like I was as a hurdler so I can’t expect that what worked for me is guaranteed to work for them.  

I pity those that say “the names and faces change, but the athletes stay the same.”  It really isn’t the case.  The combination of personality, dedication, genetics, etc make each case different.  My bag of tricks may always be growing, but I never want to simply reach into a recipe box and pull out a set routine and say “this worked for so-and-so back in 1999 so it will work exactly for you now.”

Here’s to hoping that this old dog can always learn some new tricks.