I’m not a fan of solo podcasts. Except for Brenn’s too-infrequent essays, I prefer podcasts in which there are exchanges of ideas. While I have problems with some Runners Round Tables, I enjoy them because of the interchanges.
But I gave a listen to BrandonsMarathon because he was interviewing Christopher McDougall. McDougall wrote “Born to Run” and I had issues with that book. Briefly, save for two stand-alone chapters (about shoes and evolution), I found the characters uninteresting and the premise — their inherent superiority — insulting.
But McDougall was engaging, a serious guy taking this stuff seriously. He made some interesting points.
First, about shoes. Or not. You see, he does not wear them when he runs. He had a long history of problems — he begins the book by recounting them — but overcame those problems when he started running minimalist and eventually barefoot. This relates to his chapter on how Nike-killed-running. He acknowledges that running shoes are not per se evil. Just that they are overengineered. Thus running icons of my youth — Shorter, Rodgers, Benoit — began running as I did in largely minimalist shoes. I wore blue Onitsuka Tigers (the ancestor of the Asics brand) that were basically rubber and a light upper. We all wore them. When I was in college, the waffle-sole appeared and from there shoes got more and more complicated and did more and more of the things that the foot is designed to do. So our feet end up like the humans in WALL-E.
As I recently noted, I’m happy with my current shoe. It works for me. It doesn’t have a lot of bells and whistles and thus it is relatively cheap as running shoes go, and not the $175 one can pay for a shoe that mimics running naturally. Of course, as I also recently noted, Robert tried Nike Frees ended his experiment after he suffered an injury.
Second, the whole Tarahumara topic was discussed. They smile when they run and haven’t lost the joy of running. That, of course, is fine until it crosses the superiority-line about which I’m so sensitive. I sure don’t smile when I run but, you know, I do enjoy it. To feel the body (as it felt during a run this morning) working on all cylinders is gratifying. I don’t run for that reason. It’s a perk.
I do run with a goal in mind. And here’s where McDougall surprised. The assumption was that all of this just-running is the ticket. So when it was suggested that that was enough if one were training for a race, McDougall said, “Oh, for that you need a plan.” It may involve principles gathered from the Tarahumaras or the Kenyans or the Japanese. It also involves specific speedwork.
We are intelligent beings in a physical world. That’s why I enjoy listening to Skepticism podcasts. Most of the running bloggers I read have taken a step back and come to terms with the science behind the sport. I’m training for a marathon, what types of speedwork should I be doing? How fast should my long runs be? How far? We debate wearing watches or HRMs or Garmins on easy runs.
There’s a lively debate on issues like VO2max and the like on LetsRun. Julie had a recent post on weight and running and girls and self-image. If you look at the comments, you’ll see one from Kevin Beck (Julie’s coach) and another from Scott Douglas. This I mention because Beck edited a book called “Run Strong” which gets into the mechanics of running and Douglas is a co-author with Pete Pfitzinger of a very popular couple of training books, including “Advanced Marathoning.” These are two great sources — “Daniels’ Running Formula” is a third and there are others — that get into the science of running. It seems to me that if you’re going to discuss training, you need at least (I profess no more) rudimentary understanding of how the body works. How the core creates stablity and the heart distributes oxygen. How the muscles convert oxygen into energy and form prevents injury. One should know the purpose for each workout, even if it’s a recovery run of unspecified distance and unspecified duration. As noted in McDougall’s book (and elsewhere), humans evolved to be superb distance runners. Beyond survival, we’ve taken it to the level of hobby, something to enjoy. And, to some, something to master, or at least try to.
- How.
- Fast.
- Can.
- I.
- Be.
Perhaps for a 100m. Perhaps for a 100K. For many, for 26 miles and 385 yards.
It’s not a mental thing either. As I’ve noted before, NYC Marathon winner Juma Ikanga has said, “the will to win means nothing without the will to train.” And the will to train means nothing without the knowledge to train intelligently.
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 23, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Brandon Wood
Joe,
Being the one who conducted the interview and having talked a bit more off the air with McDougall after the fact, I could not disagree more with the fact that you think he portrays the characters in his book as inherently superior. Quite the opposite, in fact.
The cast of characters brought forth in Born to Run were highlighted not because of something special that they possessed, but rather because they, as a group, portrayed a broad spectrum of nobody-ness. They are all the same as anyone else. Whether it’s the burnt-out ex-fighter, the boozing college kids, the not-so-special tribe of Tarahumara or the author himself, who began this book in the throes of PF and myriad other running related injuries. McDougall was not at all saying that they were anything special, only that, through their own trial and error or evolution, had come to figure out what worked best for them. If it worked for you to eat a big bowl of worms every day to run (WELL), and thus find some measure of joy, wouldn’t you?
As for joy; McDougall did not say that every single person on earth who reads and writes and isn’t a character in his book, has lost the joy of running. Rather, he was dead on when he said that running today isn’t a matter of finding joy for many because it is solely a reason to fit into a pair of size two pants. The whole “smile” thing that I brought up, was because, just as laughter therapy (which I also brought up) works to release endorphins and in turn makes you feel better, smiling, making yourself smile that is, is the easiest way for us to discover some measure of joy in what we’re doing. What you have going for you is that you, Joe Garland, do find joy in your running. Hence the word en-JOY.
Thanks for giving my show a chance and not being too skeptical of it. I am after all, just a guy who like to get out and move.
BW
July 23, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Erin Lee
Joe:
It is great to see an alternate perspective to this book. All of the comments and feedback I have read, up to now, have been rave reviews.
I listened to the book on my iPod and really enjoyed it but also am a healthy sceptic to all its claims.
I would highly recommend this book for those who are just getting into running or runners who are in a ‘funk’. It made me want to get out and run…maybe not in my barefeet though.
Thanks,
Erin
July 23, 2009 at 7:25 pm
joegarland
Brandon,
As I said in my review, that was my take-away. But given the apparently near universal praise for the book, as Erin notes — although how I quoted TK in my intro — I guess I’m in a minority, a small minority.
But I prefer yours to the Kumbayaish comments that plague blogs.
My major point is the more important one about training knowledge.
Erin,
For inspiration, Chapter 1 of “Best Efforts” is hard to beat.
July 24, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Robert James Reese
I might have to break my no-podcast rule and listen to this interview now. You got my curiosity up.
July 26, 2009 at 6:13 pm
joegarland
Robert,
If you’re going to break your no-podcast rule, I suggest instead that you check out The Competitors Radio. As I’ve posted, much of what I’ve learned about Lance Armstrong and performance-enhancers in cycling comes from that site.
There are also interview on triathletes, but you may really enjoy the running interviews. One of my favorites is with Ryan Hall, Josh Cox, and David Goggins. The story about Hall and Cox being turned away from a hostel because they had California driver’s licenses is priceless.