I think that it was in college that I started to think about how runners often get labeled as a "pacer" or a "racer." I interpreted the meaning of both as -- Pacer: a runner who runs with a watch or can otherwise continually run consistent pace over a middle or long distance. Racer: a runner who thrives on beating his opponents over improving his times. The obvious implication here is that pacers are the introverted marathoner type that lack the competitive fire to win races against real competition and racers are only as good as the people around them. That all sound nice and good at first, but after 15 years of running competitively, I now know that neither label really works.
In college, I found that I had the natural ability to pace better than most, and I could do so with or without a watch. No I was not born with a watch in my head, and no, I did not count off seconds either. I didn't think much of it actually. It was simply the result of training solo for much of high school and trying to repeat good performances over and over again while focusing on how I physically felt while running different times. Because of this, I was labeled as a "pacer" straight away, and when my coaches planned my races and helped me prepare, everything was slanted towards that perspective. But they were wrong, I love to compete. I thrive on competition and I hate to lose. So why then did my coaches ignore those personality traits and convince me to hit specific splits for each mile regardless of where my competitors were? I suppose they thought what I have often thought as a coach: if a runner has no sense of his or her own ability, it doesn't really matter how competitive they are because they will never be in a position to use that competitive drive. I guess that is true.
My coaches had a plan for me and by the time I was a sophomore, I understood what they were doing. In track, they finally started to preach tactics to me and started to fuel me to attack my competition. By the middle of the season I was winning races convincingly and running fast times consistently as well. I was a complete runner. But what if I had not been so naturally competitive? What if I really was the introspective desert island type of runner who didn't give much thought to beating the people around me? Would my coach's plan have worked still? I think not.
Competitive drive is often thought of as one of those things you are either born with or without. However, I am not so sure if that is true. Competition is natural after all...right? Being someone who loves to compete, no matter the medium for the competition, I find it hard to relate to those who claim to have no burning desire to win. I just don't buy it, not one bit. There is no way that a human can survive in life if he or she never aspires to either be the best at something, or to at least be better than those around them. If such a person exists, they must surely live on a deserted island with no contact with any other life form. Why then, do I have athletes that appear to fall into this categorization? They plot along, more concerned with holding a conversation than holding onto the leaders. If I train them to simply focus on pace, am I not enabling their lack of desire to push themselves to a new threshold? Is it even possible to teach competitiveness?
I operate on the "to each his own" wavelength most of the time. That just means that I know every athlete is going to succeed by doing things the way that work best for them. However, there are some definite prerequisite traits that I think all runners must adapt at some point if they are to ever really succeed. Good runners are both "racers" and "pacers." Ryan Hall did not win the Olympic trials by simply running faster than the competition. He kept himself in check long enough to not let his pace get away from him, while maintaining contact with the leaders - that is pacing. Hall's well-timed surge late in the race that broke his competitors secured the win in the end - that is racing. If he had failed to appropriately apply either tactic, the race would have gone to another runner in the talented field. Every runner must at some point decide why they run. If it is simply to smell the world and feel their heart beat, then a long training plateau is in their future. If it is more in their interest to improve from race to race and season to season and beat their opponents, then I am confident that they will find success in their career. The problem is that success does not come easy, nor does it necessarily happen when we expect it to. That can be frustrating for even the most gifted of runners and it can lead to a lack of inner fire.
My advice to all is: First accept that you are going to lose sometimes, maybe even a lot. The fear of failure is the number one excuse we use to not take chances in sports and life. Allow yourself to admit that you want to win, everyone wants to win. When the day comes to race, go for it...all out. You don't need to be conservative with racing all of the time. If you get into a race that is "over your head," just race, don't worry about the pace. If you can do just one of these things, you will see improvement...and you will thank yourself later.
Posts
Marin Mile results
1 week ago
