The personality of a champion.

This week I have been contemplating this question quite a bit - What is the personality of a champion like? There may not be a single answer to this question. In fact there probably isn't one personality type common to all champions, but I'll share my thoughts and open the topic for discussion.

Lance, Tiger and Alex

I have previously written about Alex Rodriguez in regards to his ability to perform athletically and deal with the New York fans. This week brought Rodriguez back into the sports news with his interview that caused a lot of comotion. What is the main issue with Rodriguez's interview? For me it is not that he is discussing the opt out clause in his contract, it is the fact that he is showing his need to be loved by everyone. I have always found it amazing that Rodriguez could play at the level he does, yet handle the lack of respect he appears to get from the Yankees' fans. Maybe he doesn't handle it too well. This need for fan approval was also seen in his back and forth decisions about playing in the World Baseball Classic and who he should play for.

Now compare that mentality, the need for everyone's love, to Lance Armstrong's approach to handling his decisions. In the book, Lance Armstrong's War, Coyle talks about how Lance sees everything in black and white. There are no grey areas, you are with Lance or against him. Coyle mentions how this ability to see everything in black and white allows Armstrong to make decisions quickly therefore wasting little time and energy. (It also means that those who are against him often get chewed up and left behind.) In the book, How Lance Does It, Kearns gives a similar perspective although he says that Lance has a "clarity of purpose".

Using those two examples, what does that say about the personality of a champion? I am not completely sure because Armstrong has been a successful cyclist by having a "with me or against me" attitude, but Rodriguez has been one of the best baseball players over the last ten years displaying a "please, please love me" desperation. A person could make a distinction between the two by saying that Armstrong became the best Tour de France rider of all-time, while Rodiguez hasn't been able to lift up and become a great post season player - maybe due to his inability to move past what others think of his performances?

Tiger Woods is an athlete that is commonly used as an example of performing well under pressure and possessing the mentality needed to be the best. There's a difference between Tiger's approach to the sport and Phil Mickelson's that has been discussed before in my post titled, "Planning to Fail." This difference doesn't have to do with a need to be like or not, but it does highlight something that I think might be a key personality trait shared by high performing athletes - Emotional Stability.

Elaine Breeden, Gordo Byrn, Tim Holla and others...

In the summer of 2003, I was asked to help a young swimmer out with some core strengthening and pilates. I gladly helped because I wanted the experience and because I was told that the swimmer was a motivated and talented swimmer. I ended up helping her for the summer with the core strengthening exercises and some relaxation ideas, then I began teaching the Wildcat Aquatics program for the school year. During the entire time that I helped this swimmer, there was one characteristic that I witnessed that was way above average, her maturity and emotional stability. She was only fourteen years old at the time, but she had several things going for her:

1. She knew what she wanted to accomplish.
2. She knew it would take some hard work and was willing to do it.
3. She had the emotional makeup to deal with those around her that knew she had a special talent and were giving either solicited or unsolicited advice.

One thing I shared with her were ways I found effective to prepare for races, practices or just calm myself down daily. The information I shared is - Here. Ironically, she probably already possessed a better ability to remain focused yet relaxed at fourteen than I do to this day.

The other day I was watching the Women's NCAA Swimming and Diving Championships, when I saw the highlights of the 200 meter butterfly. It was exciting to see, but not surprising at all when I realized that a freshmen swimmer for Stanford University won the race. Why wasn't it surprising to me that a freshmen won the NCAA's? Because the swimmer was Elaine Breeden, the same swimmer that had a great deal of emotional stability as a freshmen in high school.

I mentioned Gordo Byrn and Tim Hola in this discussion because of the observation I made at the Long Course Clinc last November. I mentioned then that they both possessed a "go-with-the-flow" characteristic, which could easily coincide with an emotional stabilty. This "go-with-the-flow" personality could also describe the two best local trithletes we have here in Lexington - Dave and Tony.

Finals Thoughts

Like I said in the opening, I don't know if there is a "personality of champions" but these observations have been bouncing around in my thoughts this week. It is possible that I am making too general of observations, especially when characterizing these different individuals own personalities. But from the public's eye or the brief interactions that I have with them, there appears to be a common theme.

The other possibility is that I see a lack of emotional stability in my own life, therefore want to attribute my yet_unfullfilled_goals to that lack of stability. In either case, I think it does raise a good discussion.

Here are a few questions to ponder: Can we change our personalities? Would more emotional stability in our lives allow us to train better, recover better and/or perform better? Do we see an emotional stability in those that we perceive to be "successful"?

VO2 Max - the good results!

I discussed the frustrating results from my recent trip to the lab, so I thought that I'd share some of the more exciting results.

The concept of VO2 Max is discussed among endurance athletes regularly. (Scott Dunlap at A Trail Runner's blog about his recent testing and Triathlon Network member Jodi's recent results.) The general thought that you hear talked about is that the higher your VO2 Max the faster you are and the better you will do in a race. It's not really that simple. In running there are factors to consider in addition to VO2 Max, like running economy for one.

So an athlete's VO2 Max isn't the only factor that allows them to do well in competition, but it is generally true that most elite runners have "elite" VO2 Max assessments. It's kind of like going to school at Princeton or Harvard - you may not be successful if you go to college there, but you can be pretty sure that in order to get there you were already in an "elite" group. (Don't bag me on the analogy! I didn't go to either.)

If you would like to learn a lot more about these concepts, I'd suggest that you pick up one of these two books: Daniels' Running Formula or Lore of Running.

Here's a quote from Lore of Running to highlight this idea:

"VO2 Max values may vary quite dramatically, even among elite athletes with similar performances. For example, consider the cases of Steve Prefontaine and Frank Shorter, two athletes whose VO2 Max values differed by 16%, yet whose best 1-mile times differed by less than 8 seconds (3.4%) and whose best 3-mile times differed by even less (0.2 seconds)."

So what was my VO2 Max? 64.6 ml/kg/min. I'm pretty happy with that result. It is actually consistent with results that I've had in the past AND it means that I'm still not getting everything out of my ability. My times just don't match what those results suggest I could accomplish. So there are things that I need to continue to work on, most likely running mechanics and running economy.

The other thing to consider is how the result is expressed. The result is expressed in a relative manner, meaning they show my oxygen consumption in relation to my body weight in kilograms. If you have read my last few posts, you'll know that I've been discussing how my weight is not at "optimal" weight. (They actually weighed me in at 143 pounds the day I did the max test.) The absoute oxygen consumption that I acheived was 4189 ml/min, therefore if I would get down to my optimal weight I would raise my relative results to around 67 ml/kg/min.

Here's some data from elite runners in the past taken from The Lore of Running to compare my results. Notice the "elite" club concept and how results are not always in direct relationship to VO2 Max.

Steve Prefontaine - 84.4 ml/kg/min - 1 mile, 3:54.6
Gary Tuttle - 82.7 ml/kg/min - marathon, 2:17:00
Jim Ryun - 81.0 ml/kg/min - 1 mile WR 1967
Sebastian Coe - 77.0 ml/kg/min - 1 mile WR 1981
Alberto Salazar - 76.0 ml/kg/min - marathon, 2:08:13
Frank Shorter - 71.3 ml/kg/min - marathon, 2:10:30
Derek Clayton - 69.7 ml/kg/min - marathon, 2:08:34

My PR's for comparison:

marathon - 3:04:xx
10k - 37:19

I'm excited to see myself acheive those #'s, but I know need to work on the things that will help me be able to use those abilities even better. There's lots of room to move up! Hope!

Body Composition Analysis (Why I hate this crap!)

I made a post on slowtwitch about this yesterday because there was a thread discussing the validity of a Tanita scale. In respect of time, I decided to just paste what I wrote there. There is a lot that can be said about this topic and my recent hydrostatic weighing results, hopefully we can discuss that through the comments.

It is also interesting that this came up just one day after my post about my soda habit and the amount of calories I consumed last week in sweet yellow liquid (that actually makes Mountain Dew seem like urine - maybe your right Anne).

******* post below *******

I have a Tanita that I use on a regular basis and have always assumed that it is 5 to 8% off. I don't know the error estimate in those things, but BIA is somewhere around there. The one thing that I do like about it is that it seems to give consistent results. It varies based upon my hydration levels, but if my H20 % is similar to the day before - the % body fat is very similar.

I recently had my body fat % taken in an Underwater Tank at the university and just got the results today. The UWW gave me a % body fat of 17.8%. The interesting thing for me is that I used the Tanita on the same day and got 18.3% on it.

Yikes is my first thought. I've never tested above 8% when going underwater, mostly in the 5 to 7 range (from memory anyway). But that was 6 years ago. I am now carrying about 8-10 pounds more than normal?

I realize this is a sample of n=1 , but interesting non-the-less. I guess I can't just dismiss the Tanita all the time now.

I do know that by using the "look in mirror" test, I don't seem like I'm carrying extra fat. In fact, I had assumed that most of the 8 to 10 pounds extra I'm carrying was due to the way above average amount of swimming I have been doing.

The most interesting thing for me was this quote from my results "The reccommended percent of fat for males your age is 15%. Your fat percentage was calculated to be 17.8% which places you above the levels of a healthy individual. To reach your ideal weight 134.2 lbs. will require a loss of 4.6 lbs of fat."

After seeing that statement, I think the message in The Obesity Myth is ringing even more loud in my mind. I may not be the picture of health, but of all the things that are unhealthy in my life (stress, diet, etc.) I've never considered my weight one of the "unhealthy" aspects. At 138 pounds (and 5' 6.5") I'm still not too worried.

******* end post *******

4,152 Calories and 1,038 grams of sugar.

I have been doing a little experiment over the last several weeks with myself. I have been logging the cans/bottles of Mountain Dew and Coke that I have been drinking - primarily to gain an understanding about the amount of soda I consume regularly.

In the last seven (7) days, I have consumed: 240 fluid ounces of Mt. Dew and 32 fluid ounces of Coke.

That equals: 4,152 Calories and 1,038 grams of Sugar.

That is a pretty large consumption of Calories that ultimately equals zero nutritional value. So the question should be asked, Why do you drink all that soda? It is a question that I actually get asked in different ways at times. The most common way is more of a statement, "I can't believe you drink that much soda and run all those miles!" I never know if people are thinking I run so that I can drink the soda or if they assume I would be the-picture-of-all-healthiness because I workout?

I have talked about this habit before (here, here and here), but the main reason that I drink soda is out of emotional need and boredom. I'm tired - I grab a Mountain Dew. I'm bored - I find a coke, etc. It is a habit that weighs on my guilt too. Some people say that I shouldn't worry about it because I don't gain any weight, but there seems to be something intuitively unhealthy about it. Maybe I'm just ultra-sensitive to the subject because of the diabetes that my step-father and brother have?

Whatever the reason, whatever the motivation - I would like to make another serious attempt at breaking this habit. One thing that I might do to support this attempt is to read the book, "Mindless Eating: Why we eat more than we think." I saw this book awhile back, but Ironclm did a review of it recently that peaked my interest again. (The link of the book is to her review.)

Sometimes it is good to review my old thoughts on this subject and in January of 2006 it looks like I had some similar thoughts. They actually were not bad (IMO), check them out: "Thoughtful decisions vs. Decisions made without thought".

Maybe everyone here can help me out with this very difficult change in behavior?

Training log review of 2007 - so far.

This year is completely different than last year in many ways. This year I am focused on Ironman Wisconsin in September, last year I was trying to go sub 3 hours for the marathon in the spring before returning to triathlon after a 2 year break.

I found out after completing the Runovia Triathlon (several posts at that link) that trying to split a year up, focusing on two major goals wasn't going to lead to the success that I wanted to obtain in Ironman. There was also an understanding that I gained that lead me to believe that keeping the training up year-round (with a little rest time) was going to be essential to succeeding at Ironman. (Read my post, "How to pass the suck threshold in triathlon" for more.)

One reinforcement that I've had recently related to the idea that I needed to be more "focused" came from the book I just started reading, "How Lance Does It" by Brad Kearns (who also wrote Breakthrough Triathlon Training, my review here). In the book Kearns breaks down four critical success factors that made Armstrong great. The second factor was "Clarity of Purpose". I'll share more about this later, but it is interesting to see areas of my life that are impinging upon my ability to focus on training and doing well in Ironman. That needs to be fixed soon as we are now 27 weeks away from IMMOO (critical success time here on out!).

The review.

January 2006 Training Hours: 9:43 - cross training, swimming, biking, etc.
Feburary 2006 Training Hours: 17:24 - all running

January 2007 Training Hours: 47:05
Bike - 17:41
Run - 16:58
Swim - 11:56
Weights - :30

Feburary 2007 Training Hours: 46:13
Bike - 20:54
Run - 22:55
Swim - 1:49
Weights - :35

Thoughts: Notice any difference? It is pretty obvious that I've increased my overall training. The interesting thing for me is that I actually ran more in Feb '07 than I did in Feb of '06, even though I was focusing on a marathon in '06.

I am a little dissappointed with my swim and bike numbers in Feburary of '07, but there were things that hindered my ability to do both. The SEC Championships were at UK this year which shut down the pool for 2 weeks and I was back in Nebraska for 1 week, so I missed some time there. The cycling stats will be better in March! That is a promise I have made to myself.

If interested here's my workoutlog: Gary's Workout Log.