By Bryan Green

Ritz left Brad Hudson for Alberto Salazar, and hasn't looked back.

Whenever an athlete changes coaches, the inevitable reactions occur, as we've seen in the case of Ryan Hall's announcement this week.  "It's about time he made a change, he was stagnating!"  "Why would he leave Mahon, who coached him to such fast times?"  "Nike made him do it so Alberto Salazar could give him PEDs!"

(Okay, I made up that last one.  At least until a letsrun poster proves me wrong.)  

As I argued in May, 2009, I think coaching changes are often a good thing.  About 18 months ago, we saw a number of high profile athletes change coaches, including Jeremy Wariner, Shalane Flanagan, Dathan Ritzenhein, and Erin Donohue.  I wrote about their moves in an article titled, "Coaching Changes: Why Not More?" and outlined the four main situations in which I think athletes are justified (if not compelled) to change coaches.

Since that article was written, all four of the above athletes have gone on to experience varying levels of success.  Wariner returned to Clyde Hart and was the #1 400m runner in the world this year (with some help from LaShawn Merritt's suspension).  Flanagan ran close to her best on the track, debuted in the half marathon to US #4 all-time, and is preparing for the NYC marathon in a couple weeks.  Ritz broke the US 5,000 meter AR, finished third at the World Half Marathon champs, and is also preparing for the NYC marathon.  And Erin Donohue broke 2:00 in the 800 meters and continues to prove doubters wrong.  Their moves appear to have worked out.

But their moves also had clear motives.  If you had asked what each of the athletes wanted, we could have answered pretty clearly.  Wariner wanted to get back to World #1.  Ritz wanted to stop underachieving.  Donohue wanted a coach who believed in and supported her goals.  Flanagan wanted, as near as I can tell, to get away from John Cook.

I guess the big question is: What does Ryan Hall want?

Joe Battaglia at Universal Sports thinks that Ryan wants to experience spiritual euphoria in his running, and that winning is not his top priority.  I disagree, primarily because I think it's not an either/or distinction for Hall.  I think Ryan Hall truly believes that spiritual euphoria isn't just the end goal, but it's the means by which he will land atop the victory stand.  For Hall, the two aren't separate goals at all.

With that said, I'm afraid Hall may be confusing means with ends.  When he broke the half marathon AR and won the US Olympic Marathon Trials, he just went out there and blew everyone away.  They were joyous, euphoric romps.  In the process, he ran away from the competition and won in dramatic fashion.  But was it the feeling of running free and the euphoria that led to the win, or was it the way in which he won that generated the feeling of euphoric "freeness"?  (And was it the years of speedwork preceding that year that led to his ability to run that fast in the first place?)

The more important thing about Hall is that he feels compelled to live his life and pursue his career on his own terms.  He is his own man, entirely comfortable in his own skin.  I don't have any direct experience with his training group, but I've had discussions with others who live and train in Mammoth.  I've always had the impression not that Hall followed Mahon's coaching plan so much as Mahon created a coaching plan that Ryan Hall would follow.

There's a slight difference between the two.  In the first, the athlete ultimately submits to the will of the coach.  In the second, the athlete dictates the boundaries within which the coach can perform his job.  

Hall's fans--including myself--often wonder why he never goes back to the track and why he races so sparingly.  If he were in Alberto Salazar's group, for example, we wouldn't wonder that.  We would know it is because it's not part of Alberto's plan.  But with Hall, the more likely answer is simply that he doesn't want to, and coach Mahon was never going to change that.

Could Hall have beaten Merga had he not been "running free"?

That's why it's hard to figure out what Ryan Hall wants.  If he really wanted to be the best in the world, the approach we would expect is for him to find the best coach and then allow that coach to chart the path.  That may eventually happen, but for now he plans to coach himself.  And that makes me believe this isn't about what Ryan Hall wants, but rather what he doesn't want.

My suspicion is that Hall doesn't want to be told things he doesn't want to hear.  

After all, that's pretty much a coach's job, right?  To tell you not to overdo it even though you feel great.  To tell you to do another rep even though you feel exhausted.  To keep those days when you just don't have it in perspective.  To provide the framework that allows you to be successful, despite how you might feel at any given point.  In short, to save you from yourself when you are at your weakest.  

To be fair, Hall may not need that.  Or maybe he can get that guidance from friends and family.  I'm skeptical of any athlete who thinks he can do a better job coaching himself than the best coaches in the world (whom Hall would surely have access to if he so desired).  For me, the concern isn't that he left Mahon, but that he's going it alone.  But none of this makes his decision right or wrong.  It all depends on what he wants.



Whether that's spiritual euphoria, to train completely on his own terms, or simply to no longer have to hear whatever Mahon had to tell him, this will give him the chance to realize those goals.  But if his goal is to realize his own potential, I'm dubious but willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

As the best marathoner in the US, I can only hope he has made the right choice.  I hope the next time we see him he is rejuvenated and challenging for the lead within a pack of Africans.  I hope the Ryan Hall we see at the 2012 Olympic Games is the free spirit that we glimpsed back in 2008, whether he's accompanied by a coach or not.

By Bryan Green

People are easily distracted.  Sometimes these distractions are convenient, like when we have writer's block and the Olympics are on.  Sometimes we see something irrelevant but simply can't take our eyes off it, like the annoying haircuts on the men's ice dancers.  And other times we get taught to focus on something that simply doesn't matter as much as we make it seem.

When it comes to talent, many of us fall victim to this last type of distraction.  We spend our time and energy wondering, evaluating, and debating how much talent an individual has.  Threads like this German vs Dathan thread at LetsRun attract an inordinate amount of passionate arguments.  It doesn't help that we don't have clear definitions, we use multiple words with multiple meanings, and that our attempts at measuring talent are stuck using proxies.

I think everyone intuitively understands the idea of "talent".  It's natural, it's innate, it's genetic (if you're East African, etc)...you know, either you have it or you don't.  But there are three other aspects of how we view talent that create problems for us.  First, talent is understood to be the key defining factor that enables someone to be the best in the world.  If we assume that others are working just as hard as Bekele, then the only thing that can be separating him is his talent.  Let's just say that's a big assumption.

Second, we associate talent with being a purely physical quality.  It's very rare that someone includes such factors as toughness, pain tolerance, discipline, passion, commitment, and coolness under pressure in a discussion about talent.  Yet the ability to get up and train everyday at an elite level for years and years while staying motivated and committed is surely harder for some than it is for others. 

(We also don't talk about durability in most discussions of talent.  Talent takes on a meaning equivalent to: potential to run a given time.  But isn't the ability to do the necessary training in the first place a factor?  We don't talk about this or mental stuff because it's fluffy, it's intangible, we can't measure it.  But that leads me to the third problem.)

We don't have any foolproof way of measuring talent, either mental or physical.  The only real approach we have is to look at the subset of people who've achieved at an extremely high level and then label them "talented".  This creates its own issues:

• we miss out on anyone who hasn't achieved enough to show up on our radars;
• we can't compare people at different stages in their careers;
• we (usually) can't compare what two athletes have done to achieve their marks;
• and the big one, we can never assume that what they have achieved is what they are capable of achieving.

In the first case, it probably doesn't matter.  There might be 100 other Germans and Dathans out there.  I don't believe there's some Outliers-esque selection bias happening in running.  We may miss out on a few, but I think we're probably identifying much of our top talent.  The other three problems are more relevant, in my opinion. 

Ritz and German are separated by about a decade.  You would think this fact alone would stop people from comparing Ritz's 12:56 with German's 13:25 or 3:55.  But a lot of people confuse talent with ability.  Ability changes over time, based on your years of training.  Yes, 12:56 tells us something about Ritz's talent, that at a minimum, Ritz can reach that level.  And German's 13:25 and 3:55 tell us that, at a minimum, German can achieve those marks.  But that's it, and that's not much.

Even if we try to compare two athletes when they were in high school, we (usually) don't have enough information to make our case.  In some cases, two great runners have come from the same program and can be more or less compared.  But how can we compare Ritz's experience in Michigan to German's in California (or to another favorite, Alan Webb's in Virginia, or soon, Lukas Verzbicas's in Illinois)?  They weren't doing the same workload, workouts, or afterschool work. 

Finally, races and PRs are not measurements of potential.  They may give us some clues, but they are ultimately just indications of progress at any specific point in time.  My PR today may become my lifetime PR, or it may just reflect how good I was on that day in that year.  Even after an athlete retires, their PRs won't necessarily have reflected their potential.  There's no way to know. 

The whole discussion is a distraction.  It's a distraction because there's no substance.  It's irrelevant.

Psychologist Bernard Weiner identified four broad categories to which we can attribute our success (or failure).  These are talent, effort, the difficulty of the task, and luck.  As you can see in the diagram they can be classified by whether they are internal or external, and whether they are constant or variable. 

Talent is internal and constant, it never changes.  Effort is internal and variable, it can be increased or decreased at any given time.  Task difficulty is external and constant, a mile is always a mile, a workout is a workout, and you don't usually get to choose who is in your race.  And luck is external and variable, it changes at random.

There is one more factor that matters, however.  That is what we can call "controllability".  Do you have any control over the attribute and if so, in what way?  Of the four, the only one we have direct control over is our effort (in blue).  You can't control something that doesn't change, so talent and task difficulty are what they are.  And while there are benefits to understanding your task difficulty, those are only realized through focused effort, and so should be attributed there.  As for luck, with apologies to Louis Pasteur, we don't really have any control over that either. 

What this means is that when we focus on talent, we are focusing on something that's internal, constant and out of our control.  And not only that, it can't be measured and it's only part of the equation that results in becoming an elite athlete.  So why do we focus on talent instead of effort?  Why is it so easy to get caught up in the talent distraction?

First of all, talent is equated with destiny.  If you are talented, and you pursue that talent to its extreme, you are living a narrative that many people naturally relate to.  German and Dathan may be great at other things, but they were born to run.  We like that and it turns their stories into dramas.  Will they fulfill their God-given promise?  Or will the story be a tragedy?

The second reason we focus on talent rather than effort is that effort is so opaque.  Runners do different mileage, different workouts, in different environments, with different teammates and different coaches, in different eras, and none of them share that information in a clear, easy to understand way.  Perhaps this will change someday with the advent of some new technologies and incentive structures, but probably not.  How much would Bekele have to be paid to have his every workout inputted and analyzed by this mythical service?

Ultimately, as it stands, debating about an athlete's effort is just as speculative as debating their talent.  Personally, though, I'd rather see us debate effort--specifically training methods, lifestyle choices and decision-making--as there is an opportunity to learn something from the debate. 

I'm not sure that will ever catch on, though.  I think this is one distraction many fans just aren't looking to lose. 

Previous Page  -  Intro  -  26-50  -  11-25  -  Top 10

We've finally made it to the Top 10.  Four people from last year's top 10 didn't make the cut, so let's see who took their places.  Athlete name, last year's rank (and PRs in parentheses).

Bernard Lagat is still the best in the US...but for how much longer?

10.  Bernard Lagat, 6 (800m 1:46.00 - 1500m 3:26.34 - Mile 3:47.28 - 3000m 7:32.43AR - 5000m 12:59.22)

Yes, I lowered his ranking even though he just won a World Indoor title.  I'm afraid of his age.  It doesn't take much to derail a 36 year old, even one as great as Lagat.  His win at World Indoors shows he's still got it compared to most of the world, but with his announced focus on the 5000m, I'm not sure he's the favorite to win any more major outdoor titles.  Not if Bekele's running in them, anyway.

Despite Ritz and Teg having faster PR's over 5000m, Lagat is the clear favorite to win any head-to-head race because of his kick.  You know what would be ironic?  What if Lagat goes out and runs something like 12:53, and Teg goes out the next week and runs 12:55?  That would be hilarious.  Anyway, for the next year or two Lagat is still top dog in the US, but not for much longer than that.

9.  Dathan Ritzenhein, 17 (3000m 7:39.03 - Two Miles 8:11.74 - 5000m 12:56.27AR - 10000m 27:22.28 - Half 60:00 - Marathon 2:10:00)
8.  Galen Rupp, 2 (800m 1:49.87 - 1500m 3:39.14 - Mile 3:56.22 - 3000m 7:44.69 - 5000m 13:14.21 - 10000m 27:33.48)

These two training partners are at different stages in their careers, but their goals are pretty similar (as are their chances of achieving them).  Both have their sights set on Meb's 10000m AR, and it almost looks like the favorite to get it will be the first guy to go for it. 

Each had a phenomenal 2009, with Ritz setting the 5000m AR, finishing 6th in the Berlin 10000m (in a PR), and getting a bronze at the World Half Marathon Champs.  All he has to prove is that he can master the full marathon distance.  If he does, he'll have a resume that's pretty hard to beat.

Rupp absolutely destroyed the collegiate ranks last year, won the USA 10000m title easily (over Ritz), then finished 8th in Berlin.  He's started off the year with a PR at 5000m and a 5th place finish in the 3000m at the World Indoor Champs.  I would be shocked if neither of these two broke Meb's 10000m record this year, and I give the slight nod to Rupp, who I think might have been able to do it last year had he gotten in the right race in June.

2009 Top Ten (2010 rank)

10. Anna Pierce (5) 9. Alan Webb (16) 8. Nick Symmonds (13)  7. Shannon Rowbury (6) 6. Bernard Lagat (10) 5. Ryan Hall (11) 4. Kara Goucher (12) 3. Shalane Flanagan (3) 2. Galen Rupp (8) 1. Jenny Barringer (1) Watch Ryan Hall burn me by winning Boston now that I've bumped him from the top 10.  Trust me, though, I'll be ecstatic if he does. The next most likely person to burn me on this ranking? Nick Symmonds, because anyone can win a major 800m.  The event is just that fluky.  With that said, there are no global championships this year and by 2011, I think we may be talking just as much about Wheating winning a major 800m medal as Symmonds.

7.  German Fernandez, 11 (1500m 3:39.00 - Mile 3:55.02 - 3000m 7:47.97 - 5000m 13:25.46)

If there's one runner who can equal Alan Webb for an awe inspiring all-or-nothing quality to his performances, it's German Fernandez.  When he's on, he's a revelation.  He doesn't just win, but he dictates the race and wins on his own terms.  Last year he ran a solo 3:55.02 to set an NCAA record, easily won USA JR XC over Derrick, won the NCAA Outdoor 1500m despite leading the entire race, and then set the AJR for 5000m in finishing 5th at the USA Outdoor meet.  He just makes it all look so easy.

Except when he doesn't.  He's had his share of troubles, injuries and an iron deficiency, that have kept him from training consistently and running up to his potential.  He DNF'd NCAA XC his freshman year, missed time with a stress reaction in track, struggled through XC last year and then turned his ankle at the Big 12 Champs in indoor track.  His future seems so bright yet so unpredictable.

There are a couple things that have to be said, however.  We haven't seen a 1500m/5000m talent like him in a long time, maybe ever.  But he's still not a favorite to win either race at the NCAA level, despite his pulling off the 1500m victory last year.  Will he win more NCAA titles?  Surely.  But he's less of a lock than the other collegiates ahead of him.

6.  Shannon Rowbury, 7 (800m 2:00.94 - 1500m 4:00.33 - Mile 4:20.34 - 3000m 8:47.18 - 5000m 15:12.95)
5.  Anna Pierce, 10 (800m 1:58.80 - 1500m 3:59.38 - 3000m 8:58.07 - Steeple 9:22.76 - 5000m 15:53.36)

For various reasons I'm always a little bearish about Shannon Rowbury.  Maybe I'm just too focused on PRs and not enough on racing instincts, because I haven't really come to terms with the fact that she is the best 1500m runner in the US.  I had her ranked all over the place as I started putting this list together, and finally settled on 6th because of her bronze in Berlin last year.

One spot ahead of her is Pierce.  Not only did she finish 4th at World Indoors this year, but she didn't lose a single race over 800m last year, she had the 10th fastest time in the world for 800m and the 4th fastest over 1500m, and she still is the nation's #2 steepler (should she ever go back to it).  There aren't enough good things to say about her.

Once again, Wheating was .01 away from an NCAA title.

4.  Andrew Wheating, 12 (800m 1:45.03 - 1500m 3:38.60 - Mile 3:58.16)

I think Andrew Wheating's NCAA Indoor meet was instructive as to where he stands in the US today.  He anchored his DMR team to a victory, outkicking a 1:48/3:35 guy and a host of other top milers.  He then lost the 800m by .01 seconds because he A) always races from the back and has only one strategy and B) didn't go all out because he thought he had it won.  

What we learned is that Wheating is the best overall middle-distance runner in the NCAA, but he's still inexperienced.  He's got the killer instinct, but only when he's running from behind.  This will change though.  He learned a great lesson in Fayetteville.  You can bet Robby Andrews won't be sneaking up on him again, and you can bet that 1:44 is only a few outdoor races away.  He's still the major favorite to win NCAA Outdoors, and I wouldn't be surprised to see 1:44/3:35 either.  I think we're about to see the "Summer of Wheating".  Prepare to be amazed.

3.  Shalane Flanagan, 3 (1500m 4:05.86 - 3000m 8:33.35iAR - 5000m 14:44.80AR - 10000m 30:22.22 - Half 69:41)

Last year Flanagan struggled.  Expectations were high following her 10000m bronze in Beijing, but she finished a disappointing 2nd at the USA Outdoors and 14th in Berlin.  There was speculation as to whether it was a mistake to change coaches, and she kind of disappeared after the World Champs, ending her season early.

She came back strong this winter by running a 69:41 debut half marathon--6th all-time by an American--in what appeared to be a tempo effort.  She then destroyed a very strong field at USA XC and finished 12th at World XC.  She looks poised for a great summer, but what's most interesting is her planned marathon debut.  She's got the pedigree and track times to warrant very high expectations and if she can follow in Kastor's footsteps, she may be the next great American marathoner.

2.  Lisa Koll, 16 (Mile 4:41.37 - 3000m 8:56.09 - 5000m 15:29.65 - 10000m 31:18.07)

At the NCAA Indoor meet, Lisa Koll was outkicked in the last lap of the 3000m by Angela Bizzarri.  So why is she 14 spots higher?  Because she just rewrote the record books in the NCAA 10000m.

Two years ago, Koll ran 32:11.  She did that with a 5k PR in the 15:50s.  Last Friday she ran 31:18.07, breaking Kipyego's record by 7 seconds and putting her to number 6 on the all-time US performers list.  The time is only half the story though.  I was at this race and watched it with TnF News's Sieg Lindstrom.  We marveled at how Koll went out in 15:52--leading every lap from the gun-- and then rolled off a string of 74.2's that were simply mechanical.  Her 15:26 last 5k was faster than her PB and faster than any current collegiate runner has ever run in an open 5000 meters.  And she never looked like she was overextended.

She's also arriving at the perfect time to be a 10k runner.  Flanagan, Goucher and Begley are all equal to or stronger than her, but they are all starting to pursue careers on the roads.  For the next few years, the door is open to win a number of US titles in the 5 and 10.

As for this year, there's nobody in the NCAA who can run with her in the 10000m.  And if she doubles at NCAA Outdoors?  Bizzarri outkicked her to deny her the 5k/3k double indoors, but the 10/5 is more in her wheelhouse.  Honestly, I'm not sure I'd bet on Bizzarri, even if she's running fresh.

With Pierce no longer breathing down her back, Barringer owns the steeple.

1.  Jenny Barringer, 1 (800m 2:02.56 - 1500m 3:59.90 - 3000m 8:42.03 - Steeple 9:12.50 - 5000m 15:01.70)

Here's the thing.  Even without collegiate eligibility, you have to put Barringer in the top spot.  She's the AR holder for the steeplechase, and Pierce, her only real competition, is busy kicking arse in the middle distances.  She's ranked 8th all-time in the world for the steeple, and her PR's indicate that she's capable of running close to the world record in the event.  If she decides to enter other events, she's one of the top milers or 5000m runners in the country as well.

Right now she's the only US runner with a legit shot at a world record.  She's as good a bet as anyone to win a world title or medal.  She's got practically no competition in the steeple, and she's got the range to possibly win titles both up and down from her event.  She's young.  She's a workhorse.  She's the complete package.  She's (still) the most valuable runner in the US today.

Previous Page  -  Intro  -  26-50  -  11-25  -  Top 10

 

Ezekiel Kemboi

"First of all, I had a very good race. Berlin has to be a special place, because I won silver in Paris, silver in Helsinki, silver in Osaka, and this year gold. I was tired of silver!"

[The hair style?]

"A friend of mine asked what I want to prepare for today, if I should paint my nails. But then we cut the hair and on the back side we shaved out the sign of Nike - my sponsor. Tomorrow I go back to Kenya to prepare for Zurich and there I'll shave my head again."

There is no American in steeple, there are sprinters in Jamaica. In Kenya you cannot do long jump, but if a Jamaican comes to steeple he would be number 1000 in the world and we were number 1000 in sprints.

It's what makes this stadium unique and so different to the others that makes it special. The history, but also the aesthetics make it an inspiring place to be, as an athlete or as a spectator.

Richard Mateelong

It was very fast, very tough. I won bronze before and now I did a step ahead to silver. I'm very happy - silver and personal best. My friend has to be ready to defend!

[Why the steeple?]

It is famous in Kenya and I saw this interesting race and I knew this is what I wanted to do.

Bouabdellah Tahri

I was close to silver. My focus was to finish in the top three. I wanted to run the first laps relaxed. The last round was very hard. I finished with a European record. It is a great day for me.

I worked a lot, advanced my technique at the obstacle [Tahri jumps higher over the steeples than others]. But overall I'm really happy. The last hurdle was very difficult and I was tired.



 

 

Share on Facebook
 

 

 

'Hills are speedword in disguise '
Frank Shorter

Has Sammy Wanjiru changed the conventional template for running a championship marathon?

The question must be asked after yesterday's world championship marathon emulated Wanjiru's audacious run to Olympic gold last year in Beijing with Abel Kirui and his Kenyan teammates taking control of the race at breakneck speed from start to finish.

Normally I don't like to talk about the people who are not at a championships, especially marathoners who opt for the big city, big money marathons over testing themselves against the world's best. But Steve Moneghetti declared Wanjiru's the greatest marathon run ever last August and now, 12 months later, Kirui has followed the same pattern to a world championships gold medal.

Statistically, the case is compelling. Kirui's winning time yesterday _ two hours six minutes 54 seconds _ is the second fastest men's championships time ever. The fastest is Wanjiru's 2:06:32 on the hot streets of Beijing.

Kirui broke the previous championship record set by Jaouad Gharib in Paris in 2003 by almost two minutes. Behind Kirui, three others broke two hours nine minutes _ silver medallist Emannuel Mutai of Kenya, bronze medallist Tsegay Kebede of Ethiopia and Robert Cheruiyot of Kenya. Six men _ two more than yesterday _ ran sub-2:10 in Paris 2003, but only two, Gharib and silver medallist Julio Rey of Spain, wen under 2:09.

Kirui, Mutai and Cheruiyout, helped by a second Ethiopian, Deriba Merga, carried the lion's share of the pacing load in Berlin. Merga was also a central figure for most of the Olympic marathon. How he must hate his teammate Kebede. In Beijing he passed Merga on the track to grab the bronze; here he came through him in the last 5k, though Merga was in such a bad way by then that he failed to finish.

Merga showed ahead at the first two 5k splits, but from then on it was either Kirui or Mutai, and from 30k on, Kirui.

It is exciting to think that two championships in a row have now brought a men's race run in exhilarating manner. No doubt we will see a return to conservatism sometime in the future, but for the moment let's just sit back and relish this mad, mad new world order.

Scott Westcott got burned following the early pace, but he helped Martin Dent, Andrew Letherby and Mark Tucker to pack together through 30k as Australia finished eighth of 15 teams in the marathon World Cup. With top 8s hard as ever to come by at the world champs, let's not overlook this one.

Like Abel Kirui, Steve Hooker was committed to a course of action which would lead either to death, or to glory. Like Kirui, his boldness was rewarded with a gold medal in the pole vault.

Leading in to Berlin, Hooker's ambition was to secure a world championships medal to go with his Olympic gold. But last Monday week, he suffered a grade one strain to a groin muscle. Then commenced a race against time to get fit.

It looked all over when Hooker qualified with one jump at 5.65 on Thursday. He crashed to the bag and could barely walk after that effort. The soreness settled, and he embarked on an audacious strategy of taking only one jump in the final in the hope that would suffice for a medal.

Hooker came in at 5.85. He all but cleared the height, just tickling the bar off as he went over. He was shattered but, to his surprise, found enough energy to take one more at the next height of 5.90. to a mighty roar, he cleared it and it stood up for gold.

Two jumps for a world championships gold medal. It has been done only once before by _ guess who? _ Sergey Bubka, in Rome in 1987.

ends


 

Len Johnson was The Melbourne Age athletics writer for over 20 years, covering five Olympics, 10 world championships and five Commonwealth Games. He is the author of The Landy Era, From Nowhere to the Top of the World, and a former national class distance runner (2.19.32 marathon) who trained with Chris Wardlaw and Robert de Castella.