General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Genetics determined?? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 2
 
 
2013-09-05 1:41 PM


6

Subject: Genetics determined??
Hi everyone! This is my first time posting on the site. Like almost any triathlete I have the dream of going to Kona. I would love to Qualify and not have to get in automatically through doing 11 Ironmans. Obviously everyone is built differently, are we predestined by genes to how much a reality or dream it may be? I'm not planning on giving up my day job, but I do want to know if I shouldn't shoot so high.
I have done all the distances in the triathlon. I won a few sprints for my age group, but I was in the younger age group 20-24. I'm now 25.

I run a marathon essentially without training at 345 pace. I did run an Iron distance but it was right after motorcycle accident where my training was minimal and had some injuries. I did it in 14 hrs.

Am I wishful thinking?


2013-09-05 2:02 PM
in reply to: atbaron10

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
I would never tell anyone to not pursue a dream but, having been born in the shallow end of the gene pool, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I could never KQ. I think to KQ you have to have a certain % of genetic gifting coupled with a great deal of training. Genetics alone will not get you there but neither will training alone. After 25 years, you know better than anyone how you stack up to your peers.

Anyway, I'd say swing for the fence! That is the only way you will know the answer for sure. Regret is probably the worst of all human emotions. Go for it!
2013-09-05 2:04 PM
in reply to: atbaron10

Houston
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
I imagine it depends on a combination of genetics, training, and luck. You're young. You have time.
2013-09-05 2:05 PM
in reply to: atbaron10

User image

Champion
7036
5000200025
Sarasota, FL
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??

Hard to answer your question without more information about your background and training.

While genetics provide a theoretical upper limit to one's performace capability, most folks never come close to that being their limiting factor.

Identifying one's potential is an area where a coach can certainly help.  A coach can objectively evaluate where you are now and what you will have to do to get where you want to be.  

If you get a chance, you should read the new book The Sports Gene by David Epstein.  One of the central themes discussed is the theory that basically anyone can be an Olympic champion with 10,000 hours of training.  Interesting reading. 

Good luck with your training,

Mark

 

2013-09-05 2:07 PM
in reply to: atbaron10


41
25
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
I'm new to triathlon. But for most endurance sports, I've always read that for most normal people who have work/family, etc, they will never be able to train enough to approach their genetic potential. If you can really run a 345 marathon with no training I'd say you're far ahead of most of us when it comes to the genetic lottery.
2013-09-05 2:45 PM
in reply to: atbaron10

User image

Not a Coach
11473
5000500010001001001001002525
Media, PA
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??

Think long-term and set a plan with targets you expect you'd need to be able to achieve in order to KQ.  Then set about creating intermediate goals that will get you towards those targets.  Then do the work to hit those intermediate goals.  After actually doing the work for a few years, you will have a better idea about what your chances are.  At this point, there is no way for you or anyone else to know the answer.

 



2013-09-05 2:47 PM
in reply to: RedCorvette

User image

Extreme Veteran
1001
1000
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Originally posted by RedCorvette

Hard to answer your question without more information about your background and training.

While genetics provide a theoretical upper limit to one's performace capability, most folks never come close to that being their limiting factor.

Identifying one's potential is an area where a coach can certainly help.  A coach can objectively evaluate where you are now and what you will have to do to get where you want to be.  

If you get a chance, you should read the new book The Sports Gene by David Epstein.  One of the central themes discussed is the theory that basically anyone can be an Olympic champion with 10,000 hours of training.  Interesting reading. 

Good luck with your training,

Mark

 




I just finished "The Sports Gene" this weekend. Good book that discusses "Nature vs Nurture".

As for the OPs question. I think that it takes a combination of both natural ability and dedication to achieve goals such as KQ. Since you have already performed well at some races you need to decide if you are dedicated enough to your goal to put in the work to attain it.
2013-09-05 3:10 PM
in reply to: atbaron10

User image

Member
1748
100050010010025
Exton, PA
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Genetics will not stop you from qualifying for Kona, however they may stop you from winning Kona.

If you want to qualify for Kona you just need to dedicate yourself to it and train properly.
2013-09-05 6:50 PM
in reply to: 0


96
252525
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
I have to say, I think genetics is vastly more important.

Two stories: once, I worked at a company where the general manager was exactly the same age as I was (same birthday and year) back when I was in my mid-20s. He didn't run, but when he saw that I did, he came out with me once. The very first time he went with me, he was as good as I was (which was 41:00 10K at the time); a few years later, he was breaking 3:00 in marathons.

And, just recently, I did a casual 5K with my sister-in-law, brother-in-law, and myself. The sister in law trains all the time and lives in Boulder CO (the race was in Connecticut, so she had the altitude advantage), and is 12 years younger than me, so kicked my butt with a 21:15. But the brother in law, who does not run regularly and is my age, also beat me with a 22:30 (while I came in with a 23:30).

I was very happy with my result - it was my best time in a while. But obviously, lots of people have a lot more potential than I do. (Not that I'm complaining - I do fine. But my point is that it is mostly genetics).

But it seem like the OP may well have the potential to do very well. I've heard that it takes 7 years to achieve your potential as a runner, and starting at basically 9 minute miles in a marathon, he should be able to do much better with focused, consistent training.

Edited by north_north_west 2013-09-05 6:55 PM
2013-09-05 7:46 PM
in reply to: #4847707


6

Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Thanks everyone for your replies!!! I sold, I'm gonna have my smaller goals but I think it is in reach to KQ for my overall goal! Another question, Is it necessary for me to get a coach?
2013-09-05 8:37 PM
in reply to: north_north_west

User image


81
252525
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
I've linked to a truly great study below. This was a study done on rats in which rats were selectively bred for High capacity running and low capacity running with a look to what their overall health would be.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2703424/

People aren't rats and no one has bred us with a singular outlook to aerobic capacity.

Here's the good news. Both low & high capacity running rats responded equally well to their exercise regime - meaning they increased their aerobic capacity and Vo2 max by roughly the same percentages. They also decreased their body fat, lived longer, didn't get diabetes as quickly or die of heart attacks as quickly.

The bad news if you want to win an event and you're not a high capacity rat is that the high capacity rats started at an endurance that was roughly 450%!!!! of the Low capacity rats.

Anyway - as I said - we aren't rats and this study shouldn't be read/interpreted too broadly but it's very interesting reading. And, it suggests - if we're anything like rats (which we're at least a little bit like them, physiologically) - that genetics has a massive effect on your overall endurance.



2013-09-05 8:44 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??

Originally posted by adelsud I've linked to a truly great study below. This was a study done on rats in which rats were selectively bred for High capacity running and low capacity running with a look to what their overall health would be. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2703424/People aren't rats and no one has bred us with a singular outlook to aerobic capacity. Here's the good news. Both low & high capacity running rats responded equally well to their exercise regime - meaning they increased their aerobic capacity and Vo2 max by roughly the same percentages. They also decreased their body fat, lived longer, didn't get diabetes as quickly or die of heart attacks as quickly. The bad news if you want to win an event and you're not a high capacity rat is that the high capacity rats started at an endurance that was roughly 450%!!!! of the Low capacity rats. Anyway - as I said - we aren't rats and this study shouldn't be read/interpreted too broadly but it's very interesting reading. And, it suggests - if we're anything like rats (which we're at least a little bit like them, physiologically) - that genetics has a massive effect on your overall endurance.

Really fast running is genetic.  Fast running, not as much.  Like you stated in your summary of the article, everyone has the capacity to get faster....and some can get fast.  Only a select few can get really fast (15:00 5k and below).....it takes genetics, period.

A someone stated above.....you can KQ without the really good genetics, but it takes a lot of work.



Edited by Left Brain 2013-09-05 8:45 PM
2013-09-05 9:50 PM
in reply to: atbaron10

User image

Coach
9167
5000200020001002525
Stairway to Seven
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Of all distances, genetics may have the least impact on iron distance races. Endurance vs. speed over short distances is much easier to develop. Speed over long distances is less dependant on vo2 max as compared to other factors.

Alan Couzin's of endurnace corner has written about this, just head over to their website and do some searches for it. I'll leave that for the seekers out there to discover.
2013-09-05 10:02 PM
in reply to: AdventureBear

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??

Originally posted by AdventureBear Of all distances, genetics may have the least impact on iron distance races. Endurance vs. speed over short distances is much easier to develop. Speed over long distances is less dependant on vo2 max as compared to other factors. Alan Couzin's of endurnace corner has written about this, just head over to their website and do some searches for it. I'll leave that for the seekers out there to discover.

You lost me there.

2013-09-06 12:33 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Coach
9167
5000200020001002525
Stairway to Seven
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
being a fast sprint or olypmpic distance athlete may be more strongly tied to genetics than being a fast iron distance athlete which couzins has found to be less tied to tested Vo2 max...the most limiting genetic trait of endurance athletes.

2013-09-06 5:58 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Master
8247
50002000100010010025
Eugene, Oregon
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
I would not make any judgment on your genetic gifts or lack thereof until you've put in several years of solid training in all disciplines. Were I to have based my athletic efforts on my parents' performance, I'd probably never have gotten off the couch. My dad ran a four hour plus marathon and some 10K's in the neighborhood of an hour, after several years of training. Mom was (and is) an avid cyclist but has never averaged much more than 10 mph. on her favored MTB's and hybrids. She can't swim and hates to run; Dad could pull off a decent 50m in his youth but was never a distance swimmer. I started running at 10, and for my first few years of running, my times were very unremarkable. I was commonly last in the races of 200-800m that kids my age usually ran. I did better in road races of 1.5 to 3 miles but my times wouldn't have won any strong age-group completion today.

Later in my teens, I swam 1500m in close to 20 minutes, ran a 2:43 marathon at age 19, and was one of the top 40-50 in the US at marathon and half marathon. I'm not God's gift to triathlon and at age 44, training in a tropical country, never will be, but I'm guessing if I had started younger and dedicated myself to the sport (and gotten a decent bike) at least a KQ would have been in the cards.

I don't know what the research is but in my experience, for endurance sports, it's much more about building a solid base of consistent training. No amount of genetic gifts will compensate for that. If they can put in the training (and the ability to handle a decent training volume MAY be somewhat genetically determined, but it's also heavily about common sense and persistence), then almost everyone can improve vastly, some will get fast, and a lucky few will get very, very fast. You can't know which one you will be without several years of hard work.

Finally, you're young for an endurance athlete. You don't have to be a dork like me and give it up for various reasons long before you hit your physical peak. 24 or 25 is young for iron-distance athletes--many of the top pros are in their mid to late thirties, some even in their forties. Make a plan, follow it, and see where your dreams take you.

ETA Coaches--it depends. A good coach is invaluable for perspective and helping you develop short and long range plans to help you work toward your goals. But it's critical that he/she believes in you and is willing to adapt the approach to your physical and other needs. I've been lucky to have incredible coaches who saw potential where I saw nothing and worked patiently with me; others who spent most of their time trying to convince me that I couldn't do what I knew I could do, and later did. Choose carefully.

Edited by Hot Runner 2013-09-06 6:03 AM


2013-09-06 6:12 AM
in reply to: atbaron10

User image

Champion
7136
5000200010025
Knoxville area
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Genetics start mattering at the pointy (very...very pointy) end of the knife.

Most *healthy* men/women could be winning / finishing very close to the podium of very big events if they were truly dedicated to it.

After you've done years of consistent training and put in "full time" (30+ hour) weeks of training... then I'm willing to listen to someones opinion of genetic limiters.
2013-09-06 6:36 AM
in reply to: 0

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.

Edited by Fred D 2013-09-06 6:37 AM
2013-09-06 6:38 AM
in reply to: Left Brain


631
50010025
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Originally posted by Left Brain

.

Really fast running is genetic.  Fast running, not as much.  Like you stated in your summary of the article, everyone has the capacity to get faster....and some can get fast.  Only a select few can get really fast (15:00 5k and below).....it takes genetics, period.

A someone stated above.....you can KQ without the really good genetics, but it takes a lot of work.



To add to this you can get fast running with proper coaching and training. I think a perfect example of this is the Caldwell cross country team in the mid 80's to the early 90's. Caldwell is a mining town in the Apalachian foothills of Ohio. It was a town of less than 2000 people and a school of less than 200 students. Statistically they should not of dominated for 10 years if it was all genetics. I think only Carna went D1 (U of M) so I think a lot of their success came down to coaching, training and working hard.

This article focuses on their 86 season. But you get the idea.

http://usa.milesplit.com/articles/26334#.Uim6nMURCXs

My high school did not have a CC team but I ran the 1600 and 3200 against them in '86 and '87.

2013-09-06 8:32 AM
in reply to: Leegoocrap

Member
1748
100050010010025
Exton, PA
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Originally posted by Leegoocrap

Genetics start mattering at the pointy (very...very pointy) end of the knife.

Most *healthy* men/women could be winning / finishing very close to the podium of very big events if they were truly dedicated to it.

After you've done years of consistent training and put in "full time" (30+ hour) weeks of training... then I'm willing to listen to someones opinion of genetic limiters.


Like I said genetics will not stop you from qualifying for Kona, but it could stop you from winning Kona.

Most people are using genetic as a way of rationalizing their poor performance. If you are dedicated and train properly you can qualify for Kona.
2013-09-06 8:36 AM
in reply to: 0

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??

Originally posted by Leegoocrap Genetics start mattering at the pointy (very...very pointy) end of the knife. Most *healthy* men/women could be winning / finishing very close to the podium of very big events if they were truly dedicated to it. After you've done years of consistent training and put in "full time" (30+ hour) weeks of training... then I'm willing to listen to someones opinion of genetic limiters.

I think your first point is a good one....which is why I said "very fast" running is genetic, fast running can be accomplished.  On your other point, you can't rule out genetics when talking about training 30+ hour weeks.....there is a reason the overwhelming majority of people can't handle that kind of load....and it also has a lot to do with genetics.  Any time you get to those very far ends you have to look further than just "hard work". 

I spent about 10 years training and running retriever dogs in field trials.  I went into it with the idea that almost any "retriever" breed dog could be trained to a very high level....one in which they could compete with other similar breeds on a National level.  I was wrong.  We coveted certain bloodlines because in those litters of puppies were champions.  They had a drive and a set of genetically coded traits that could not be taught....and they were consistent winners.  Of course training played a role.....but I watched some very marginally competent trainers (of which I was one) take those genetically gifted dogs to a very high level.  It was like the difference between driving a Ferrari and a Shelby Mustang.

I am now involved with fast kids running and triathlon.  The fastest kids all laced up their keds in grade school and ran sub 6 minute miles....no training, no practice, nothing.....just run a mile in gym class.  By middle school nearly all of the kids were sub 5 minute...again, very minimal training or coaching.  Now, with coaching and training we are watching them as 15 and 16 year olds....sub 16 5K's and sub 4:30 miles....and dropping.

I understand the idea that saying genetics is a limiter knocks some people out of the gate needlessly..... because they may have other traits, especially in triathlon and other endurance events, that can compensate for the sheer lack of genetically built in speed.  That argument is certain and valid.....but you still can't count out genetics in those other traits....durability can also the be the result of genetics. 

 Can someone become a really good triathlete with great coaching and determined work even if they lack those "pointy end" speed genetics? Absolutely.  Can they become a VERY fast triathlete without the genes......probably not.  The same way you aren't going to go sub 15:00 in a 5K without them. The same way you can't build a Ferrari out of Mustang parts.



Edited by Left Brain 2013-09-06 8:42 AM


2013-09-06 8:39 AM
in reply to: mike761

Champion
7595
50002000500252525
Columbia, South Carolina
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??

Originally posted by mike761
Originally posted by Leegoocrap Genetics start mattering at the pointy (very...very pointy) end of the knife. Most *healthy* men/women could be winning / finishing very close to the podium of very big events if they were truly dedicated to it. After you've done years of consistent training and put in "full time" (30+ hour) weeks of training... then I'm willing to listen to someones opinion of genetic limiters.
Like I said genetics will not stop you from qualifying for Kona, but it could stop you from winning Kona. Most people are using genetic as a way of rationalizing their poor performance. If you are dedicated and train properly you can qualify for Kona.

I use poor training as a way of rationalizing my poor performance.

2013-09-06 8:43 AM
in reply to: mike761

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??

Originally posted by mike761
Originally posted by Leegoocrap Genetics start mattering at the pointy (very...very pointy) end of the knife. Most *healthy* men/women could be winning / finishing very close to the podium of very big events if they were truly dedicated to it. After you've done years of consistent training and put in "full time" (30+ hour) weeks of training... then I'm willing to listen to someones opinion of genetic limiters.
Like I said genetics will not stop you from qualifying for Kona, but it could stop you from winning Kona. Most people are using genetic as a way of rationalizing their poor performance. If you are dedicated and train properly you can qualify for Kona.

Truth ^

2013-09-06 9:00 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Can't think of the BTer who KQ'd a few years ago but he posted one time that he knew genetically he was 'born on third base'. Using that metaphor, I figure I was born in the parking lot outside the locker room.

I think most healthy people could, if they worked hard enough, probably KQ. The diffence in the genetically gifted and the rest of the herd is that the rest of the herd has to work harder, train harder/smarter/longer for the same results as the guy that was born on 3rd base.

I don't think genetics is as big a factor in triathloning as in other sports. Very few people in the world were born with the ability to hit a major leage fast ball....no matter how much they practice they simply were not born with the right muscle-nerve-eye-brain connectitivity.
2013-09-06 10:40 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

Champion
7136
5000200010025
Knoxville area
Subject: RE: Genetics determined??
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Leegoocrap Genetics start mattering at the pointy (very...very pointy) end of the knife. Most *healthy* men/women could be winning / finishing very close to the podium of very big events if they were truly dedicated to it. After you've done years of consistent training and put in "full time" (30+ hour) weeks of training... then I'm willing to listen to someones opinion of genetic limiters.

I think your first point is a good one....which is why I said "very fast" running is genetic, fast running can be accomplished.  On your other point, you can't rule out genetics when talking about training 30+ hour weeks.....there is a reason the overwhelming majority of people can't handle that kind of load....and it also has a lot to do with genetics. 



I'm not disagreeing with you on most everything, but the reason most (again, reasonably healthy to start with) people can't handle a 30hr/wk load is not genetics.

I'm also not sure I believe that drive/determination (in humans) is Nature and not Nurture.
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Genetics determined?? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 2