There are, in my estimation, about eight to ten elite-level triathlon coaches here in the United States. This ain't many, given the number of triathletes (elite or otherwise). I've asked other coaches and athletes as much, and they each reckon a comparable figure. For what it's worth, I consider an elite-level coach as one who coaches elite-level athletes to perform (and win) at the highest levels of triathlon. I do not necessarily consider myself one, although I've helped guide a few such athletes over the years. Coaching, to me, is more about working closely with an athlete, regardless of level, than it is simply producing victors (or, as most multisport coaches seem to think, building a bu$ine$$). A coach's ego should be inferior to the athlete's performance, even if the two go hand in hand.
Interestingly, as coaches, we are in many ways in the business of putting ourselves out of business---a sort of planned pursuit of obsolescence. At the very least we should endeavor to minimize the contribution needed to assure our athletes' performance. The better we perform our responsibilities, the more likely the athlete can move forward without us. We should strive to prepare the athlete to handle the demands and pressures of competition on their own. The best of the elites eventually figure this out: that they can continue to figure things out for themselves.
Two heads may be better than one (and are certainly better than none), but once two heads have meshed into one (not a pretty sight, I realize), that single unit is---or should be---able to proceed without interruption. Nevertheless, I think it wise that all athletes seek to find a (valued) second opinion when possible. Further opinions may even be prudent, but a point should be reached where the athlete's judgment and knowledge must override all others, or the athlete may never accomplish what he or she is truly capable of.
Interestingly, as coaches, we are in many ways in the business of putting ourselves out of business---a sort of planned pursuit of obsolescence. At the very least we should endeavor to minimize the contribution needed to assure our athletes' performance. The better we perform our responsibilities, the more likely the athlete can move forward without us. We should strive to prepare the athlete to handle the demands and pressures of competition on their own. The best of the elites eventually figure this out: that they can continue to figure things out for themselves.
Two heads may be better than one (and are certainly better than none), but once two heads have meshed into one (not a pretty sight, I realize), that single unit is---or should be---able to proceed without interruption. Nevertheless, I think it wise that all athletes seek to find a (valued) second opinion when possible. Further opinions may even be prudent, but a point should be reached where the athlete's judgment and knowledge must override all others, or the athlete may never accomplish what he or she is truly capable of.
