Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Rabbit

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HigherEd
    replied
    taking this in a different direction

    This is about pacesetters, but slightly off the direction of the present conversation. The NCAA has been reviewing the policy on pacesetters for a while, seeing if some remedy needs to take place. If I can capture the essence of the debate, it goes something like this. We know that there are a finite number of qualifying spots to the NCAA Championships, so unlike staged races, there is another goal in mind. And given that there are a finite number of qualifying spots, and these spots are highly desirable, coaches will look for any advantage to propel their athletes to gain one. On the one side of the debate are those that say, the competition itself is the primary focus, and qualifying performances should come as a byproduct of great races, where everyone has to focus on tactics, and strategy, etc. The other side of the debate is on artificially inserting someone into a race to turn that competition into no more than a time trial, therefore negating the tactics, strategy, etc. While nothing has been decided it is an interesting debate for collegiate track & field. Any thoughts would be welcome on this topic.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Yes, but we're talking about a perceived link: Rabbits need to go because they are 'connected' to PEDs.
    True, i agree they have a coincidental not causal relationship. The author wrote:
    Originally posted by The article quoted at the beginning of this thread
    Any measures which promote genuine contests instead of paced world records are to be applauded.
    I agree with that and I agree with marlow that it wouldn't change the drug issue one iota, but did the original author imply that it would? Hard to say since the drug thing seemed more like a throw away observation.

    Actually, more emphasis on racing might make track more popular and thus the incentives to win (appearance fees, sponsorship and prices) become higher. So this might make the incentives to take PED's high not less.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Isn't this getting off topic?
    Yes

    Originally posted by Daisy
    You would agree that the cult of faster includes both rabbiting and PED's?
    Yes, but we're talking about a perceived link: Rabbits need to go because they are 'connected' to PEDs.

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    I appreciate your last comment, and have actually trained faster than I could race.

    However, you have concluded that it would not being a great way to train, whereas the author is speaking specifically about rabbits - the kinds athletes follow in races.

    Most non-doped athletes, the majority who are not part of that sub-culture (which has mistakenly been named a culture) mentioned, aren't using races to follow rabbits to gain strength, and, ultimately to use that strength in other rabbitted races to run faster (chase world records). How many times in the past year alone have folks on this very board lamented how rabbits ran too far of the actual competition - or how the competitors let the rabbits simply run on? The pursuit of the world-record isn't being made by those who need to gain strength following rabbits, though (following a rabbit and) running at a rate faster than you have previously should be something the body eventually gets used to.

    Those who are pursuing the rabbits already have the strength.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by EPelle
    they are not getting stronger by chasing rabbits.
    I get what you're saying but bio-mechanical theory actually does say that running at paces above your comfort level makes you 'stronger', in the broad sense of running strength. If you want to break 4 minutes, going out at 4-min pace, even if you die in the last quarter, will benefit you (but not your competitive placing). The body tries to adapt to this new stress by making it 'easier' to maintain the demanded pace. This is, of course, not a great way to regularly train, but there are athletes who have successfully followed this course.
    Isn't this getting off topic? I thought the guy was talking about races not training.

    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Half Miler
    "A constant thirst for world records contributed to the cult of pacemakers. The downside has been the drugs culture."
    Taking those two statements out of the larger context does not diminish his attempt to throw those cute little furry bunnies under the PEDs Bus. Rabbits are the topic of the article. Bringing up PEDs in this context is a clear attempt to smear them with the PEDs issue.
    Is he not just writing in a big picture way? You would agree that the cult of faster includes both rabbiting and PED's?

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by EPelle
    they are not getting stronger by chasing rabbits.
    I get what you're saying but bio-mechanical theory actually does say that running at paces above your comfort level makes you 'stronger', in the broad sense of running strength. If you want to break 4 minutes, going out at 4-min pace, even if you die in the last quarter, will benefit you (but not your competitive placing). The body tries to adapt to this new stress by making it 'easier' to maintain the demanded pace. This is, of course, not a great way to regularly train, but there are athletes who have successfully followed this course.

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    Marlow, how can he attribute drugs+rabbits to becoming stronger as this sentence is supposedly suggesting?

    The downside has been the drugs culture which has blighted the sport in the endless quest to become faster and stronger

    Follow rabbit to run faster. Ok. Follow rabbit to become stronger? No. Chasing world records - the pursuit - is what appears to be the target here. A very few athletes are turning to drugs (since the majority aren't part of this, these people must really be a sub-culture), and their quest to become faster and stronger by method of drugs-use is blighting the sport. Again, they are not getting stronger by chasing rabbits.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Miler
    "A constant thirst for world records contributed to the cult of pacemakers. The downside has been the drugs culture."
    Taking those two statements out of the larger context does not diminish his attempt to throw those cute little furry bunnies under the PEDs Bus. Rabbits are the topic of the article. Bringing up PEDs in this context is a clear attempt to smear them with the PEDs issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Miler
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    I would have to characterize that as a willful misreading of my post.
    While you're probably right about the thingy between you and gh, in this case the misreading (of the article) is your own.

    Seriously...Mehaffey is saying the downside of world record chasing has been drugs, NOT the downside of having rabbits.

    "A constant thirst for world records contributed to the cult of pacemakers. The downside has been the drugs culture."


    :roll:

    Leave a comment:


  • AthleticsInBritain
    replied
    What's most interesting about a journalist is not what he publishes, but what he doesn't publish due to lack of proof or legal action (actual or possible risk of).

    Without wanting to sound like MattMarriott, I'm quite sure there's plenty of shenanigans that go on at the top level (athletes as well) that don't reach the ears of your average track fan, coach or official but a journalist knows about and doesn't report. There are some journos I would dearly love to slip some sodium pentathol. Or in the absence of that, get them blind drunk on whisky! :lol:

    Mehaffey may well know more than you think! Although he may not be an expert on just how perfectly Ms Dragila drifts over the bar ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    But this isn't about me. This is about trashing a whole profession as if it's nothing. Would you dream of walking into Marlow's classroom and telling the class that everything he said doesn't really mean anything; you walked in off the street and you can do his job as well as he?"
    In rhetorical terms, I would have to characterize that as a willful misreading of my post. Also . . . I actually do teach my students to challenge everything I say.

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    It pains me to say so, but I agree with Marlow. There is no link between PED use and rabbited races - that is a ludicrous assertion.
    I am not seeing that. Please help me identify that assertion in the following sentence structure:

    A constant thirst for world records contributed to the cult of pacemakers. The downside has been the drugs culture which has blighted the sport in the endless quest to become faster and stronger.
    • Constant thirst = setting world records. [/*:m:23df1k3n]
    • Effect (of having that constant thirst) = "cult" of pacemakers. The pacemakers arrived on scene due solely to the constant thirst of setting world-records, according to the author. [/*:m:23df1k3n]
    • Downside (of that constant thirst, which is tied to setting world records - some of which are aided by rabbits) = drugs culture.[/*:m:23df1k3n]

    Endless quest to become faster could be tied to pace-making, but following rabbits doesn't make you stronger. I don't believe the author is attempting to tie in pace-making and performance-enhancing drugs. To me (and, perhaps I alone), he is solidifying a point he made earlier, namely that rabbits are not encouraged to run, but using them is not disallowed. This started off with discussion he had about the London Marathon in particular, and how neither Boston nor New York allow pace-makers. In context, Wanjiru stated that he would have had the pace-makers drop off at 35km into the 42,2km race. The author sounds a bit nostalgic in hoping that pace-making would exit stage left and real racing would commence.

    There is one single mention of PED's.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Like Charles Barkley, I'm not here as your role model.

    But this isn't about me. This is about trashing a whole profession as if it's nothing. Would you dream of walking into Marlow's classroom and telling the class that everything he said doesn't really mean anything; you walked in off the street and you can do his job as well as he?"

    Leave a comment:


  • donley2
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Stop being a pompous ass.
    Perfect example of how to act/post ??

    Leave a comment:


  • TrackDaddy
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    It pains me to say so, but I agree with Marlow. There is no link between PED use and rabbited races - that is a ludicrous assertion.
    :?

    :lol:

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X