Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mexico times revisited

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    OK, you have lumped alot of stuff into one post
    no

    What should be obvious to anyone with any background in sports medicine is that:

    1) Testosterone levels drop off after 19-20ish.. and by 28 are nothing near that of the late teens early 20s ..... look it up. Your assertion above is false.
    nonsense

    they drop of significantly in their 30's

    you are making the naive mistake of assuming that a current testo level = current sprinting ability

    you are forgetting the cumulative effect of years of a near-max testo level from teenage years years to late-20s has allowed years of accumulated muscle building

    testo is just a hormone - it is NOT the determining factor in how fast they run - the determining factor for all intents is how much muscle they have acquired over the years due to the sustained testo levels

    2) Sprinters dont age well, training at a high level can not be accomplished without serious risk of injury. Notice that the two older dash medalists Wells (27-28) and Ewell(30) both did not compete in the dashes for a significant portion of their peak years. look at the ages of the gold medalists in 36, 48, 52,56, 60,64,68... Morrow tried to carry through to 60 and couldnt while the late starting Sime does.
    you seem to ignore the fact that for most of wells career he was a mediocre lj'er - if he'd been full-time sprinter at early 20's, then it's likely he wouda run 10.11 earlier

    you are also digging up ancient sprinters who once again competed in probably 1 games soon after college before having to find a job

    3) The age of the 30-something dasher begins in earnest in the 90s and we all know that performance enhancing disciplines that can overcome 1) and 2) above were in full blossom starting in that decade.
    you obviously cannot read

    i said sprinters carrying onto a 2nd games, meaning about 26 - 27y

    to end this nonsense, find 1 poster who believes an uninjured sprinter is going to be quicker at 22y than at 26 - 27y

    Comment


    • #32
      That is fine, I still contend that a dasher that has been training since HS at a high level (e.g. Jim Hines) through to 22 and continues to train at that level until 26 will on average lose something. I think history agrees with that. This is strictly at 100m , at 200m less so and at 400m much less so.

      Please review the average testosterone levels for a male as a function of age. I repeat , they decrease from 20 or before .

      I can easily imagine a 26 year old doing quite well after a full career of dashing, but on average Ill take the sub 25 year old every time.Obviously performance is not a sole function of test level but it is a dominant factor and while 26 is not impossible, I doubt a 30+ year old, all other things being equal, has much of a chance against a pack of 21-25 year olds.

      aside: why waste bandwidth with comments like "you obviously cant read"

      Injuries are part of the game, fiat factoring them out is not.
      ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

      Comment


      • #33
        http://men.webmd.com/testosterone-15738

        The level of testosterone is the highest around age 40, then gradually becomes less in older men

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by eldrick
          http://men.webmd.com/testosterone-15738

          The level of testosterone is the highest around age 40, then gradually becomes less in older men

          That is total fiction. WebMd needs an MD that knows something. Ill find the right references and get back.
          ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Mexico times revisited

            Originally posted by eldrick
            for keino & 3'34.9, use jrm's 400 calc & scale up the average 400m time -> 3'36.75 basic

            using 84% aerobic ->

            1 + ( (98/94) - 1 )* 84/100 ) for aerobic = 1.0357

            -> 3'34.9/1.0281 = 3'29.3 !

            ( indicating ryun ran about a 3'32.3 behind )

            obviously needs lot more work, but those mexico performances were truly superhuman & altitude doesn't detract them
            We've been around & around on this one over the years, and I've completely come around to gh's view that some athletes--e.g., Kip Keino--were essentially unaffected by the MC altitude. While it's safe to say that the lower-density air + altitude was a "wash" for low-landers at 800m, it was very likely a "wash" for Keino at 1500m. It may not make "sense" according to human averages, but in this case we're not talking about averages--we're talking about a single case. I'm of the opinion that Keino's 3:34.9 at altitude may have been "really worth" about 3:34.5 at sea level. That's "it." He had a proven (and unusual) ability to run fast at varying degrees of altitude. Conversely, no sea level performance would remotely suggest that he was anything like a 3:30 talent--or, for that matter, any more than a 3:34 talent (which, as we know, was pretty great at the time).

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by paulthefan
              Originally posted by eldrick
              http://men.webmd.com/testosterone-15738

              The level of testosterone is the highest around age 40, then gradually becomes less in older men

              That is total fiction. WebMd needs an MD that knows something. Ill find the right references and get back.
              Errr... you know Eldrick himself is an MD, right?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by gh
                Originally posted by paulthefan
                Originally posted by eldrick
                http://men.webmd.com/testosterone-15738

                The level of testosterone is the highest around age 40, then gradually becomes less in older men

                That is total fiction. WebMd needs an MD that knows something. Ill find the right references and get back.
                Errr... you know Eldrick himself is an MD, right?
                no i didnt, when I have time Ill find the reputable references. I dont trust webMd.
                ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Here are a few sites with references.

                  In short testosterone levels drop off from a man's 18-20 yr age levels pretty quickly such that by 40 you are operating at much much lower levels:

                  http://www.endotext.org/male/male11/male11.htm

                  here is another:

                  http://www.vrp.com/articles.aspx?ProdID=art469&zTYPE=2

                  with what could be called a "seminal" (well almost reference being:

                  6. Ottinger, Mary Ann. Male reproduction: Testosterone, gonadotropins, and aging, in: Mobbs, C.V., and Hof, P.R. (eds). Functional Endocrinology of Aging. Interdiscipl Top Gerontol, Basel, Karger, 1998, Vol. 29, 105-126.

                  Of course every man that can remember what his life was "like" at 18 years of age knows this. There are a few other better references out there but I could not find/recover them.




                  Now back to some other brilliant works:
                  Originally posted by eldy
                  mennea's time converts to mid-19.7 with above, but considering the reports that he shouda been dq'ed for running large parts of the curve in the inner lane, that probably indicates an effort in high-19.8/low-19.9s if he'd run it legit, not inconsistent with what may have been a career best performance ( he only won og in 20.21 )
                  Originally posted by thefan
                  When is the Mennea WR cheat myth going to die!.. He did NOT run inside his lane... these stories are pure fiction. Where do you get this stuff and why does it continue unchecked. His 1980 win was in 20.19 by the way. Videos of all these are everywhere, you expose some bias.
                  Originally posted by eldrick
                  the youtube video doesn't show his bend clearly enough to judge - i'm going with contemporary reports
                  What contemporary reports? As one watches the video, it is as obvious as the nose on your face that over a large part of the curve he is not even near the inside line... please site your sources and where they were positioned/ standing during the race else your comments are useless on this subject.

                  hmm...visual/video record/evidence of the curve is not good enough, eldrick needs to find someone who heard something from someone who believed something about a race that was not the race in question. Simply priceless.

                  To repeat, Mennea was a great 200m man, he has a '72olybronze, '76oly4thpace(lane1), '80olygold, '84oly7thplace.. longevity, dominance, championships even without the WR he was the most impressive 130lb sprinter since Patton or Ewell. besides his WR was a WR by the standards of the day. It is our job to adjust and calibrate those results relative to previous and later results. Mennea was not the most impressive WR holder in history but he was a WR holder. His greatest performance was his '80olympic gold, he came off the curve and at 120m he is in something like 7th place.
                  ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by eldrick
                    -simple thought experiment : get a 10.00 guy to run a 100m in a 100% nitogen atmosphere with no O2 ( have him breathe a normal 78% N2/21% O2 mixture at atmospheric pressure thru a cylinder just before the gun goes off ) - if he runs 10.00 then there is no aerobic component, but if he runs anything slower, there is aerobic component

                    - i'd have to say generally the '68 guys were the best, followed by '64 ones & lastly the '72 ones - not all games have same calibre of elite
                    Other bodily functions: Brain function, thoracic organs etc, may be much more than 50% aerobic regardless of where you are. It is very easy to see that the total body aerobic output could be above 20% during a 100m sprint. It is not obvious that making changes to the flow of o2 will have any impact on the dashing itself which is conducted by the muscular/skeletal system operating as a near 100% anaerobic system.

                    at 100m and in particular the gold medal: I would rate the 64 as far superior to the 68 and the 72 as equal or just below the 68. The rating of 64 is a no brainer (i.e. it requires little oxygen) . The relative value of 68 and 72 is worth more fleshing out.
                    ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      You do know that Carl Lewis and Linford Christie ran their fastest in their 30s, right?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        I agree with paulthefan.

                        We all know how the aforementioned sprinters, and others in recent times, continued successfully into their 30s.

                        The best age for sprinters is 20 - 25. There have been some exceptions (e.g. Allan Wells), but only if they started later. The body can only take so much punishment, so if you are already a top sprinter at, say, 22, you are most unlikely to be still a top sprinter at 30+, without some form of artificial assistance.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Rob
                          The best age for sprinters is 20 - 25.
                          It's a untenable theory when so many exceptions exist. The 'fact' is that's it's different for everyone. Some athletes blaze early and short. Some develop steadily and are in their prime in their 30s. Some excel early and hold it through their 30s.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Ok, let me express it slightly differently:

                            If someone is already a world-class 100m sprinter in their early - mid 20's, but then goes on to set personal best times well into their 30s, there can be only one reason behind such an improvement.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Marlow
                              You do know that Carl Lewis and Linford Christie ran their fastest in their 30s, right?
                              you do know that I already addressed this issue, right?
                              ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Besides, Lewis is not a good example. He ran his 9.86 when he was exactly 30 but that was on the ultra fast Tokyo track. He was not Top ranked in the 100 after he was 27.
                                It is simply incorrect to indicate that Carl peaked in his 30's.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X