Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sprinting About the Fast Twitch?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Speedfirst
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by Speedfirst
    I agree on the non invasve, heck you can even use a method in the weight room to determine it to a certain degree, doing 1 rep max.
    Originally posted by rasb
    It is easily possible to attain a "relative" ranking of fast twitch/slow twitch kids, ....... We did this over 30 years ago, and compared to actual muscle biopsy results (quad. sample), and there were no surprises.
    I might add that I'm not surprised that a few simple tests can give a close (and certainly near enough) estimate of the ratio.

    Rasp and speedfirst, do you still have the equations that you plug your data into to get the estimate?
    Daisy I don't, I can check with some colleagues of mine.

    Leave a comment:


  • rasb
    replied
    Originally posted by Pego
    Originally posted by rasb
    Dr. Doug Clement and Jack Taunton did a study in the mid 1970's that involved middle-distance runners and muscle biopsies and fibre-typing.
    This is really interesting, since muscle fiber histochemistry was still in its infancy.
    Yes, both Doug and Jack were fine runners themselves, and both doing a lot of "sports medicine" type or work, in addition to their GP status. Doug did a lot of elite coaching as well in the 1980's, including Lynn and Paul Williams, Graeme Fell, Simon Hoogewerf, and many others, with the Kajaks in Richmond, B.C. Doug and Jack co-founded the UBC Sports Medicine facility, which was/is excellent...
    The study quoted above would have been conducted in 1976 +/- a year.
    They also did an interesting study to do with iron intake and blood levels, at about the same time...

    Leave a comment:


  • Pego
    replied
    Originally posted by rasb
    Dr. Doug Clement and Jack Taunton did a study in the mid 1970's that involved middle-distance runners and muscle biopsies and fibre-typing.
    This is really interesting, since muscle fiber histochemistry was still in its infancy.

    Leave a comment:


  • rasb
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by Speedfirst
    I agree on the non invasve, heck you can even use a method in the weight room to determine it to a certain degree, doing 1 rep max.
    Originally posted by rasb
    It is easily possible to attain a "relative" ranking of fast twitch/slow twitch kids, ....... We did this over 30 years ago, and compared to actual muscle biopsy results (quad. sample), and there were no surprises.
    I might add that I'm not surprised that a few simple tests can give a close (and certainly near enough) estimate of the ratio.

    Rasp and speedfirst, do you still have the equations that you plug your data into to get the estimate?
    I certainly don't have any equations/data. My observations were always from an experiential/observational perspective, more so than from a "hard "data/scientific reality.
    I was fortunate enough to have both of the following situations intersect, from which I arrived at conclusions, or at least, strong leanings:
    a) I was coaching at a High School, and we were able to convince the Phys.Ed. staff to do a series of tests (as indicated in a previous post), about 3-4 times a year. From this ongoing testing of about 300 students, we had ready access to performances in a range of tests, which could generally be ranked from most explosive to most enduring. Of course, an overlay of technique, motivation, etc., was required to assess relatively accurately what was happening with each invidividual. These were based on the Canada Fitness Program or Canada Fitness Awards, which can still be found somewhere on the Net, I am sure.... Our focus, however, was not about achieving gold/silver/bronze, etc., but about self-improvement over a several year period, and it worked very well. As a cross-country coach, I managed to select several runners who were very tough mentally, even though they weren't that fit initially....(i.e., they would run until they dropped in a P.E. class setting), and 14 months later, we won the Provincial H.S. Cross Country Championships with a group that were not runners a year earlier...
    b) Dr. Doug Clement and Jack Taunton did a study in the mid 1970's that involved middle-distance runners and muscle biopsies and fibre-typing. I am sure that study is up there somethere for those "docs." among us. Several of the athletes that I was coaching at the time were part of that study, and results confirmed what I/we thought of their capacities, based on muscle fibre types...

    Leave a comment:


  • cladthin
    replied
    As mentioned above, biopsies can't really tell you everything you need to know about performances. Also from earlier in the thread, it's better to look simply at performances on certain tests to see what current ability and long-term potential an athlete might have.

    I think it was Hasely Crawford who was reported to possess a ratio that indicated that he would be best suited for the middle distances.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Speedfirst
    I agree on the non invasve, heck you can even use a method in the weight room to determine it to a certain degree, doing 1 rep max.
    Originally posted by rasb
    It is easily possible to attain a "relative" ranking of fast twitch/slow twitch kids, ....... We did this over 30 years ago, and compared to actual muscle biopsy results (quad. sample), and there were no surprises.
    I might add that I'm not surprised that a few simple tests can give a close (and certainly near enough) estimate of the ratio.

    Rasp and speedfirst, do you still have the equations that you plug your data into to get the estimate?

    Leave a comment:


  • Pego
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Lonewolf, here is a page describing a non-invasive method.

    http://tensiomyography-uk.com/3.html
    Just some comments. It seems that they use an EMG needle which would make it not quite so non-invasive. They definitely cannot use a surface electrode, those are pretty useless. While you can gain some insight from this tensiomyography, I suppose you need to test so many sites to make it quite invasive.

    As far as the muscle biopsy that Speedfirst mentioned is concerned, histochemical stains are quite useful, but to start cutting active athletes' muscles (multiple sites, I might add) might be slightly unethical :wink: .

    Leave a comment:


  • kuha
    replied
    Originally posted by lonewolf
    I think all my twitches are slow these days
    A motto for those of a certain age:

    BETTER SLOW TWITCH THAN NO TWITCH!

    Leave a comment:


  • lonewolf
    replied
    At age 77, my physical abilities are somewhat diminished from my prime.
    Is there a link to a chart of formula where you can plug in performance history and get a meaningful ratio?
    Heck, I may have wasted my athletic career on the wrong events.

    Leave a comment:


  • rasb
    replied
    It is easily possible to attain a "relative" ranking of fast twitch/slow twitch kids, without any invasive biopsies. Run a battery of test efforts that include standing long jump, standing vertical leap (sargeant jump), short sprint from a stand, shuttle run, and then add in some endurance tests - e.g. 800 metre run, and a 12 minute run... You will quickly figure out ( with a surprisingly high degree of accuracy) where you are on the continuum. Of course, most middle distance athletes are somewhere between 70/30 or 30/70, so you need to be aware of that. We did this over 30 years ago, and compared to actual muscle biopsy results (quad. sample), and there were no surprises.

    Leave a comment:


  • lonewolf
    replied
    Thanks, Daisy. But, I don't have one of those machines and still don't know, not that it matters, if I am/was FT or ST.
    Of course, I think all my twitches are slow these days

    Leave a comment:


  • Speedfirst
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by Speedfirst
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Lonewolf, here is a page describing a non-invasive method.

    http://tensiomyography-uk.com/3.html
    Daisy and you also have the invasive procedure, a muscle biopsy test.
    Yes, although I thought this non invasive might be more practical.

    And now you can even get your genome sequenced.
    LOL...

    I agree on the non invasve, heck you can even use a method in the weight room to determine it to a certain degree, doing 1 rep max.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kevin Richardson
    replied
    I agree that the ratio of fibers is the key component of speed. A trained nervous system to fire them is another important, but lesser component. In addition to the general training argument, the amount of muscle you have also plays into it.

    My personal example is that I had a long, lackluster career, which ended with a rebuilt knee and drop foot (neither of which I recommend). During rehab/therapy, they gave me one of those tests to determine leg strength ratio, etc. What surprised the therapist, and to be honest surprised me as well, ws that I did remarkably well on the reaction speed, but not so well on the power generation. In short, I have fast muscles, but just not enough of them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Speedfirst
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Lonewolf, here is a page describing a non-invasive method.

    http://tensiomyography-uk.com/3.html
    Daisy and you also have the invasive procedure, a muscle biopsy test.
    Yes, although I thought this non invasive might be more practical.

    And now you can even get your genome sequenced.

    Leave a comment:


  • Speedfirst
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Lonewolf, here is a page describing a non-invasive method.

    http://tensiomyography-uk.com/3.html
    Daisy and you also have the invasive procedure, a muscle biopsy test.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X