Colin Jackson Programme on BBC

thirtyfoot

What did people think? I thought it was great and showed a great insight into being a top athlete. The mental side was interesting in that it showed coming back from disappointments is a true sign of a champion. After his Barcelona disaster he bounced back with a WR even though he must have had the heart ripped out of him with dissappointment in '92. Point to note for all coaches I'd say, as many kids give up when they start losing races and comps that they normally had easily won.

Pherekydes

I loved it and so did the wife and she's not really into sports at all. It fairly got under his skin, didn't it? I wasn't surprised at the results of some of the tests, like his ability to concentrate (better) under extreme stress, his mental ability to bounce back, and the muscle biopsy results. Also interesting was the fact that the sprinter's gene is a lot more prevalent in European (Celtic?) populations than was first thought.

Hession, you've no excuse.

robinph

Missed this programme, but seem to remember them doing a DNA test on him previously for the Who Do You Think You Are? series. They figured he was only about 50% African and then various other parts American Indian and some other Caribbean tribes I think it was.

Racing Flat

1. Genetics
2. Muscle composition
3. Psychology
4. Environment
5. Training
6. Diet
7. Month of birth


In summary for those who didn't see it....


In order to be world class, Jackson had favourable:

Genetics - A sprint/power gene has been identified, 98% of Jamaicans have it, 80% of Europeans do. CJ has it.

Muscle composition - average person has 50% fast muscle fibres, 50% slow. CJ has 75% fast and 25% slow. Some people have some 'super'fast' fibres. The most the testers had ever recorded in an athlete was 2%. CJ had 25% (I presume that's 25% of the fast twitch fibres rather than the whole lot, but not sure...)

Psychology - Ability to think positively (when inflicted with pain and disturbing images, most people have increased blood flow to the areas of the brain governing negative emotions, CJ had blood flow to the positive emotion brain regions which was off the charts. The scientists said this was a sign of his ability to 'be positive' and hence bounce back from defeat (as opposed to being a sadist!!!))
- Ability to stay calm under pressure - he could still think clearly enough to work out numerical sequences, even when under high pressure (ie just prior to a sky-dive), much more than the average person

Environment - positive environment growing up, encouraging of his pursuit of athletics ie parents and coach
- facilities
- competition; he wasn't the best underage athlete

Added to this, an appropriate training regime (I presume, although they didn't go into this ) and a diet of 550-1,000kcals a day :eek: (which again, unfortunately the scientists didn't go into, only his mother mentioned her disapproval/concern at the time. The diet was IIRC yogurt and coffee for breakfast, jellies and almonds and coffee at lunchtime and prawns with green leaf salad and coffee for dinner (no dressing), not sure if I missed anything...)

Being born in the winter months (or at the time of year that you will be towards the older end of the age range for your competetive age group as an underage athlete) apparently also confers an advantage, but I can't remember when they said he was born.

cfitz

Racing Flat wrote: »

Being born in the winter months (or at the time of year that you will be towards the older end of the age range for your competetive age group as an underage athlete) apparently also confers an advantage, but I can't remember when they said he was born.

I'm surprised by that! I would have thought that the top tier of athletes in any age-group would be so small that this would be unlikely to significantly increase your chances of making it to the international senior ranks.

Pherekydes

Good summation, RF. He was born in February. His diet was fairly insane alright. I don't think he's on 1000cals a day now.

Racing Flat

Pherekydes wrote: »

I don't think he's on 1000cals a day now.

I don't know about that - he still looks fairly lean all the same... Let's just say I won't be challenging him to a hurdles race for money anytime soon.

I know somebody whose husband beat him at ?junior category. He went on to become a world class couch potato, but it's still his claim to fame.

There was also a rumour that before one race, when he was young, he had a slight niggle, so went to the physiotherapist at the meet. She did some ultrasound treatment and he ran a PB. The rumour goes that from then on he insisted on having ultrasound before every race for a while after that, even when he wasn't injured. Whether this is true or not I don't know. If so, maybe superstition/placebo needs to be added to the list:p.

thirtyfoot

Racing Flat wrote: »

I know somebody whose husband beat him at ?junior category. He went on to become a world class couch potato, but it's still his claim to fame.

I raced* him twice. I got close to him once in one of the races but it was only in the set position as we were drawn next to each other. I was still in the blocks when he was negotiating the first hurdle (slight exageration). The man could move.

* I'll qualify raced by saying I was in the same race, similar to a joe marathoner being beside Geb at the start of a marathon

Racing Flat

cfitz wrote: »

I'm surprised by that! I would have thought that the top tier of athletes in any age-group would be so small that this would be unlikely to significantly increase your chances of making it to the international senior ranks.

They seemed to have statistics to back this up. Something along the lines of if 1/12th of the population is born every month, then roughly 8% will be born in January. If date cut-off for underage competition is Jan 1st, then the 8% born in January will tend to be bigger and more developed than those born in the other months. Therefore, they may be more likely to do well in competitions against those born in the other months and so receive more 'positive reinforcement', which in terms of behavioural psychology (not to mention the thoughts/dreams of fame/financial reward that they as well as their parents might have) may lead to them being more likely to continue through the age groups to senior. So if there are proportionately more 'born in January' athletes competing at senior ranks compared to born in other months groups, well then more winners are likely to come from the 'born in January' group of Senior athletes. Doing a straw poll of month of birth of international athletes may not reveal this as every country may have different cut-off dates for underage competition (tends to be 1st September or 1st January here and UK I think, depending on whether it's club or schools competition, and also differs for different sports, but it may be different in other countries, e.g. Australia school year is February to November so may be different...). But on the programme last night when they looked at UK athletes alone, it was found that the majority of international medal winners were born between September and March and by all accounts this is statistically backed up.

Me. Born in Summer.

Racing Flat

Tingle wrote: »

I raced* him twice. I got close to him once in one of the races but it was only in the set position as we were drawn next to each other. I was still in the blocks when he was negotiating the first hurdle (slight exageration). The man could move.

* I'll qualify raced by saying I was in the same race, similar to a joe marathoner being beside Geb at the start of a marathon

He was exceptional. Saying that, on seeing the world record by (is it?)Dayron Robles the other week.....I was in awe. Is this the most graceful performance we've ever seen? If you only saw the top half of his body, you'd barely know he was hurdling, just think he was running. The hurdles seemed (to the untrained eye anyway) not to interfere with his form whatsoever.

On the subject of hurdles form...seen a few races with DOR recently - she seems to put her lead leg out to the side, away from her body a little moreso than the other athletes who seem to go straight out in front. Is this 'incorrect'? Or is it different for everyone? I was thinking this may be a 'fault' due to either weak hip flexors/tight hamstrings or else being (in terms of height) too short? Incorrect and fault in parenthesis because obviously she's world class, just a difference I noticed between her and the others...Also, is this a change? Or has she always done this?

TheRoadRunner

Pherekydes wrote: »

Good summation, RF. He was born in February. His diet was fairly insane alright. I don't think he's on 1000cals a day now.

I wasn't too sure if he was always on this diet or if it was just for a phase. 550 calories a day over many years would surely have made him look like the dead ? The program didn't go into this enough considering some of the drivel they went on about. Having said that I did enjoy the program.

One thing I found really weird was the fact he wanted to have exceptional genetics compared to his peers. He was actually quite gutted when it appeared he was nothing exceptional and it seemed he had got where he had purely on his work ethic. When he found out he had the super fast twitch muscles he was over the moon. He wanted to be "super human" or something along those lines.

Racing Flat

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

I wasn't too sure if he was always on this diet or if it was just for a phase. 550 calories a day over many years would surely have made him look like the dead ? .

You're probably right about that, but he did mention he wanted 'control' over his diet, somaybe there were some eating issues?

.[/quote]One thing I found really weird was the fact he wanted to have exceptional genetics compared to his peers. .[/quote]
He did though, i.e. he had 25% of the super-fast fibres (which I presume must be genetic based), compared to none in some people and 2% in other athletes they had tested (although they didn't elaborate on the standards of these other tested athletes). Plus his pscchological ability to be positive and stay calm under pressure were 'exceptional' and maybe genetic based.

.[/quote]He was actually quite gutted when it appeared he was nothing exceptional and it seemed he had got where he had purely on his work ethic. [/quote]
This is an incorrect interpretation - he is genetically 'exceptional' as pointed out above, but it was the interaction between these genes and his environment (training, support, competition etc.) that brought the genetic potential to fruition. ie nature and nurture. One without the other wouldn't suffice.

It is interesting though that he appeared disappointed not to be more 'superhuman'. Maybe he didn't understand it fully. Or maybe it's just another sign of his competetive nature, which also contributed to his success...

TheRoadRunner

Racing Flat wrote: »

This is an incorrect interpretation - he had the genetic potential (so he was (in terms of genetics, muscle fibres, maybe psychology etc.) 'exceptional' but it was the interaction between the genes and his environment (training, support, competition etc.) that brought the genetic potential to fruition. ie nature and nurture.

Yeah I obviously got that. I just think he was hoping that his genetics contributed more than his training. He actually said he wanted to be "super" in some way.

Racing Flat

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

He actually said he wanted to be "super" in some way.

But he was in many ways, ie muscle composition and psychology. Maybe he was disappointed that 98% of Jamaicans and 80% of Europeans have the sprint/power gene, and that made him feel less superhuman, so maybe down to his poor understanding of it all.

thirtyfoot

Racing Flat wrote: »

On the subject of hurdles form...seen a few races with DOR recently - she seems to put her lead leg out to the side, away from her body a little moreso than the other athletes who seem to go straight out in front. Is this 'incorrect'?

The 'correct' way is straight and in the direction of running. The hurdles are so low in womens she can get away with it a little more but leading with leg at an angle will create breaking forces on landing (to get back in line) which will have a negative impact. They have obviously looked at it and are happy its not causing too much of a problem.

ChickenTikka

I didn't see the program but found the remarks in this thread re the advantage it confers for senior athletics very interesting.

I spend more of my time coaching juvenile athletes than running myself and have often wondered if there is a long-term advantage to month of birth.

It seems this program produces or referred to statistics that say there is an advantage. Certainly in juvenile athletics, there is a big advantage in being born in January. It makes you the best part of a year older than many of your competitors and on average gives you a serious physical advantage.

I've often wondered do kids like the things they are good at or do they become good at the things they like. I still don't know the answer to that question.

But if success leads to someone liking the sport and sticking at it, then January birthdays are a big advantage.

It would make a very interesting research project for someone either in Athletics Ireland or maybe a post-grad in UL.

RealistSpy

Are Africans really that fast? I feel so slow

High&Low

I thought it was a very good program but they didn't explore properly answer the question why black athletes (athletes descended from west africa) have made up every olympic and world 100m final since 1983.


Racing Flat - you can add a protein shake to his diet too. I was disapointed also that they didn't elaborate on his diet. I have never heard of any athlete, especially in a power event, consume so few calories.

Pherekydes

RealistSpy wrote: »

Are Africans really that fast?

Really what fast?

RealistSpy

I mean African never win anything thing but they are suposed to be good at athletics.