how sport science makes us faster.....

peter kern

http://www.usada.org/media/sanction-usps7102012

one point that is very hard to refute ;-)

longshank

peter kern wrote: »

http://www.usada.org/media/sanction-usps7102012

one point that is very hard to refute ;-)

USPS team enjoyed a dominance that Sky now look like repeating, both using sports science to get faster, legality is another issue!!

peter kern

Since I am a beliver that the tour hasnt won legaly for many many years i gave up on cycling.
Having said this I do believe that Wiggins is going new ways with his training that would resonate quite well with my own coaching philosophy and its a change from what seems to be a more typical trainings cycle of cyclists and triathletes.

one way or another sky seems to do a very good job.

MrCreosote

I've said it before, but I think those doctors should be commended for their work keeping cyclists from harming themselves unnecessarily with doping.

Damage limitation if you like.

Not surprising that the USADA don't see it the same way though.

peter kern

so you are saying in the result lists it should say lance armstong/ dr ferrari.

MrCreosote

peter kern wrote: »

so you are saying in the result lists it should say lance armstong/ dr ferrari.

I'd write it more like Dr Ferrari/Lance Armstrong.

What I'm saying is that there might have been many more dead cyclists if the docs hadn't been keeping some sort of brake on things.

d4r3n

peter kern wrote: »

Having said this I do believe that Wiggins is going new ways with his training that would resonate quite well with my own coaching philosophy and its a change from what seems to be a more typical trainings cycle of cyclists and triathletes.

Interesting to see what Wiggins has to say about his new coach here, particularly "in particular his recommendation that the rider dispense with the idea of using races as training.".

peter kern

I would not agree with your thinking to be honest, since i am totally contra drugs in sport.( being aware that they are used)
I would go much more for conserving samples so they can be analysesd 2, 5, 10 y or whatever is best years later when Wada has cought up with illigal practises and then take away wins and earnings from the sport and give them to the deserving person.

BennyMul

I do not think its a clear cut case of only doping for results. after 3 weeks of punishment the body is destroyed,
Should there be a case for "replenishment" via artificial means,

I do not agree with doping but as above its not a black and white situation

peter kern

BennyMul wrote: »

I do not think its a clear cut case of only doping for results. after 3 weeks of punishment the body is destroyed,
Should there be a case for "replenishment" via artificial means,

I do not agree with doping but as above its not a black and white situation

I think its black and white no drugs to assit recovery. Its a plain level field then.

BennyMul

peter kern wrote: »

I think its black and white no drugs to assit recovery. Its a plain level field then.

even at the risk to the health of the athlete.

RayCun

What's the line between "recovering from the race just past" and "preparing for the race to come"? There isn't any. An athlete who can dope to recover faster gains an advantage, just like an athlete who dopes to train harder.

BennyMul

unfortunately there is none, human nature especially amongst that personality type means always wanting to win, and at time at any cost, same in all sport,business

my point was that doping is not always for results.

peter kern

then it becomes a medical issue for which somebody has to be accounted for.
but it has to be in accordance to wada rules.

ps and i think we have to be very careful not to encourage unfit people to participate in competitions they are not fit for .


and in Ironmans their should be an obligatory weight stop at 25 k marathin mark
you lost to much wight you can not continue till you are safe again.

Clearlier

BennyMul wrote: »

even at the risk to the health of the athlete.

Can you give an example of a scenario where this applies? One that isn't already covered by the current regulations. I'm asking because I can't think of any scenarios but suspect that it's probably a lack of imagination on my part:o

BennyMul

Clearlier wrote: »

Can you give an example of a scenario where this applies? One that isn't already covered by the current regulations. I'm asking because I can't think of any scenarios but suspect that it's probably a lack of imagination on my part:o

Not a great example but,
I read an article on a grand tour (looking for it at the moment), where an athlete was checked by a non associated Doctor, all his vitals readings were down, and in a normal world they would have been given substances to being them back to a lay persons normal level, however due to rules this was not allowed.


sorry I cant think of a better one.

peter kern

http://www.rte.ie/tv/programmes/fasterhigherstronger.html

peter kern

would have been useful if they had found a subject that could use epo and monitor the progress over 1 year.

I found it interesting that they had an athlete talking about contamination beside an Scientist at the sport nutrition company, but there you go brilliant spinning and marketing. and they balanced it off nicely with the guy that has another view.

Bambaata

Will watch that tonight. It fairly biased?

mloc123

Bambaata wrote: »

Will watch that tonight. It fairly biased?

Pretty odd program from what I saw of it.

peter kern

it opens up a few things but dosnt follow them through.
I really liked the interview with the runner that has taken drugs and why he took it. That came across reasonable.

not biasd i think since it dosnt really give answers.prob more confusing than biased.
result you dont get their without science but they find most of the siecnce dodgy. not quite sure what they want to say.

its more a bed time storry to watch and will leave more people confused what legal and whats not legal than before they watched it.

I think they would have done better to say thats allowed by Wada and thats not .

tummy would have turned in his grave seeing that they tried to show the difference of the old now illigal nasa swim suits and a legal suit. having one girl swim 2 x 5o meters hand stopped;-)

unfortunately they did not answer the marathon question.....

littlemsfickle

peter kern wrote: »

would have been useful if they had found a subject that could use epo and monitor the progress over 1 year.

I found it interesting that they had an athlete talking about contamination beside an Scientist at the sport nutrition company, but there you go brilliant spinning and marketing. and they balanced it off nicely with the guy that has another view.

To be honest I felt this was kind of a cop out - they could have found another amateur with a lower hemoglobin level to do the EPO experiment. I kind of feel like they just didn't want to show someone taking the drugs...I found it interesting, but I don't think the goal was really to answer questions - just to make people consider more where the boundary lies between taking advantage of scientific advances and cheating. It seems to be pretty arbitrary - substance X is considered a "supplement", while substance Y is a "performance enhancing drug" - both are performance-enhancing...how do you decide what should/shouldn't be allowed?

peter kern

littlemsfickle wrote: »

To be honest I felt this was kind of a cop out - they could have found another amateur with a lower hemoglobin level to do the EPO experiment. I kind of feel like they just didn't want to show someone taking the drugs...I found it interesting, but I don't think the goal was really to answer questions - just to make people consider more where the boundary lies between taking advantage of scientific advances and cheating. It seems to be pretty arbitrary - substance X is considered a "supplement", while substance Y is a "performance enhancing drug" - both are performance-enhancing...how do you decide what should/shouldn't be allowed?

.... your post 10 past 11pm and i can see you are not asleep yet. so there we go modern age technology helping coaches to know everything......its still quite hard to beat sleep as a performance enhancer and from 9pm-6am we get the best quality sleep.
thats free performance enhancement better than any K bar .....;-0
otherwise i totally agree.

hardCopy

Panorama may be interesting tonight. "The Truth About Sports Products" http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01l1yxk

peter kern

i believe BMC s main nutrition at I am lanza was mars bars ..... ;-)
not bad going for ones first IM ...

pgibbo

peter kern wrote: »

i believe BMC s main nutrition at I am lanza was mars bars ..... ;-)
not bad going for ones first IM ...

from some of his tweets I seet he's a big fan of training on empty and the associated adaptations. I believe he has worked with Barry Murray, as has Gavin Noble.

It will be interesting to see how Challenge Barcelona goes for him. I think the Lanza conditions will stand to him in a big way and he'll knock out a very fast time in Barcelona.

peter kern

So was there anything interesting last night ?

d4r3n

I came across this yesterday in relation to performance enhancement, I assume it's an argument for sports science?

Zuppy

d4r3n wrote: »

I came across this yesterday in relation to performance enhancement, I assume it's an argument for sports science?

Well it proves that science is working on sport, abeit without the ethics committee but progress in some shape.