Guest guest Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 Hi ! Your last post noted the following: >The longer the time in the air the less horizontal velocity necessary to cover a given horizontal distance each stride. This will not lead to high overall velocities of course and a maximal solution for velocity must be found in trade off of these factors. Exactly why there is an optimum solution that dooms most of us to be genetically not destined to become world class runners... I believe you've framed the situation very well here. Of course, I'm reading Colvin's Talent is Overrated, where suggestion of genetics being what 'dooms us' is not a popular notion:) >at anything over a short sprint, maintenance is the name of the game not acceleration. I believe that, but others will suggest acceleration is a critical determiner of what we can maintain. When paralympian Tony Volpentest ran here in Lisle in '97, he did not look all that impressive in the 100. In fact, he was beaten in that race by three of the masters athletes I had assembled to race against him. However, the 200 was a completely different story. He blew them away with a 22.94, which at that time was an unofficial world paralympic record. >are you saying that Pistorius is " special " and if that is the case then the study should continue to determine a measurement of his metabolic cost to " run " a course on the upper body ergonometer to establish independence from the prosthesis. Maybe this is an issue for future study. My thought is that his muscles really aren't that different. The metabolic issues may not be the path to follow, though. Other sprinters may be more efficient than Pistorius (like Tadese in figure 2 from the study), but he is still faster at 400 meters. >I think the ban is justified and the tests confirm it with their measurements and results. Perhaps I am missing something but until there is a sanctioned distance race for athletes competing with or without non-powered equipment of their choice (sound like an engineering contest not Olympic competitors.) Again, the issue goes back to what the IAAF wanted the Cologne group to determine, and whether the Cologne group understood what the IAAF wanted them to determine. You raise some interesting points about paralympians in general. Apart from competition in able-bodied meets, should there be separate classifications within the Paralympic Games themselves, like separate events for single leg amputees as opposed to double amputees? Ken Jakalski Lisle High School Lisle, IL USA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2009 Report Share Posted June 27, 2009 Hi Nick In a message dated 6/27/2009 10:48:33 A.M. Central America Standard , nick.tatalias@... writes: I do understand the opposition if theory shows an advantage is conferred, still trying to figure it all out in my head. Do you have a reference to the studies concerned? SMU has a press release on the research. You can check it out at _http://blog.smu.edu/research/_ (http://blog.smu.edu/research/) And thanks for the insights on how South Africans are viewing all this. I believe that there are those on the outside who might see him as trying to profit through the attention, but clearly those who have worked with him see a different side. The Houston group came away quite impressed with his attitude and demeanor. I think that was reflected in their acknowledgement at the end of the study: " We thank Pistorius for the exceptional cooperation and openness that made this study possible. " I like that you mentioned he has " highlighted disabled athletics and sports. " In that regard, there have been some positive benefits to the controversy. I'm sure many will not take this as an appropriate counter argument, but when Tony Volpentest addressed an audience here in '97, he asked us to reconsider our notions of disability, and whether corrections for disabilities need be viewed as a competitive advantage. " Glasses and contact lenses correct for a disability, " he noted, " to the point that poor vision is no longer considered a disability. Maybe breakthroughs in prosthetics will be viewed in a similar way, not so much as using technology to gain a competitive advantage, but to attempt to restore in some way what we've lost. " Ken Jakalski Lisle High School Lisle, IL USA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.