RE: t-and-f: Follow the money?....one last post...I promise..:)
For example, there are a host of 4:00 milers who can only run 49-50s for 400m but can run 1:47 in the 800 whereas no 400m runner with a 49-50s PR could do the same, but would need to be in the 45-47.low range. I find it hard to swallow that a guy could go 52.5/54.7 = 1:47.2 but could manage only 49.x-50s for 400m. Also, if you are a 1:47/4:00y-flat guy ... you are a much better 400/800 guy than a 1500 runner. I know this was your event, but Elliott's numbers seemed EXACTLY right to me just the way they are And regarding this: So two guys both running 1:45 could have significant differences in their 400m times. Isn't 45.5-47.0 a significant difference? Elliott wrote: 800m in 1.45 = 400m in 45.5 - 47.0 -Original Message- From: P.F.Talbot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 7:03 PM To: Elliott Oti Cc: 't-and-f@darkwing. uoregon. edu' (E-mail) Subject: Re: t-and-f: Follow the money?one last post...I promise..:) On Thu, 3 May 2001, Elliott Oti wrote: About nine years ago I ran against Koers in a 400m which he won in 47.2 - 47.3. This despite the fact that Koers considers himself to be primarily a 1500m man. Nine years ago I was a teammate of Marko's and I saw him run mid 48s in an open though he could get below 48 in a relay. His webpage doesn't have his 400m PR so I'll take you word on it. I wonder how many 800m guys can run 7:46 for 3000? Marko also qualified for the NCAA cross country nationals as an individual which means he certainly could break 30:00 in a 10,000 as well. I think you do not give 800m runners enough credit. Based on personal observation I would say the following times correspond roughly: 800m in 1. 55 = 400m in 50.0 - 52.0 800m in 1. 50 = 400m in 48.0 - 50.0 800m in 1.45 = 400m in 45.5 - 47.0 I don't have it in front of me and may be remembering wrong but I think there is discussion of this in Run With the Best in which the basic argument is that it is a sliding scale. The 400/800 types have to be MUCH faster over 400m to achieve the same 800m time as a 800/1500 type with a slower 400m time. So two guys both running 1:45 could have significant differences in their 400m times. For example, there are a host of 4:00 milers who can only run 49-50s for 400m but can run 1:47 in the 800 whereas no 400m runner with a 49-50s PR could do the same, but would need to be in the 45-47.low range. Regards, Paul
t-and-f: top American 10,000m on U.S. soil
Note that all but one of the below were run at Pacific Coast venues: 27:30.00 -- Alberto Salazar, 10 Apr 92, Eugene, OR 27:31.34 -- Todd Williams, 06 Apr 95, Knoxville, TN 27:36.7 -- Mark Nenow, 24 Apr 82, Walnut, CA 27:38.37 -- Bob Kennedy, 07 May 99, Palo Alto, CA 27:39.27 -- Alan Culpepper, 07 May 99, Palo Alto, CA 27:39.4 -- Craig Virgin, 17 Jun 79, Walnut, CA 27:41.05 -- Ed Eyestone, 27 Apr 85, Walnut, CA 27:43.6 -- Steve Prefontaine, 27 Apr 74, Eugene, OR 27:43.7 -- Paul Cummings, 28 Apr 84, Walnut, CA 27:45.20 -- Steve Plasencia, 25 Jul 90, Seattle, WA 27:45.5 -- Salazar, 28 Apr 84, Walnut, CA 27:45.61 -- Virgin, 24 Jun 80, Eugene, OR 27:46.80 -- Pat Porter, 23 Apr 88, Walnut, CA Marty Post Senior Editor Runner's World Magazine www.runnersworld.com
t-and-f: IAAF: Another Counsil election withdrawal
I am starting to wonder how many of these press releases will follow between now and early august... (cannot be more than about ten, because then we are out of candidates...) Nevertheless, courtesy IAAF WK (PS to those who also read a lot of mailing lists: you can see I cut back on the number of lists I send these election releases to... (;-) PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE International Amateur Athletic Federation Fédération Internationale dAthlétisme Amateur MOHAMAD HASAN WITHDRAWS FROM COUNCIL ELECTION RACE 4 May 2001 - MONTE CARLO - Monaco - Mohamad Bob Hasan, a former IAAF Council Member and the incumbent President of the Indonesian Athletics Federation, has withdrawn from the list of candidates for the forthcoming IAAF Congress elections. Mr Hasan had been proposed for a place on the IAAF Council. ENDS
t-and-f: Salazar Eugene 10k ?
Mcewen, Brian T wrote: 3) If El Salazar can run 27:30 in a downpour, with no rabbits, and the outcome in doubt right up until the end, in EARLY-April NO LESS ... Question here. Is my mind screwed up again or wasn't that 27:30 10k Salazar ran in Eugene 10 days before the Boston Marathon where he won? Joe
t-and-f: Jon Entine, can we get over this discussion?
Even I am growing tired of this...:) Doesn't matter how many examples we put out it will always be responded to with the individuals VS group thing. Also Jon, to say that one person out of a certain group of people will NEVER do something is a pretty ignorant statement. Not saying that you are ignortant, just the statement is. There is always the possibility of individuals doing extraordinary things. Can you see the future Jon? I bet you probably thought that a Greek would never win the Olympic 200m? Individual successes are always possible. I will agree that in this point in time you are right. The East/North Africans as a group will dominate distance running. I would say that 80 years ago the same could have been said about the Finnish. As a group they dominated distance running. Same could also have been said 20 years ago about the GBTC. I am agreeing with you Jon. Given your findings you are right. Your statistics prove you right. As a group the East/North Africans are dominate and no individual successes will prove you wrong. Anyone remember how this got started? I believe it was Jon posting some article of his? Well, Jon at least you've drummed up some interest in your book. $ Alan _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: t-and-f: Follow the money?....one last post...well I guess not
Jon wrote: Thank you for such a sophisticated analysis. Grade: D. Now retake logic and statistics 101. Not that I agree with all of Richard's points, but my statistics 101 said that you can't conclude much from correlations like the ones that have been cited. My logic 101 teacher said that when using logical analysis provides results that don't make intuitive sense, chances are you are missing something. I'd say Richard's posts match what my teachers told me more than yours. - Ed Parrot
t-and-f: RE: Salazar Eugene 10k ?
I believe it was NINE days before. His big goal was to simulate a 10k/marathon double at the LA Olympics (back when distance stars did such things), to see how his body would handle an all-out 10k a short time before a tough marathon. The Boston Marathon is usually April 18/19 or so ... That would make that Eugene 10k around April 9/10, 1982. -Original Message- From: Joe Rubio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 12:01 PM To: Mcewen, Brian T Cc: t-and-f Subject: Salazar Eugene 10k ? Mcewen, Brian T wrote: 3) If El Salazar can run 27:30 in a downpour, with no rabbits, and the outcome in doubt right up until the end, in EARLY-April NO LESS ... Question here. Is my mind screwed up again or wasn't that 27:30 10k Salazar ran in Eugene 10 days before the Boston Marathon where he won? Joe
t-and-f: shirts or skins? - what's best for training in hot weather?
Does anyone have any professional opinion or know of any research studies on the following: what is cooler in hot weather - running without a shirt (bare skin) or running with a coolmax type shirt on? Let's assume a hot and humid climate, like the southeast not the southwest. Coolmax wicks, but any fabric also blocks the wind and airflow that is generated by running. Is the wicking worth the blocked airflow of wearing a shirt? Experience would suggest that no shirt is cooler than shirt even if the shirt is made of coolmax type fabric, but I have heard some cite evidence to the contrary. Anybody from any elite programs out there have insights on how you train? Thanks, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t-and-f: [Fwd: FW: Virus alert/worst ever according to CNN]
Original Message Subject: FW: Virus alert/worst ever according to CNNDate: Fri, 4 May 2001 09:50:24 -0700From: "honikman" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: "Linda Honikman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I received this last night- I hope its helpful. Basil Honikman Virus alert/worst ever according to CNN PLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERYONE ON YOUR CONTACT LIST!! A new virus has just been discovered that has been classified by Microsoft www.microsoft.com http://www.microsoft.com) and by McAfee ( www.mcafee.com http://www.mcafee.com) as the most destructive ever!This virus was discovered yesterday afternoon by McAfee and no vaccine has yet been developed. This virus simply destroys Sector Zero from the hard disk, where vital information for its functioning are stored. This virus acts in thefollowing manner: It sends itself automatically to all contacts onyour list with the title "A Virtual Card for You". As soon as the supposed virtual card is opened, the computer freezes so that the user has toreboot. When the ctrl+alt+del keys or the reset button are pressed, the virus destroys Sector Zero, thus permanently destroying the hard disk. Yesterday in just a few hours this virus caused panic in New York, according to news broadcast by CNN ( www.cnn.com http://www.cnn.com/ http://www.cnn.com http://www.cnn.com ). This alert was received by an employee ofMicrosoft itself.So don't open any mails with subject "A Virtual Card for You".As soon as you get the mail, delete it. Please pass on this mail to all your friends and co-workers. Forwardthis toeveryone in your address book.I would rather receive this 25 times than not at all. Also: Intel announced that a new and verydestructive virus wasdiscovered recently. If you receive an email called "An Internet Flower For You" donot open it. Delete it right away! This virus removes all dynamic link libraries(.dll files) from your computer.Your computer will not be ableto boot up.! ! SEND THIS TO EVERYONE ON YOUR CONTACT LIST!! -- This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courriel est confidentiel et prot?g?. L'exp?diteur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) destinataire(s) d?sign?(s) est interdite. Si vousrecevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser imm?diatement, par retour de courriel ou par un autre moyen. Le courriel ne peut ?tre consid?r? commeun moyen de communication s?r. == ---
t-and-f: Virtual Card Virus Hoax
This is from the Symantec Antivirus Center: The Virtual Card for You is a hoax that should be ignored. The following is the text that may be received as an email message: Virus Alert VIRUS WARNING To ALL INTERNET USERS: A new virus has just been discovered that has been classified by Microsoft (www.microsoft.com) and by McAfee (www.mcafee.com) as the most destructive ever! Read more here: http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/virtual.card.for.you.html Ken Parker Runner's Web http://www.runnersweb.com/running.html A running and triathlon resource site mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t-and-f: Please don't send hoax warnings
Hello everyone, This list receives enough messages even without hoax warnings. Before you send a warning about a virus which probably is a hoax, please read the list: http://vil.mcafee.com/hoax.asp This way you can save other people from trying to protect themselves from a virus than does not exist. Kind regards, Mirko Jalava
t-and-f: Never??
Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 15:55:56 From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Jon Entine, can we get over this discussion? Even I am growing tired of this...:) Doesn't matter how many examples we put out it will always be responded to with the individuals VS group thing. It's not a thing Alan. Science does not make theories from individual examples. In running, you have millions of examples to make a case or not. I am responding the way intelligent people respond who believe that statements should be backed up with empirical evidence, which you do not provide but is available--and which I cite in Taboo. Also Jon, to say that one person out of a certain group of people will NEVER do something is a pretty ignorant statement. Generally, you're right, but I can assure you a Watusi will NEVER become the world's strongest man. And that's NOT a stupid statement. Sometimes, such declarations, which I rarely have used, are appropriate. Not saying that you are ignortant, just the statement is. There is always the possibility of individuals doing extraordinary things. Can you see the future Jon? I bet you probably thought that a Greek would never win the Olympic 200m? That statement shows how little you have yet grasped from this debate. If you had read Taboo, you would have recognized that such an event was hardly that extraordinary. First, the time was just okay...not among the top few hundred of all time. Second, Meditterannean countries have had a lot of gene exchange, as geneticists have long documented, making such a occurance now and then likely. It is no surprise that many of the top white runners come from southern Meditterranean countries. Individual successes are always possible. Theoretically, but not pratically. That's like saying it is possible the we will find a woman who is the world's tallest human. Sure it's possible... But your statement, for all intent and purpose, is totally meaningless in terms of the issues at hand. I will agree that in this point in time you are right. The East/North Africans as a group will dominate distance running. I would say that 80 years ago the same could have been said about the Finnish. As a group they dominated distance running. Same could also have been said 20 years ago about the GBTC. There's a huge difference. IT WAS NOT NEARLY A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD THEN. Now that Africans are ABLE to compete, the story is different. This is a totally bogus point you're making. Compare the old Finn times against today's times. I am agreeing with you Jon. Given your findings you are right. Your statistics prove you right. As a group the East/North Africans are dominate and no individual successes will prove you wrong. Anyone remember how this got started? I believe it was Jon posting some article of his? Well, Jon at least you've drummed up some interest in your book. $ I only wish Alan. I've barely covered the advance, which means I still need a day job. Alan -- Jon Entine RuffRun 6178 Grey Rock Rd. Agoura Hills, CA 91301 (818) 991-9803 [FAX] 991-9804 http://www.jonentine.com
RE: t-and-f: [Fwd: FW: Virus alert/worst ever according to CNN]
By now I'm sure that someone else have sent this to you. But... This is a hoax. It took me about 30 seconds to find out that this was a hoax. For those who don't know you can verify these simply by going to McAfee.com. If it is the "worst ever" it'll be on their front page. See the following: http://vil.mcafee.com/dispVirus.asp?virus_k=98604 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jim McLatchieSent: Friday, May 04, 2001 1:25 PMSubject: t-and-f: [Fwd: FW: Virus alert/worst ever according to CNN] Original Message Subject: FW: Virus alert/worst ever according to CNN Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 09:50:24 -0700 From: "honikman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Linda Honikman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I received this last night- I hope its helpful. Basil Honikman Virus alert/worst ever according to CNN PLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERYONE ON YOUR CONTACT LIST!! A new virus has just been discovered that has been classified by Microsoft www.microsoft.com http://www.microsoft.com) and by McAfee ( www.mcafee.com http://www.mcafee.com) as the most destructive ever! This virus was discovered yesterday afternoon by McAfee and no vaccine has yet been developed. This virus simply destroys Sector Zero from the hard disk, where vital information for its functioning are stored. This virus acts in thefollowing manner: It sends itself automatically to all contacts on your list with the title "A Virtual Card for You". As soon as the supposed virtual card is opened, the computer freezes so that the user has to reboot. When the ctrl+alt+del keys or the reset button are pressed, the virus destroys Sector Zero, thus permanently destroying the hard disk. Yesterday in just a few hours this virus caused panic in New York, according to news broadcast by CNN ( www.cnn.com http://www.cnn.com/ http://www.cnn.com http://www.cnn.com ). This alert was received by an employee of Microsoft itself.So don't open any mails with subject "A Virtual Card for You". As soon as you get the mail, delete it. Please pass on this mail to all your friends and co-workers. Forwardthis toeveryone in your address book.I would rather receive this 25 times than not at all. Also: Intel announced that a new and verydestructive virus was discovered recently. If you receive an email called "An Internet Flower For You" do not open it. Delete it right away! This virus removes all dynamic link libraries(.dll files) from your computer.Your computer will not be able to boot up.! ! SEND THIS TO EVERYONE ON YOUR CONTACT LIST!! -- -- -- -- -- This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courriel est confidentiel et prot?g?. L'exp?diteur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) destinataire(s) d?sign?(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser imm?diatement, par retour de courriel ou par un autre moyen. Le courriel ne peut ?tre consid?r? comme un moyen de communication s?r. == ---
Re: t-and-f: RE: Salazar Eugene 10k ?
The Boston Marathon in 1982 was contested on Monday, April 19th. On March 21, 1982 Salazar placed second to Mohamed Kedir in the World Cross in Rome. Salazar had already run 2:08:13 in NY in the previous fall. (Called a world record but later measured short.) I looked it up. The story is told in the 1982 chapter of my book where I contrast Salazar and Beardsley, very different guys with very different backgrounds and very similar running ability. Tom Derderian - Original Message - From: Mcewen, Brian T [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: t-and-f [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 1:04 PM Subject: t-and-f: RE: Salazar Eugene 10k ? I believe it was NINE days before. His big goal was to simulate a 10k/marathon double at the LA Olympics (back when distance stars did such things), to see how his body would handle an all-out 10k a short time before a tough marathon. The Boston Marathon is usually April 18/19 or so ... That would make that Eugene 10k around April 9/10, 1982. -Original Message- From: Joe Rubio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 12:01 PM To: Mcewen, Brian T Cc: t-and-f Subject: Salazar Eugene 10k ? Mcewen, Brian T wrote: 3) If El Salazar can run 27:30 in a downpour, with no rabbits, and the outcome in doubt right up until the end, in EARLY-April NO LESS ... Question here. Is my mind screwed up again or wasn't that 27:30 10k Salazar ran in Eugene 10 days before the Boston Marathon where he won? Joe
Re: t-and-f: Preview of Stanford 10k
For those of you born after 1982, and continue to downplay Salazar's effort, please let me remind you. Salazar was in about 27:15 shape in his match against Rono. He lost a fast and tactical race to one of the world's best at the time. It was more of a tune-up for his more important race several weeks later, running 2:08:52. The "AR" remains intact tonight, and the only American to better Salazar's Eugene time is Kennedy. LRN NeTrack
t-and-f: Viruses
People should confirm something is a virus before burdening lists or others with these types of messages. The propagation of these messages IS the virus. Regards, Martin Martin J. Dixon, B. Math. (Hons), C.A., PartnerMillard, Rouse Rosebrugh LLP Chartered Accountants P.O. Box 367 96 Nelson Street Brantford, Ontario N3T 5N3 Direct Dial: (519) 759-3708 Ext. 231Telephone: (519) 759-3511Private Facsimile: (519) 759-8548E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web site: www.millards.com Practice Areas: www.millards.com/htm/profs/m_mjdixo.htm IMPORTANT NOTICE:This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Access, disclosure, copying, distributionor reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be acriminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and emailconfirmation to the sender.
Re: t-and-f: Viruses
What the heck! If the warning is bogus, it's just one more time on the delete button. If you get no warning, everything is gone. I say don't be so critical, warn me every chance you get. And...Thanks for the effort! John Lunn "Martin J. Dixon" wrote: People should confirm something is a virus before burdening lists or others with these types of messages. The propagation of these messages IS the virus.Regards,MartinMartin J. Dixon, B. Math. (Hons), C.A., Partner Millard, Rouse Rosebrugh LLP Chartered Accountants P.O. Box 367 96 Nelson Street Brantford, Ontario N3T 5N3 Direct Dial: (519) 759-3708 Ext. 231 Telephone: (519) 759-3511 Private Facsimile: (519) 759-8548 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web site: www.millards.com Practice Areas: www.millards.com/htm/profs/m_mjdixo.htm IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Access, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.
Re: t-and-f: Viruses
Sorry. I respectively don't agree. That virus alert was fall down funny so I suppose it had some entertainment value, if nothing else. Regards, Martin Martin J. Dixon, B. Math. (Hons), C.A., PartnerMillard, Rouse Rosebrugh LLP Chartered Accountants P.O. Box 367 96 Nelson Street Brantford, Ontario N3T 5N3 Direct Dial: (519) 759-3708 Ext. 231Telephone: (519) 759-3511Private Facsimile: (519) 759-8548E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web site: www.millards.com Practice Areas: www.millards.com/htm/profs/m_mjdixo.htm IMPORTANT NOTICE:This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Access, disclosure, copying, distributionor reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be acriminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and emailconfirmation to the sender. - Original Message - From: John Lunn To: Martin J. Dixon Cc: Track Field List Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 4:16 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: Viruses What the heck! If the warning is bogus, it's just one more time on the delete button. If you get no warning, everything is gone. I say don't be so critical, warn me every chance you get. And...Thanks for the effort! John Lunn "Martin J. Dixon" wrote: People should confirm something is a virus before burdening lists or others with these types of messages. The propagation of these messages IS the virus.Regards,MartinMartin J. Dixon, B. Math. (Hons), C.A., Partner Millard, Rouse Rosebrugh LLP Chartered Accountants P.O. Box 367 96 Nelson Street Brantford, Ontario N3T 5N3 Direct Dial: (519) 759-3708 Ext. 231 Telephone: (519) 759-3511 Private Facsimile: (519) 759-8548 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web site: www.millards.com Practice Areas: www.millards.com/htm/profs/m_mjdixo.htm IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Access, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.
t-and-f: Neville Hodge 10.96 M45 called legit
Y ask Y: Phil Felton, a trackside witness to the masters sprints at Penn, reports that the negative wind reading and time for Neville Hodge in the M45 100 was legitimate -- and that paperwork is being filed for a WR in his age group: 10.96. That's a 10.1 on the Age-Graded Tables (for sake of theoretical comparison, and not to make David Honea go ballistic). This makes Neville the oldest man to break 11 in the century. Ken Stone http://www.masterstrack.com
t-and-f: Twilight Mile
A reminder that the Bill McChesney Jr Memorial Twilight Mile will be held Saturday, May 12th at Hayward Field in Eugene, Oregon. Athletes in the 3:40-44 or 3:58-4:02 range (or faster, of course) are invited to contact me about entry. Hotel and meals will be provided. There is prize money on the race of $1200-$800-$500-$200. preclassic.com
Re: t-and-f: Neville Hodge 10.96 M45 called legit
In a message dated 5/4/1 5:13:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's a 10.1 on the Age-Graded Tables (for sake of theoretical comparison, and not to make David Honea go ballistic). Ken, David Honea is not the only one that goes ballistic when you publish these age-graded comparisons. In my opinion, you do a disservice to masters athletes when you do this, since most serious track fans laugh at the numbers. Let the performances speak for themselves. I would guess that many of the people on this list can appreciate that a 10.96 for a 45-year old man is pretty darned good. I have no doubt that age-graded performances serve as a valuable tool in masters competition...they just don't belong here. Walt Murphy (Wannabe Masters sprinter--but too lazy to do anything about it)
RE: t-and-f: Neville Hodge 10.96 M45 called legit
I rarely chime in on this type of stuff, but as long as it's not taken seriously I don't mind the age-grading conversions. My feeling is as long as it's referred to a Age-graded then what's the harm? It's a funky masters thing that gives them an opportunity (although, admittedly, not a very accurate opportunity) to compare marks. By the way, why was there a controversy with the winds at Penn, as far as I could tell (and we we're running the anemometers) everything was O.K. Roger (not even a sub-master yet) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 5:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Neville Hodge 10.96 M45 called legit In a message dated 5/4/1 5:13:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's a 10.1 on the Age-Graded Tables (for sake of theoretical comparison, and not to make David Honea go ballistic). Ken, David Honea is not the only one that goes ballistic when you publish these age-graded comparisons. In my opinion, you do a disservice to masters athletes when you do this, since most serious track fans laugh at the numbers. Let the performances speak for themselves. I would guess that many of the people on this list can appreciate that a 10.96 for a 45-year old man is pretty darned good. I have no doubt that age-graded performances serve as a valuable tool in masters competition...they just don't belong here. Walt Murphy (Wannabe Masters sprinter--but too lazy to do anything about it)
Re: t-and-f: shirts or skins? - what's best for training in hot weather?
In a message dated 5/4/01 1:23:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: any fabric also blocks the wind and airflow that is generated by running. Having test-worn and reviewed the Stand Off singlet Nike developed for Sydney, I would say it may be one piece of clothing that is as cool as no shirt, if not cooler. It has thousands of tiny holes, like a football jersey, that are designed to channel the airflow to your skin, and the inside has raised bumps or nodes that hold the majority of the fabric off your skin (hence the name). It's made from recycled soda bottles (same as PolarFleece) so it doesn't absorb any water. Still, I wore it during a muggy August race (temp and humidity both in the upper 80s) and shucked it around 3 miles. So it's not perfect, but I think if the sun was out and there was any air movement at all it would be better than bare. Jim Gerweck Running Times
t-and-f: Re: [t-and-f_statistics] IAAF: World Athletics Day
Anybody know where the pool of names of kids for the draw come from? Is it possible for a kid to send in an application for consideration? Any prerequisite criteria for consideration (besides age) ? RT
Re: t-and-f: Neville Hodge 10.96 M45 called legit
Walt wrote: Ken, David Honea is not the only one that goes ballistic when you publish these age-graded comparisons. In my opinion, you do a disservice to masters athletes when you do this, since most serious track fans laugh at the numbers. I am as strong a proponent of age grading as anyone - I designed a program that age grades everyone in the USATF/Connecticut grand prix series. But Walt is right that it has NO place in elite track and field, even for masters. It is the nature of the bell curve that represents race performances that the fastest runners will be significantly overrated with formulas like this that are designed for all runners (and the slowest runners will be underrated). The solution is simple - don't use age-graded equivalent times to compare runners - use the age graded percentages. Simply say that 10.96 is considered 97% of the expected age graded performance and that anything over 95% is a world class masters performance. Don't try to compare it to an open performance or Walt is right, it does more harm than good. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: Individuals vs. groups
Randall: the 800 meters is NOT a long distance race although it is a distance race. I've been following this thread for some time with pretty much detached bemusement. My only comments are rather peripheral to the core debate of the thread: The terms distance runner, distance race or just distance seem to have emotional meanings to practicioners of Steeple, 5K, 10K, and Marathon, that are quite apart from a dictionary definition. For instance, such athletes would surely claim that it is not possible for an 800m specialist (let alone a 100mH hurdler) to experience what has ubiquitiously been referred to as a runners high. That realm of conciousness is reserved for those who...well, you get the idea. Those who are distance runners. This argument is circular. You can't qualify to be a distance runner unless you're a distance runner, and those who aren't don't understand. And those who already are get to decide who is. Because there is a considerable amount of pride attached to the club of distance running, there is a tendency to protect the exclusivity of such a club very fiercely. Perhaps this fierce loyalty is rooted in the U.S. with distance advocates being somewhat social outcasts to the general public social norm of couch-potato heaven. Or that they are about as far away from the football player model as you can get. Thus the arguments are reactionary. But when it comes to club membership arguments are applied to exclusivity WITHIN OUR OWN sport, such arguments seem to collapse into some extreme positions. Thus, the arguments that 800m racers cannot possibly be distance runners. Not much science, a whole lot of emotional-based argument. The long distance club seems to be a radical offshoot of the distance club. The FBI is probably tapping their phones about now. :-) RT
t-and-f: Stanford Webcast
In case you can't make it to the meet, there will bea live webchat detailing what is going on in the men's 10k at www.letsrun.com/stanford10k/ That is of course barring technical difficulties. If the URL is different go to letsrun.com to find out the real one. The meet is in 2 hours (9:15 pacific time) -Weldon
t-and-f: Distance Runner as a circular argument
re: the comments about the definition of 'distance runner' being a self-serving circular argument: I heard a fairly good tongue-in-cheek comeback from a deep-thinking shot putter, considering the distinction between an 800m race and longer races as to which of them qualifies as a distance race- You want a circular argument? How's this one- 'Which came first, the chicken or the distance runner?' ...I guess you have to be a shot putter to fully appreciate the logic... :-) RT
t-and-f: New thread regarding the Entine book
While I may have feelings one way or another about the likelihood that the theories espoused in this book are correct, what is MUCH MORE intriguing is the title of the book- TABOO. If I were just looking over titles in a bookstore, this title would tell me that the subject of the book is NOT whether or not there is any relevance to genetic predetermination theory, but rather what causes the social phenomenons which result in extreme pressure on any individual who would even consider suggesting research into a topic such as this. Does 'blacklisting' by academia relegate any researchers in this area to 'political correctness hell' ? Does it mean that they can never get 'published' by academic journals again on ANY topic? For example, the bashing that Dr. Bannister got by the so-called 'liberal academia' through the media a few years ago after his making a 'casual observation' kind of statement about long/short twitch fibers relating to East or West African origins, and saying that it merits more study. At least we now know that the subject is anything BUT taboo on this list- resulting in some of the longest threads in list history. Don't know if that's good or bad, but at least it means list subscribers are willing to talk about it out in the open. A few years ago on the list, when a similar idea was tossed into the hat for discussion, a bunch of coaches quickly jumped in and bashed the originator, saying if there was even an iota of truth in the theory, which they didn't believe for a second, they couldn't POSSIBLY share such a reality with any of the athletes they coach, for fear of them losing all motivation. They argued that exposure of such facts, even if true, serves no PRACTICAL purpose but to damage the 'everybody has a chance' appeal of track field as a sport. Therefore, any investment in research into the topic is not warranted, and should actually be discouraged. Research funding could be better spent elsewhere, they said. Does that kind of coach still exist? Don't coaches have any other kind of motivational techniques they can draw on, even if genetic roots theories DO turn out to be true? Or is it just an example of ostrich behaviour (sticking head in a hole in the ground to avoid seeing things that are scary, which by the way, exposes the posterior to open attack!) Is there practical VALUE to our sport of getting the answers to the genetics questions? If so, what? Will the truth set us free? ..hm... To me, this kind of examination of the 'Taboo' phenomenon, with it's political correctness and social bashing symptoms, is an even MORE interesting topic than the genetics topic behind it. What's the best way to get people to open their minds and THINK in spite of political incorrectness, in order to get truth out in the open? WhereEVER the truth turns out to be... Jon's approach sometimes seems to be in-the-face confrontation...or maybe I'm confusing his discussion technique with the responses he often stimulates... ... is that the best way to get the dialogue on a 'taboo' topic out in the open? I'm not sure I know the answer. It seems to have succeeded in stimulating a lot of discussion on this list, but how well does that approach work elsewhere? RT
Re: t-and-f: New thread regarding the Entine book
Don't coaches have any other kind of motivational techniques they can draw on, even if genetic roots theories DO turn out to be true? One might consider the approach taken by the character played by Woody Harrelson in the movie White Men Can't Jump- even though 'genetically challenged' and unable to dunk, he was able to use that reality as a reverse-psychology weapon in defeating his opponents- namely their disbelief and his capitalizing on their inability to seriously consider him as a potential threat- his dress and manner (his act) served to convince his opponents that he couldn't possibly be a genetic outlier, if they even recognized that such a thing could exist. His taunting of them also serving to trigger emotional responses which reduced the effectiveness of their superior natural skill set. Sort of the David versus Goliath syndrome. Very humorous to moviegoers, but perhaps also some relevance to coaches who have to coach 'genetically challenged' athletes ?... ...this approach might only work when the opponent isn't particularly intelligent and easily 'baited' ..Muhammad Ali was very good at this (see the George Foreman fight, when Ali was probably genetically inferior to Foreman but had a brilliant psychological game plan- the rope-a-dope) !... Also: can telling an athlete he's genetically inferior (or inferior in any other way) to somebody else make that athlete 'hungrier' to prove something to himself and others? Hungrier than his/her more gifted opponent? So much hungrier as to out-train the more confident opponent? This approach was also seen in the movie 'Rocky'- running up the Philly library steps, pounding sides of beef in a freezerbecause he'd always been told he was 'lower class'... Taken to an extreme, does the Army drill sergeant technique of yelling 'you're a scumbag, you're dirt!, etc', which seems to work in a lot of military training environments, also work to any extent in coaching scenarios? Some football coaches seem to like the technique... the theory seems to be that drawing out anger or hatred or resentment toward an intentional single focal point like a drill sergeant or a coach, serves to get the focus and single-mindedness that is otherwise difficult to motivate...at the end of boot camp, the challenge for the trainer is to then succeed in re-directing the focus from the D.I. or Coach to the 'enemy/ opponent'. I always thought the technique worked better (more positive results) on people with a low I.Q., people who can't see through what the D.I. is trying to do... ...I remember another movie with Jan-Michael Vincent as an extremely intelligent kid, who was totally unaffected by a Marine Corps D.I.'s textbook approach to boot camp training because he understood the whole psychology better than the D.I. himself!... ...but perhaps I stray too far from the Taboo topic at hand... RT
