Tuesday 10 July 2012

[Supertraining] Digest Number 4589

4 New Messages
Digest #4589

Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:54 am (PDT) . Posted by: "pushprogress" pushprogress
deadliftdiva wrote:

> 1. Will inclusion of Oscar and his blades end up impairing the Special Olympics and the other special Games for those with physical and mental challenges....

Hi Linda, interesting topic.

For those not familiar with the "other special Games," the Paralympic Games are for those who have physical disabilities. In order to compete in the Paralympic Games, an athlete has to meet both national and international performance standards.

Just my $0.02--The world of "adapted sport" exists to enable the disabled to participate and compete in sports. If a person has a disability but is able to compete with those who are not disabled, and if the governing body of the sport allows such a person to do so, then great. For disabled athletes who want to compare their performances with those of other athletes who have comparable disabilities, adapted sport is the way to go.

FWIW, my wife was a middle-disance track athlete who enjoyed competing in open college and masters meets. She was, and remains, visually impaired and uses a cane or guide dog to get around town, so she used a guide runner when she competed on the track. She also competed in four Paralympic Games in the T-12 classification and ran in other track meets for the visually impaired, such as those sponsored by the International Blind Sports Ass'n (IBSA) and the United States Association of Blind Athletes.

Regards,

John

Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:56 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Nick Tatalias" nicktatalias
Hi Linda and all

I have wondered about this for some time and these are my current musings
on the subject. Since Oscar hails from my neck of the woods I am absorbed
by his story. For me it comes in several parts. My coach has been the
Para olympic coach for the SA powerlifting at the Olympics including
Sydney, Athens and Bejing, and his association with the paraolympic teams
perhaps gives me some insight, perhaps not.

Firstly Oscar only just qualified for this event, he is unlikely to beat
many, if he progresses past his heat this will be an oustanding achievement.

The science seems to say that the blades give him an advantage* in a race*,
mainly no fatigue in returning energy at top speed running , however his
start is compromised as he does not have the calf muscles and foot
extension to help generate starting forces and as with all athletes there
is no energy to return at that stage of the race. In the wet Oscars
acceleration is very poor (thinking of London weather I wonder about
this). But advantage or not for Oscar for me what that argument neglects to
cover is that competing at the higher levels and running fast in a race is
only possible through hard training and the ability to recover from the
training. Its hard to quantify but I watch the paraolympic athletes who
train at our gym (bench pressers mostly) and life for them is hard much
harder than for able body athletes, everything from going to the toilet to
getting into bed is hard. The organisms ability to recover is compromised
by the level of other stressors. This compromises the athletes ability to
recover. Meaning that training is less effective (relatively). Although
Oscar is well adapted to his life, his life is just that much harder to get
through daily than is an able bodied athlete, Oscar suffers from
compromised training recovery in the same way that a clean athlete suffers
relative to a drug assisted athlete. I remember reading a post on this
site last year about sleep deprivation leading to a significant, about 20%
loss in performance and recovery (if memory serves me correctly) it struck
me that for the para athletes there whole life is compromised and recovery
compromised may equate to a loss in performance similar in magnitude, pure
speculation of course, but I think a worthy discussion topic.

I think of a fellow gym rat who at the worlds last year the day before he
was due to compete suffered from a pressure sore, an affliction suffered by
wheel chair bound people. He was unable to compete (he may have medaled
given his gym lifts) and since then he has spent over 6months in hospital
with repeated skin grafts and operations. He has not been able to train
even. This is an extreme situation, and perhaps overly dramatic but I
think that it reiterates the point about how much harder life is for
athletes with disability.

Finally what do sports represent and why do we love to watch sports for me
it shows people's finer traits namely the ability of people to overcome
adversity, hard work, fairness in competition and these are an inspiration
to us all. For me Oscar is each of those, some may contest fairness, but
for me his participation is fair and above all inspirational.

Regards
Nick Tatalias
Johannesburg
South Africa

On 5 July 2012 21:29, <deadliftdiva@comcast.net> wrote:

> **
>
>
> A man much previously discussed on our board is now entered in two running
> events at the Summer Games.
>
> For discussion, I'd like to ask our group a couple of questions:
>
> 1. Will inclusion of Oscar and his blades end up impairing the Special
> Olympics and the other special Games for those with physical and mental
> challenges by encouraging such entrants to pass up them up for the
> mainstream?
>
> 2. Are the blades themselves "fair" against the meat feet and legs of the
> other competitors? There has been some discussion about the energy savings
> and other concerns - that the blades are more "springy" and possibly
> "better" than meat feet/legs?
>
> 3. If you believe the blades are "fair" for running events, would you also
> believe they retain that "fairness" if you were to see them entered in the
> high jump or other more "springy" events? Would they be an "unfair"
> advantage in say, high hurtles as well?
>
> 4. If Oscar ends up defeating the non-challenged entrants (the non bladed
> entrants), what do you believe will be the result of this and do you think
> it will result in a ban? Court challenges as to the "fairness" of the
> entry?
>
> My personal opinion is that although shoes have been changing and
> improving over time, they do not account for the springy nature of the
> blades, nor do they account for the lack of energy expenditure or oxygen
> debt that limbs do. We penalize many means of changing one's energy profile
> - like blood doping, etc. While the entrant is fast enough and will bring a
> great deal of attention to the events, I'm not sure it will be a continued
> feature of the games, that the inclusion may encourage some attempts to
> mimic the effect of the blades by way of devices not currently allowed or
> other means yet to be determined. That athletes without blades may find
> themselves behind someone with what was previously considered a
> disadvantage in sport and become desperate to keep up...any way they can.
> Gold medals mean money and livelihood, sometimes for the family of the
> winner for life in many countries. There's too much at stake...
>
> I look forward to reading the discussion and see what really happens with
> this amazing athlete and the Games themselves.
>
> the Phantom
> aka Linda Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter
> Denver, Colorado, USA
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:25 am (PDT) . Posted by: "deadliftdiva@comcast.net"
Hi Ken - good to hear from you :) Still deadlifting over here, so that's still my nick. :) I've also read and agreed with a good portion of Carson's posting as to the opportunity of choosing to compete with the regular sport or the special one set aside for those with special challenges.

Amazing return posts, very enlightening, thank you for putting the research synopsis quite well and understandable. Yours and Carson's post put the two major sides of this question of Oscar's competing in the main Olympic Games in the true frame it should be in - the two main questions we have now are:

1. Is it fair to non amputees who do not have the same technology (proven to be a major advantage by the researchers and not replicated by existing shoes or other aids to a non amputee - that without the same blade technology, the able bodied athletes are in a serious disadvantage over the duration of the 400 meters. The times he is putting up are 2 seconds slower than Michael Johnson (USA) WR holder - but faster than the entrant from Great Britain by nearly 1.5 seconds.

2. Is it a problem for the ParaOlympic Games and other organizations that aid the athlete whose will to win is great despite having obstacles to overcome and adapt to in order to compete?

With regard to question 1 - the evidence may be more clear after Ken's post and the actual running times of the athlete in question that there may be some advantage - or that he has learned to make the blades an advantage. Another good question is whether or not the athlete has experienced disruption of training due to the question of whether he would be permitted to compete, or other factors as the large press interest in the story. His experience at a full Worlds level is also possibly one of the questions as to his performance in the Olympic Games - he has run a quick enough race at 45.07 seconds to qualify for Games.

The further question is whether an athlete with such challenges has an advantage over the non amputee athletes. It is here I disagree, respectfully, with Carson on his comparison to the participation in PL meets as a sight challenged lifter. I have actually participated in a dual meet that was for several years held in Denver, Colorado, with the USBAA PL Nationals and a state level PL competition for sighted athletes. What I have generally observed is that although loss of sight presented a significant challenge in many activities, that many of the USBAA athletes were quite strong and some were quite capable of competing against sighted and quite competitive PL here. One athlete in particular was competing in the deadlift - and the bar was rolling away - he helicoptered 600 lbs at under 200 lbs bodyweight and seemed to still be strong enough to lift more - there was a gasp from some onlookers as we were aware of how strong that young man really was....and he lacked the experience along with the sight not to try such a feat.

Were athletes to perform with an artificial limb that contributed infinitely better grasp of the bar - or one that caused a springy return of the bar up from the chest - say a "hand blade" that caused a loading and rebounding of a bar with more weight, this would then be questioned by those athletes without such an advantage.

So for a runner with a sight issue to run in a regular race, were they able to do so - I would not have the same question but agree with Carson that he should be permitted to enter, provided he would run in his lane somehow and make the same turns and other general requirements of the race as the other athletes do - as Carson clearly does in PL.

The questions remain both about the athlete's base talent before the blades are added and then what would happen if someone made the most of the blades - say you then ran against Michael Johnson at his peak - would it prove an advantage if equally gifted athletes ran against each other? Did the blades make an average athlete into an exceptional one?

By his time, he properly should be included in the Olympic Games. But there are also athletes quicker than those without an impairment who are much faster than those who have regular legs - this argument might also serve to say "wheelchair runners should be allowed to compete in regular road races". Some athletes with clear disadvantage in other activities are actually superior at some of the PL moves - for example, those with abnormally short legs may be gifted at the squat, or abnormally short arms, the bench press...and also be in a far lighter weight class on top of it all, due to their otherwise shortened limbs. Generally with amputees in PL, there are formulas used to adjust the athlete into the proper weight class, that is, to add back the weight estimated to be represented by the missing meat limb - to attempt to level the playing field. Thus the athlete may compete against their peers if they wish to in the regular PL federations.

We are left to await the results of the races and the continuing consideration of whether it aids or injures the organizations who have made a good job of providing opportunity where it was not provided before for those who face daily challenges in their lives. Will the attention help the organizations who gave this athlete his start or hamper them by making other athletes wish to go to the mainstream events, along with funding?

The Phantom
aka Linda Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter
Denver, Colorado, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: CoachJ1@aol.com
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 6, 2012 3:55:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Hi Linda!

Good to hear from you!

My kids still refer to you as the "Deadlift Diva" That is a cool nickname!

I think the OP story has divided the research community, at least there are
disagreement among the seven who were originally involved in testing
Pistorius relative to the what the blades were allowing him to do.

Two of the members of that research team (Peter Weyand and Matt Bundle)
have never backed off their position regarding what their data show relative
to Pistorius's swing time--an indication of a clear advantage.

However, the facts behind the CAS ruling really have been misreported to
the point that Bundle/Weyand issued the following in an effort to present
the actual facts.

Misreported Incorrect Item 1 - The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
ruled that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO NOT provide an advantage vs.
intact limbs during sprint running.
Fact â€" The publicly available ruling of the CAS indicates that the issue
the court considered was whether the specific eligibility ban imposed on Mr.
Pistorius by the IAAF was scientifically valid or not.
Fact - The court DID NOT rule “no advantage” for Mr. Pistorius. Rather,
the court overturned the IAAF’s eligibility ban due to the inadequate
supporting evidence offered by the IAAF. In the very ruling that overturned the
ban, the CAS specifically pointed out that Mr. Pistorius blades may, in fact,
provide a competitive advantage.

Misreported Incorrect Item 2 â€" Matthew Bundle and Peter Weyand testified
before the CAS that the artificial limbs of Oscar Pistorius DO NOT PROVIDE a
competitive advantage and at a later time reversed themselves and stated
that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO PROVIDE an advantage.
Fact â€" First, neither of us were present at the CAS hearing. Second, since
we first reviewed the data obtained in Dr Weyand’s laboratory in the
spring of 2008 we have been completely consistent in our public and scientific
communications in stating:
1) The scientific rationale put forth by the IAAF leading to Pistorius’
ban in 2007, was not valid, and
2) The entirely distinct data that we collected and published with Drs.
Herr, Kram and others, indicate that the carbon fiber prostheses worn by Mr.
Pistorius provide major competitive advantages vs. biological limbs.

Misreported Incorrect Item 3 â€" The 11.9 second advantage over 400-meters
provided to Mr. Pistorius by his artificial limbs is a “back of the envelope
calculation” that has never been peer-reviewed.
Fact â€" All of the data used to quantify the advantage that Mr. Pistorius’
blades provide was published after peer-review and with Drs. Herr and Kram
as co-authors. These data first appeared in an original manuscript that
was published in the print version of the Journal of Applied Physiology in
April 2009.
A second peer-reviewed paper presented the analysis that used the
previously published data to quantify Mr. Pistorius’ 11.9 second advantage over
400-meter race. This second manuscript was a point/counterpoint contribution
that also appeared in the Journal of Applied Physiology. The peer review of
this second manuscript was conducted in accordance with the Journal’s
policy as described on its website:
“Articles in the pro-and-con series are subject to peer-review by the
editor and editorial consultants, and acceptance cannot be guaranteed in
advance.”
Our point/counterpoint manuscript was reviewed and accepted by the former
editor-in-chief of the Journal.
The two quantitative relationships used to determine the magnitude of Mr.
Pistorius’ advantage first appeared in respective papers published in 2000
and 2003. The supporting data bases in the original and subsequent papers
include hundreds of all-out running trials that validated the accuracy of
these relationships to within 3.5% or less.

Misunderstood Item 4 â€" Why did Peter Weyand and Matthew Bundle wait until
18 months after the CAS Hearing to make their conclusions public?
Answer 4 â€" Because doing so was the only responsible, fair and
scientifically credible way to disseminate our research findings that Mr. Pistorius’
artificial limbs do indeed provide a major competitive advantage.
The least responsible course of action would have been to release our
advantage conclusion without: 1) the supporting data and analysis, and 2)
without peer review by other scientists. Early public release of our conclusion
without data, a supporting analysis and peer-review would have brought about
confusion for all, been unfair to Mr. Pistorius, other athletes, policy
makers, and the public. This course also would have violated the well-founded
conventions for the ethical, responsible dissemination of scientific
information and conclusions.

One result of the scientific disagreement among researchers working on the
Pistorius project was that the peer-review publication process necessarily
involved two steps, a first publication authored by all that introduced the
relevant data, and a second in which we were able to publish our advantage
analysis and conclusions alongside an alternative conclusion offered by
Drs. Kram and Herr. Because each round of the peer-review process typically
takes a minimum of one to two months after the lengthy process of manuscript
preparation, we were fortunate to publish the two papers as quickly as we
did."

I hope this helps. I've had an interest/involvment in double BTK amputees
since former paralympic champion Tony Volptentest compteted on my school
track here in Lisle back in '97--years before Pistorius and his carbon fiber
blades became an issue.

Respectfully,

Ken Jakalski
Lisle Senior High School
Lisle, IL USA

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:54 am (PDT) . Posted by: "François" francois_gazzano
Hi, if these topics interests you, you might find the articles listed below useful.

http://www.athletemonitoring.com/about-overtraining.html
http://www.athletemonitoring.com/blog/

François Gazzano
Moncton, NB Canada

GROUP FOOTER MESSAGE
Modify/cancel your subscription at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups

Sign all letters with full name & city of residence if you
wish them to be published!

on

No comments:

Post a Comment

Finish Reading ? Make Your Comment Now..!

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)