Robert Chung wrote:
> Bill C wrote:
> > Robert Chung wrote:
> >> 17 March 2005 issue of Journal of Applied Physiology:
> >>
> >>
> >
>
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&dopt=Abstract&db=PubMed&list_uids=15774697
> >
>
>
> You ought to be. Coyle was, and I'm guessing he's seen a few more
cases
> than you. The change in calculated efficiency (both gross and delta)
isn't
> small, it's pretty darn big.
Your right. The amount of the change is pretty big, but given Lance's
performance over his career which has been an indicator of increasing
performance and the fact that he started out as a genetic freak makes
this unusual gain more acceptable to me without raising all the other
issues of performance enhancement.
I'm taking it as just another indicator that Lance's body, combined
with his drive is capable of doing the same things, and making the same
adaptations that we are, just on a whole different scale. I'd like to
see comparative studies including people like Paula Newby-Fraser, Dave
Scott, and Scott Tinley all of whom got better as they matured. I guess
that the only person here who would have a real good idea about whether
the elite of the pro athletes actually also, gain proportionally and
commeasurate, with their genetic gifts would be Andy.
In simple words do the best of the best, also get a higher percentage
physical benefit from training too?
Bill C