Triathlete's training bible and power requirements

[Sam]

"Amie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It somewhat depends on the way you train as well as your response to
> weight training. One can be strong but not big. There was a female
> powerlifter in the area who competed in the 124 lb weight class, and
> she could squat almost 400 lbs. Training for strength is different
> than training for hypertrophy (size).
>

And riding a bike requires very little strength (look up the term in an ex
phys book). Roadies (aside from what passes for a sprinter) have average
leg strength. However, their aerobic capacities are wonderful. Lance did
not get where he is in the weight room; he got there riding his bike a lot.

 

[Amie]

I'm not sure that riding a bike requires very little strength, though.
It somewhat depends on the terrain, but if you compare most
pro-cyclist's legs to, say, a pro-marathoner's legs, generally they are
much more muscular.

Running takes very little legs strength especially on flats - about 25%
of the bodyweight is supported with each pushoff. However biking -
think especially Alps as the extreme example - takes more strength. I'm
not sure if Lance went in the weight room or just got his strength
through cycling, but his legs are definately strong.

-Amie

 

[KLO]

what is your problem, JT? leave it alone already. you got the last
word in. happy now?

go ride with carmichael and discuss it with him and leave this thread
alone. sheesh.

let's keep this to the topic at hand, please. flaming unwelcome!

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 12 Jul 2005 07:39:06 -0700, "KLO" <[email protected]> wrote:

>what is your problem, JT? leave it alone already. you got the last
>word in. happy now?
>
>go ride with carmichael and discuss it with him and leave this thread
>alone. sheesh.
>
>let's keep this to the topic at hand, please. flaming unwelcome!

OK -- what have you contributed? Nothing? OK.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Sam]

It is aerobic POWER that matters.

If strength is so important in the mountains how come the sprinters suck?


"Amie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I'm not sure that riding a bike requires very little strength, though.
> It somewhat depends on the terrain, but if you compare most
> pro-cyclist's legs to, say, a pro-marathoner's legs, generally they are
> much more muscular.
>
> Running takes very little legs strength especially on flats - about 25%
> of the bodyweight is supported with each pushoff. However biking -
> think especially Alps as the extreme example - takes more strength. I'm
> not sure if Lance went in the weight room or just got his strength
> through cycling, but his legs are definately strong.
>
> -Amie
>

 

[KLO]

whatever, dude. you have contributed alot and thank you for that. but
this was a bit over the top. that's all i was saying.

 

[Tom Henderson]

John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> My first post and second posts in this thread were very civil. My
> first one in response to your posting material you did not have the
> right to post said "It's not right to post copyrighted material like
> this w/o permission. of the copyright holder. Did you get permission?
> If not, it's bad."
>

OK, I'd like a vote. Who gets the Brian Wagner award, JFT, or Amie?

It's a tough call, but I'd like to start by voting for Amie.

 

[Triathlete]

Tom Henderson wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>
>>My first post and second posts in this thread were very civil. My
>>first one in response to your posting material you did not have the
>>right to post said "It's not right to post copyrighted material like
>>this w/o permission. of the copyright holder. Did you get permission?
>>If not, it's bad."
>>
>
>
> OK, I'd like a vote. Who gets the Brian Wagner award, JFT, or Amie?
>
> It's a tough call, but I'd like to start by voting for Amie.

Brian was always very kind to me. I understand JFT's point and he is
rather strong, where as Amie seems softer. Neither one really fit
Brian's shoes. I thought that Brian was always trying to beat down the
overbearing.

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 07:20:49 GMT, Triathlete <[email protected]>
wrote:

>, where as Amie seems softer.

Isn't it nice he is able to be soft when defending illegal and immoral
action. I wish I could be so nice.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Amie]

Force (strength) and Speed (the ability to move fast) are two different
things. World class marathon runners, for example, are FAST but not
very strong. Sprinters can apply speed for shorter periods of time, but
if they 'suck' in the mountains they probably do not have enough
muscular endurance - the ability to put forth large amounts of effort
for an extended period of time. And muscular endurance is a combination
of Force (strength) and Endurance.

They may have a combination of Speed + Endurance (anearobic endurance)
for longer sprints... but that's still different from Force/Strength.

 

[Amie]

I've been ignoring this thread because it is so stupid, and wanted to
put an end to it for everyone's sake here. I thought people would have
other things to do - train for one- rather than keep an idiotic flame
alive.

If it makes you feel any better, I DID ask some of my colleagues. And
they agreed with me.

I truly don't care who votes for who in whatever idiocy award this
continuation represents. I am not responding to this any longer because
it is a waste of my time, not to mention everyone else's - say what you
will. Have fun, but I'm finished with this.

-Amie

 

[John Hardt]

On 7/16/05 7:54 AM, in article, "Amie" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I've been ignoring this thread because it is so stupid, and wanted to
> put an end to it for everyone's sake here. I thought people would have
> other things to do - train for one- rather than keep an idiotic flame
> alive.
>
> If it makes you feel any better, I DID ask some of my colleagues. And
> they agreed with me.
>
> I truly don't care who votes for who in whatever idiocy award this
> continuation represents. I am not responding to this any longer because
> it is a waste of my time, not to mention everyone else's - say what you
> will. Have fun, but I'm finished with this.
>
> -Amie
>

GAME OVER! I cast my vote for the Brain W. award for JFT.

It was a close race - I stayed up nights trying to decide which way to go.
But, at the end of the day, Amie shot herself in the foot at the last minute
with the above post. Brian W. would have never suggested anything so
sensible as ignoring or killing a flame thread. ;-)

Current vote tally: JFT 2, Amie 0.


[DISCLAIMER: The above is a joke. It is not intended to be taken seriously
by either of the participants in this thread, other readers, innocent
bystanders, or anyone named Brian W. The Brian W. award is intended to
serve as entertainment for those viewing this newsgroup for an extended
period of time. Winning or losing the Brian W. award may be considered
positive or negative at the sole discretion of the recipient. The Brian W.
award is fictional. No triathletes were harmed in the posting of this
message.]

 

[KLO]

[DISCLAIMER: The above is a joke. It is not intended to be taken
seriously
by either of the participants in this thread, other readers, innocent
bystanders, or anyone named Brian W. The Brian W. award is intended to
serve as entertainment for those viewing this newsgroup for an extended
period of time. Winning or losing the Brian W. award may be considered
positive or negative at the sole discretion of the recipient. The
Brian W.
award is fictional. No triathletes were harmed in the posting of this
message.]

JH, that is hilarious.

 

[Triathlete]

Amie wrote:
> I've been ignoring this thread because it is so stupid, and wanted to
> put an end to it for everyone's sake here. I thought people would have
> other things to do - train for one- rather than keep an idiotic flame
> alive.
>
> If it makes you feel any better, I DID ask some of my colleagues. And
> they agreed with me.
>
> I truly don't care who votes for who in whatever idiocy award this
> continuation represents. I am not responding to this any longer because
> it is a waste of my time, not to mention everyone else's - say what you
> will. Have fun, but I'm finished with this.

I liked Brian. He wasn't an idiot, and neither were his posts or
thoughts. To say that either of you are acting like him in some ways, is
not an insult.

 

[Triathlete]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 07:20:49 GMT, Triathlete <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>, where as Amie seems softer.
>
>
> Isn't it nice he is able to be soft when defending illegal and immoral
> action. I wish I could be so nice.

Being soft, is not always being nice and can be very cruel indeed.

You were protecting what you thought was right, and I respect your
position in this matter. You were protecting the source of the
information and the hard work put into the article.

I thought that you were a bit harsh at the start because I too have
posted direct links with a copy of the material attached, along with the
date and time of article because I thought it was easier on the reader
for me to do so. I have changed my mind, because of your posts.

You are right in that if someone does something illegal that same
something should be pointed out to them. Also, you were right that it is
better for the link to be posted so that the author or webpage owner has
the benefit of the readers coming to their webpage to view the
advertisements, sponsors, and other information only available via the
web page. You are also right in that students and/or Universities pay to
use documents that are copied in their entirety, unless otherwise marked
as ok to use without payment and/or with author approval.

I also believe that because Amie posted the link, and author of the
article, readers will click on the link and some benefit will be had for
all involved in the creation and advertising of the article. Without
Amie's post not as many would have benefited be it the author, sponsors,
webpage host and any others involved.

Amie, however, posted that her credentials in this matter were "a *bit*
more extensive than yours". Amie then went on to post that she was a
journalist, etc. In that regard, Amie has relinquished two points to you
in her attempt to argue the points through fallacies of intimidation,
authority, and appeals to popular belief.

 

[Triathlete]

John Hardt wrote:
> No triathletes were harmed in the posting of this
> message.]


My brain was hurt.

 

[Tom Henderson]

"Amie" <[email protected]> wrote in news:1121514863.132092.304290
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> I truly don't care who votes for who in whatever idiocy award this
> continuation represents. I am not responding to this any longer because
> it is a waste of my time, not to mention everyone else's - say what you
> will. Have fun, but I'm finished with this.
>

Amie and JFT, I apologize. The BW award was just a joke for the benefit of
the folks who've been around a few years. Brian was know for sticking to an
argument to the very end, determined to get the last post. He was not an
idiot, though he occasionally played one quite well, as most of us have.
The thread had gotten a bit silly and i just had to add a little more.

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 21:02:36 GMT, Triathlete <[email protected]>
wrote:


> I also believe that because Amie
> posted the link, and author of the
> article, readers will click on the link and some benefit

Amie only posted the link *after* receiving criticism for posting
copyrighted material without permission as an attempt, so it's not
very admirable.

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************