There are some decent, but not great, and sucky teams that train at altitude. Even when utilized correctly, altitude doesn't help more than it can hurt.
There are some decent, but not great, and sucky teams that train at altitude. Even when utilized correctly, altitude doesn't help more than it can hurt.
Less O2 wrote:
So how do you explain Goucher's ability to go out hard with the top guys when he won his XC title, or Torres'?
Supremely talented.
Beaver Tranquilizer wrote:
Terra Haute
"Terre Haute"
idiot detector wrote:
They were underdogs. Solinsky completely bombed. They had more talent on their team. It was like 4 or 5 to 1 in terms of first place votes. Don't imply you don't have to not understand XC to say Wisconsin was the favorite. Could Colorado win? Obviously, but on paper Wisconsin should have won just as they should have in 2004.
Yes, UW had more talent at each scoring position, but they just didn't have the developed depth and inspired performances like CU did. Even with Solinsky's bomb, each of UW's top 3 (their usual 2-4 runners) still beat each of CU's top 3. CU's 2nd man (due to a sub-par race there by Vaughn) at pre-Nationals, Nelson, was their 5th man Monday, but CU's 5th man at pre-Nationals, Heinonen, really stepped it up to be their 3rd scorer, which went a long ways towards negating that. Considering how UW's recruiting classes have gone, you'd think that their usual 5th and 6th scorers shouldn't have had too much trouble keeping up with CU's 4th and 5th scorers. UW graduates 2 scorers and returns 5 of their top 7, while CU graduates 3 scoring runners, yet returns 4 of their top 7 and will have redshirts to help. UW should be favored next year, too, unless Oregon really busts out of the gate with their army of talent. Iona returns all scorers and Stanford graduates 3 scorers and 5 of their top 7.
Next year will be a very good year but Oregon wins in '07 with this line-up:
Rupp - 4th again
Kiptoo - 15th
Acosta - 18th
Mercado - 24th
Klotz - 30th
Mercado - 52nd
Centrowitz - 70th
I find it hard to believe that altitude's negative and posotive effects balance each other out. From my understanding living in an oxygen reduced environment causes the kidneys to secrete more EPO which makes the bone marrow create more red blood cells for the blood stream. Someone who trains in altitude and then races at sea level would have the hematocrit(red blood cell count)of someone who just blood doped or an epo abuser. More RBC's = greater oxygen delivery to muscles. Greater and longer sustained oxygen delivery to muscles = delay of reaching lactic threshold. Correct me if i'm wrong.
Just like VO2 Max, hemocrit isn't the only or main performance variable. There's a reason that the vast majority of top elites don't live and train at altitude fulltime.
How did Pannone from Whitehouse Station NJ do at Colorado this year.
Most scientists/anthropologists would most likely disagree with the multiregional model for the evolution of Homo sapiens. In all liklihood Homo sapiens did leave Africa independent of Homo erectus.
This article, written by Don Johanson (he discovered Lucy), does a good job of describing the debate.