Heat shock proteins = non sequitur. Joe Hobbyjogger gets plenty hot training in Baton Rouge in summer. Just makes him slower.
Elite runners avoid too much heat training. Varied temperature/humidity/air pressure is what they experience, to adapt to plasma shifts.
Plasma volume higher = hematocrit lower. Hematocrit is a percentage. Somebody tell subway surfers please.
JonO. wrote:
Heat shock proteins = non sequitur. Joe Hobbyjogger gets plenty hot training in Baton Rouge in summer. Just makes him slower.
Elite runners avoid too much heat training. Varied temperature/humidity/air pressure is what they experience, to adapt to plasma shifts.
Plasma volume higher = hematocrit lower. Hematocrit is a percentage. Somebody tell subway surfers please.
Balanced training, brah. Joe Hobbyjogger just jogs.
Joe Hobbyjogger is using a lot more energy in a race than Joe Elite.
This is where you go non sequitur again and rant about elites burning through their energy stores quicker.
That's why we need a reliable bioenergetics/biomechanics model because you people have no idea about either.
JonO. wrote:
Joe Hobbyjogger is using a lot more energy in a race than Joe Elite.
This is where you go non sequitur again and rant about elites burning through their energy stores quicker.
That's why we need a reliable bioenergetics/biomechanics model because you people have no idea about either.
They have to. Simple math, brah. No rant here.
You need to fit that into your model. Get going on it. We don't live forever.
Drugs help us to though.
JonO. wrote:
Joe Hobbyjogger is using a lot more energy in a race than Joe Elite.
This is where you go non sequitur again and rant about elites burning through their energy stores quicker.
That's why we need a reliable bioenergetics/biomechanics model because you people have no idea about either.
Actually no. If JoeH and JoeE are the same weight JoeE is putting out more power to run faster and burning more calories.
Carry on with your bioenergetics posts though, only you truly understand exercise physiology.
JonO. wrote:
I'm not imagining it, it's reality. You can't exceed homeoststasis. But since you don't understand the concept or they physics pertaining to it or the chemistry or biology, then you have to believe in the drugs.
They aren't using 4% more oxygen than they could naturally. That is a bioenergetic impossiblity.
So, back to my question, which you have avoided; what is your bioenergetics/biomechanics model?
So, the only difference between champions and amateurs is that amateur uses more oxygen for sweating?
JonO-no wrote:
JonO. wrote:
Joe Hobbyjogger is using a lot more energy in a race than Joe Elite.
This is where you go non sequitur again and rant about elites burning through their energy stores quicker.
That's why we need a reliable bioenergetics/biomechanics model because you people have no idea about either.
Actually no. If JoeH and JoeE are the same weight JoeE is putting out more power to run faster and burning more calories.
Carry on with your bioenergetics posts though, only you truly understand exercise physiology.
burn more calories in the same time, same calories in same distance.
power=work/time
I'm going to say "Post hoc ergo propter hoc".
Morrocan Magic wrote:
Of course, rekrunner & Aragon will say it's just a coincidence and there's nothing to see there.
Zede wrote:
JonO-no wrote:
Actually no. If JoeH and JoeE are the same weight JoeE is putting out more power to run faster and burning more calories.
Carry on with your bioenergetics posts though, only you truly understand exercise physiology.
burn more calories in the same time, same calories in same distance.
power=work/time
Right. JoeE is going to burn through calories at a faster rate. JonO, is stating otherwise.
JonO circumvented physics with that bioenergetics model. It was something like JE runs a Marathon in 2 hours and burns 3.9 pounds of sugar. JHJ does a Marathon in 4 hours and burns 4 pounds. Therefore JHJ uses more energy and EPO doesn't work.
Of course he's just a pseudoscientist.
Jono, didn't you already write the book on physiology, I mean phizzyology?
fred wrote:
Jono, didn't you already write the book on physiology, I mean phizzyology?
Hey Fred, Haven't seen you here in a while. Nothing new from Jon's lab if you were waiting for that.
JonO. wrote:
1)Why does no-one ask Indurain either?
2)But will some of the science experts here please explain how injecting EPO helps circumvent the laws of physics? Still waiting for an anwer on that one.
Answer 1) dirty, dirty, dirty
Answer 2) so conveniently you've switched from thermoregulation to the laws of physics. So steriods/testosterone/hgh/sarms give a stronger thrust in each stride against gravity or more powerful contractions, longer strides, the quicker the hip flexor pulls the thigh up, the quicker you go. The more stable the core is at high speed the less energy being wasted, the more efficient the athlete is. An increase in Hct mass means a lower accumulation of lactic acid at threshold pace, making the athlete fresher and able to go faster for longer.
Can't Believe What I'm Hearing wrote:
Aragon wrote:
... The study can be located by google using terms "Lodewijkx" and "col d'eze" and one of the first links is researchgate.
Say what??? LA, Riis, Pantani, Ullrich - all prolific EPO users who have won the Tour & other GTs during the EPO-abuse era. You're in the extreme minority that believe this. Trying running this through over at "The Clinic" forum and see what happens. Lol.
Out of curiosity, have you taken a look into the Paris-Nice paper, which calculates that there were many cyclists that won the Col d'Eze TT with W/kg of 5.4-5.6 in the 1980's whereas the best EPO-era figures were actually slightly lower?
Or don't you have any appetite to read any material that might weaken your case spending your time thinking which of your few links to attach into your next post?
(I should add that I spent some time recalculating the figures from the ascent chart and there are a few weird anomalies in the data that weaken their case about inefficacy of rHuEPO)
I found a paper that leaves no room for doubt.
Zede wrote:
burn more calories in the same time, same calories in same distance.
power=work/time
There are two types of efficiency, bioenergetic and biomechanical. We use 75% or more of our energy to produce heat in ideal conditions and more than that when we sweat more. So 25% is the maximum bioenergetic effficiency in ideal conditions.
Biomechanical efficiency is the neural skill of running and as elite Kenyan runners show, that is where the current future world records are achieved.
JonO. wrote:
Zede wrote:
burn more calories in the same time, same calories in same distance.
power=work/time
There are two types of efficiency, bioenergetic and biomechanical. We use 75% or more of our energy to produce heat in ideal conditions and more than that when we sweat more. So 25% is the maximum bioenergetic effficiency in ideal conditions.
Biomechanical efficiency is the neural skill of running and as elite Kenyan runners show, that is where the current future world records are achieved.
And faster energy consumption. Stop dodging that with your little army of straw men.
S = (F · VO2max )/ C
Either the denominator has the greatest variance, or also the numerator is very important.
Please explain your equation.
the moran is done his shift wrote:
JonO. wrote:
There are two types of efficiency, bioenergetic and biomechanical. We use 75% or more of our energy to produce heat in ideal conditions and more than that when we sweat more. So 25% is the maximum bioenergetic effficiency in ideal conditions.
Biomechanical efficiency is the neural skill of running and as elite Kenyan runners show, that is where the current future world records are achieved.
And faster energy consumption. Stop dodging that with your little army of straw men.
Wrong on two counts. Firstly, faster energy consumption has nothing to do with efficiency, in your model it actually implies the opposite. And secondly, your just wrong anyway, but you know that don't you?
