Intensive Porcupine wrote:
On-topic.
If I was Mo's coach I would also work on his form.
As someone said before, he is very "bouncy" and he will benefit from staying closer to the ground when racing over longer distances.
That is very clear in the footage of the Great North Run.
Actually, new study says "bouncy running strides are more economical"
http://www.runnersworld.com/running-tips/are-bouncy-running-strides-more-economical+10
It looks like Farah's arm carriage is lower than in the past ie kipsang & Mataui.
I thought Salazar was an advocate of high arm carriage Ie Bekele?
Run 200k a week and you'll develop an economical style, doesn't hurt to refine it in the lab though, if you can.Nike's money, if that's how they want to spend, it's their business. Run a company on nothing but ideology and you end up with an East German Trabant rather than a West German VW, etc.Would Bill Gates and Microsoft fit the following?
LM wrote:
To give just ONE (there are many) complications, if you take all your profit and spend it right into humanitarian stuff, then you have nothing leftover with which to grow the business, limiting ability to make other contributions later, as well as doing nothing to increase the number of jobs and general amount of wealth that makes everyone living conditions better.
A Duck wrote:
And yet, rather then dedicate every moment of your life to solving those problems...you find the time to 1st world problems complain about it here...
A Duck wrote:
And yet, rather then dedicate every moment of your life to solving those problems...you find the time to 1st world problems complain about it here...
+ another 10
And heres a sneak peak on Mo's form and what hes good at in other areas
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/dec/21/mo-farah-this-much-i-know
El Keniano wrote:
How Kenyans manage to compete with this sort of science and technology boggles.
trollism wrote:
You know they've all got their dodgy doctor/coach/agent providing them with the latest 'support'?
And these Kenyans still loose to a clean Rupp. Hey even drugs cannot make up for superior caucasian genetics.
Do you really think they're not measuring changes? In the video the OP posted, Mo is having a VO2 max test, whcih measures an athletes oxygen intake at different speeds (aka efficiency). They definitely perform this test periodically, and measure changes in VO2 and LT. They can compare the results pre-form change and post-form change. WHen changing Mo's form, Nike definitely has a number of biomechanists on staff along with motion capture equipment to look at joint angles and the like.
And he will be beat by some kid from Africa who grew up running back and forth to school and does it for fun. No scientists, just a dream.
Yeah. I'd say its more like less than 1%. Maybe less than .1%. Running water, roof and walls that keep the elements out, car (or any form of transportation beyond your legs), 3 meals a day, any kind of formal education, access to a hospital, life expectancy beyond 55, access to potable water, not getting shot for voicing your opinion, a functioning city sewer, cell phone, internet, heater, AC, etc... each blessing you add just takes you deeper and deeper into the world elite crowd, making I dare say 99% of the occupy movement some of the biggest hypocrites ever to roam a city park and scream "injustice"That all being said, he raises a valid question: Is the pursuit of excellence in any avenue worthy of the costs incurred? Hard to do the math, not knowing the exact numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that a roided baseball megastar who will never even enter the conversation of "greatest outfielder, hitter etc (let alone greatest overall player) of all time, still gets paid more money every time he scratches his crotch, than is spent on athletes like Farah, Bekele, Rupp, Rudisha etc in a month to learn more and run faster.At the end of the day though, Farah doesn't strike me as one who would chain himself to batting cage and scream injustice. I think he probably just enjoys the fact that the (by comparison) exponentially small amount of money that is spent on helping him become the best in the world at what he does will never be enough to qualify him to join the ranks of the media driven sports d-bag club. But that money may enable him to inspire tens or even hundreds of thousands to reach beyond their grasp. Maybe those masses all end up living in 850 sq ft homes and have just that much more to contribute to the less fortunate in society.
Gamera wrote:
Hardloper wrote:Please get over yourself. What you just described puts you in the top 10% of the world in terms of quality of life, but somehow you think because you give a minority of your income to charity gives you the right to call others brainwashed psychopaths and say corporate executives you have never met are @ssholes for being a couple percent higher on the overall wealth distribution.
Every altruistic person I've known has been humble and introspective, knowing that they can't inspire others to do the same by judging them. You'll find the @sshole in the mirror.
That's fine. I'm not interested in convincing you I'm a good guy. Why would I be? I don't know you and will never meet you. I'm a hypocritical dick who wants to pretend to be altruistic. Fine. Whatever. I only brought up my own situation because somebody asked what kind of car I drive, apparently assuming I would confess to alternating between a Rolls Royce and a specially modified 3-storey Hummer.
But attacking me doesn't make my argument wrong. If Charles Manson said that running 100-120 mpw with some speedwork mixed in was a good way to get in racing shape, would you say he was wrong just because he is repellent on a personal level? I stand by what I said earlier:
-getting a team of experts and all their resources to change Farah's form is a waste of time and money
-flying a cryochamber to NY for several days of cooling Ritz off after his shakeout runs before the marathon is a waste of time and money
-this seems like typical Nike behavior to me
-I find it a shame that resources are wasted on such useless things when so many out there are subsisting on so little
-I find Nike especially galling among corporations, because I happen to care about distance running, and they shamelessly exploit the memory of Steve Prefontaine to serve the bottom line
So criticize me all you want - I really don't care. But I'd prefer you address the above statements.
Gamera wrote:
so superior wrote:What kind of car do you drive?
Since you ask, I don't drive much (I commute by bike most of the time), but the car I do drive is a 1993 Honda Accord with 150K miles on it. So if you're trying to bust me for hypocrisy there, you failed.
And as it happens, since you're apparently looking to go the ad hominem attack route, I do live reasonably close to the ideals I express. I don't watch TV, I buy my clothes at Goodwill, I rarely go out, I live with my wife and 2 kids in an 800 sq ft house, and what little money I have left over after expenses, I give to what I consider worthy causes. Yes, I know it's boring and you don't care about me, but the thing is, your question indicates that nobody has the right to question Nike or other horrible corporations because they themselves are hypocrites. But that's not true! I may be a dick, but I don't live my life like a self-centered psychopath, and neither do a lot of other people. It's convenient to act like nothing can be done about anything anyway, so we might as well all act like mass-consuming selfish scum, but I don't buy it.
I think many people are so brainwashed by the status quo line that selfishness is good, consumerism is good, being as shallow and stupid and insipid as possible is the way to go (see almost all pop stars, sports stars, etc) that they think anybody questioning this approach is just some dweeb who doesn't know how to have fun, or a hypocrite. Which is ironic, when you think about it.
THAT SOUNDS AWFUL
Gamera wrote:
LM wrote:Ultimately though, it just seems like you have an entirely different viewpoint of what corporations should do with the money they earn. It sounds as if you feel corporations should take excess earnings and, instead of distributing them to shareholders, they ought to use them for humanitarian projects.
AHAHAHAHA! That's hilarious!! Humanitarian projects! That would be so stupid! Who in their right mind would want to take their hard-stolen money and help those less fortunate them? They would have to be complete a**holes to do something so perverse!
You're post shows that you actually don't know how public corporations work. Corporations don't actually DO anything. Extreme left wing hippies like you like to speak about corporations as if they are actual people. It's just a legal entity that provides limited liability to the shareholders and serves as a capital raising devices. No more, no less.
Nike is made up of 888 Billion shares that are held by actual people. Ultimately its up to those shareholders to decide what they want to do with their excess profits. If they chose to be greedy and not help the less fortunate, then your beef is with those people, not NIKE.
You're anger towards Nike is mis-targeted and in the end I'd argue is counterproductive because you're muddling the issues. The issue here is not corporate greed, or nike's greed. The issue here is the same issue that humans have always faced, individual greed. In this case it's the 1% of the world and the US that sit on top of 99% of the wealth. It's an individual problem, not a corporate problem.