Trackbot! Dope Jon Orange
Trackbot! Dope Jon Orange
TrackBot decaffeinate Weldon Johnson.
I like it.
Trackbot! PRs Jon Orange
Where does trackbot get it's information from?
800ftw. wrote:
Where does trackbot get it's information from?
Mostly from Tilastopaja, as you can see in the source code:
https://habs.sdf.org/trackbot/source.cgiAlso to everyone, please ask me questions specific about trackbot via email or any one of the designated TrackBot threads. I just don't really want to spam non-related threads with the technical details if it's not relevant to discussion.
I wouldn't sweat it. This thread has been heavily spammed already.
habs wrote:
800ftw. wrote:Where does trackbot get it's information from?
Mostly from Tilastopaja, as you can see in the source code:
https://habs.sdf.org/trackbot/source.cgiAlso to everyone, please ask me questions specific about trackbot via email or any one of the designated TrackBot threads. I just don't really want to spam non-related threads with the technical details if it's not relevant to discussion.
Ok I see. So if I asked trackbot to find my own PBs it couldn't do it as I'm not in that list?
Cool programme anyway!
800ftw. wrote:
Ok I see. So if I asked trackbot to find my own PBs it couldn't do it as I'm not in that list?
Cool programme anyway!
Thanks. Yea, it's meant for elite runners. Though there are a lot of people in the DB, so if you ran D1 in recent years and have a unique name chances are you're probably in it.
I have no idea what you are talking about fred. As usual.
http://online.fliphtml5.com/rmkd/yjxj/#p=2Did you notice in the chart that there is a runner for the US named:
Molly Muddle
(I sure hope that an Irish person is not making fun of another Irish person in this chart.)
I did not see any Olympians today fred.
Where did they go fred?
Someone told me they all went to the Olympics.
Do you know where the Olympics are and when they start?
Thanks.
(I hope that you also read the entire boring article I gave you to read for a good summary on this topic. Please read all 83 references as well.)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3874847/Thanks fred.
(Please note that there is zero discussion of adrenergic receptor mechanisms of action.)
I do not find that surprising.
Your argument is essentially the more EPO the more one needs for the EPO to be effective. Wrong wrong wrong. However, your argument re viscosity is relevant to specially when a highly trained athlete goes from altitude to sea level (where it is more pronounced), thus the blood thinners used by elites the first week or so after coming down the mountain.
Go.Brits.w/stupid.Alberto.idea wrote:
Molly Muddle
(I sure hope that an Irish person is not making fun of another Irish person in this chart.)
I did not see any Olympians today fred.
Where did they go fred?
Someone told me they all went to the Olympics.
Do you know where the Olympics are and when they start?
Thanks.
(I hope that you also read the entire boring article I gave you to read for a good summary on this topic. Please read all 83 references as well.)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3874847/Thanks fred.
(Please note that there is zero discussion of adrenergic receptor mechanisms of action.)
I do not find that surprising.
The Olympians are all hiding in Paraguay so they don't get drug tested before their event.
Beta Adrenergic receptor activation would effect cardiac output at the same time as blood vessel constriction.
As well,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18391178Sure…but that is not important in how EPO works. Your study is about beta-2 adrenergic receptor agonists such as clenbuterol that are used to increase the muscle/fat ratios in cows in the cattle industry, and in cyclists such as Alberto Salazar…I mean Alberto Contador…in the cycling industry.
Here is a study that showed a large decrease (71%) in the incidence of thrombosis from prolonged stay at high altitude from the use of the vitamins folic acid, B12, and B6 to significantly lower homocysteine levels.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26319423
fred. I just turned the TV on and there are Olympics from Rio, Brazil on right now.
Why didn't you tell me?
The Olympians are probably in Rio now.
Darn.
MD Phan wrote:
Your argument is essentially the more EPO the more one needs for the EPO to be effective. Wrong wrong wrong.
If the only effect of altitude training were to increase endogenous EPO production, then my argument would be this simple. As evidence that it's not that simple, I'll reference Renato Canova's numerous posts stating that his brand of high/high training tends to reduce hematocrit, an effect which he attributes to large increases in blood volume. The thesis I'm putting forward in this thread is that in athletes where this happens (plasma volume increases to the point that it actually lowers hematocrit), such athletes should stand to gain more from exogenous EPO than others where this plasma increase hasn't occurred. Note that this is the opposite of Renato Canova's reasoning as he uses the same data to argue that EPO does not help athletes like his. On this point I simply disagree with him.
Early on in this thread SouthernFriedRealist and 800 dude pointed out that training in high heat and humidity is a cleaner example of the effect I'm hypothesising because it elicits the increase in blood plasma without increasing endogenous EPO production. The example of high/high training remains interesting, however, because of how popular high/high training currently is with the world's best distance runners.
But you're still working with the ridiculous but widely accepted concept that more red blood cells = more oxygen delivery.
I've shown you why this is a false concept, and why cardiac function is so reliable that it regulates oxygen delivery despite big changes in plasma volume.
You have to consider oxygen demand as the driving force, which is always met by oxygen delivery in a normal healthy cardiovascular system.
But I guess you want to keep bumping up these threads to keep the drugs hype going. After all, that's the true political path to follow in this phoney drugs war isn't it.
Good science be damned, there's a drugs war to profit from, especially in Olympic year. Bad science is always the more profitable and righteous way to go for any decent journalist. Am I right or am I right?
hallelujah!
Seriously though, peace buddy. You and I obviously have common interests or else we wouldn't be the only two keeping this thread alive. We differ in opinion but mostly in process. We both think we have found a flaw in standard exercise science. I've tried to make my case in this thread hoping to either see the idea shot down so I'd understand my error if it's wrong or just get the idea out there if it's basically sound.
I'd urge you to follow my example such as it is and lay out your best case in one thread for the everyone to read, critique, learn from. Start a thread for the adrenaline hypothesis, another for the elite runners use less oxygen hypothesis, etc. This business of jumping in other threads and posting the same stuff over and again about your pet theories isn't getting us anywhere. it just isn't a good way to convince people of something.
Jon Orange wrote:
But you're still working with the ridiculous but widely accepted concept that more red blood cells = more oxygen delivery.
I've shown you why this is a false concept, and why cardiac function is so reliable that it regulates oxygen delivery despite big changes in plasma volume.
You have to consider oxygen demand as the driving force, which is always met by oxygen delivery in a normal healthy cardiovascular system.
By the way, if you are right about this then, yes, that's the flaw in my argument. So please, make your best scientific case and because it's likely to be a lively one, I'd think it deserves its own thread.
Thanks. You're right, well mostly. The reason why I do it this way is because it's going to take many years for these ideas to take hold of the public consciousness. Starting threads about these ideas will have very little effect because they are so far from the conventional wisdom.
With the current drug dogma haveing being preached by so many for so long, there are so many vested interests in keeping things the way they are.
I think a book presenting these things would be a good idea, but only if I was working with the right editor and publisher. An idea I had just two days ago was for the editor to contribute his or her (or their) own opinions and ask me tough questions within the text, so that the reader isn't just getting my opinions. This would be interesting and important because a lot of training and racing concepts are based on the emotions of the athlete or coach so their are always going to be differences of opinion regardless of what can be demonstrated with numbers. As well as that, the challenge to conventional wisdom would be better served with a balanced argument and that can surely only be a positive thing?
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Strava thinks the London Marathon times improved 12 minutes last year thanks to supershoes
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
NAU women have no excuse - they should win it all at 2024 NCAA XC
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts