 |
> home
> community >
discussion forums > mainstream racing
> pose research link (Page 5)
|
    |
 |
| > rules | > faq | > e-mail to a friend | moderator: sue, Warrior1971
 |
 |
| Author |
Topic: Pose research link |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
 posted Jul-08-2007 05:03 AM
   
quote:
Or you can read:http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/fdurgin1/publications/DurginFoxKim2003.pdf
But I thought: quote:
Ok, so throwing studies at each other like spit wads in class doesn’t mean much to me, because the end question is how does one run faster?
So do studies matter or not?
quote:
If I’m faster at the 100 meter sprint, then building the cardio skills to run a marathon would extrapolate easy to beating him in a race.
If wishes were horses beggars would ride. Step up, if you beat me I'll shake your hand - until then it's just talk.
You seem, despite your contention that they don't matter, adept at linking to studies - why don't you link to a couple of your race results instead?
At the end of the day, if you want to show people that you are the real deal, showing us your time over a standard race distance is the only way to silence the sceptics. quote:
Give me math my friend, or your opinions won’t mean much to me or anyone else.
Unfortunately, this isn't a math message board - give us race times, nothing else matters on here. [This message has been edited by hopper3011 (edited Jul-08-2007).]
IP: Logged |
laker
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-09-2007 11:50 AM
quote:
Originally posted by sport jester:
And yeah, you probably could well be a faster runner than myself, but if I can run straighter, I’m in reality running the shorter distance and would beat you anyway…
No, the person that gets there first wins. Is that too complicated for you?
I
Tigger is getting it, and beginning to think differently. While he jokes about his observation, he’s looking at what he once took for granted and postulating a reason for why birds circle in the directions that they do. That’s intelligence at work, something that you have yet to indicate any measurement of to me. Yeah, he's got your back man
So all I did was connect a few dots (you know, the ones that take intelligence to figure out) as to why the best Kenyan distance runners, the most efficient walking women, and the world’s fastest sprinter as a cheetah is, all come from the same place on earth.
And this means what exactly? Have they all been working together?
And you still have yet to describe the difference in running biomechanics between a cheetah and their prey, as both have four legs, yet one is clearly the faster runner…
I think biology and evolution would explain it pretty well. And yes, the track direction of running counterclockwise is determined by our “imperfect” gait, not the design as you postulated. Yeah, they had originally planned to make tracks straight. But since we can't run staight they had to curve them. Over the course of a road race, with no lines to guide him as a track runner has, Hopper as well as the vast majority of runners may be faster but have no clue as to how far they truly run for any given distance. If I’m faster at the 100 meter sprint, then building the cardio skills to run a marathon would extrapolate easy to beating him in a race. Sorry skippy, it doesn't work that way.
Running faster means nothing, if you run further for any race difference than your opponent, speed doesn’t matter as you‘ll still lose.
Pretty sure we've already covered that.
So in a track environment, the counterclockwise rotation takes advantage of the most common right leg dominance by utilizing the natural circular path to allow a runner their highest speed possible.
What if the guy who invented the track was left handed? Wouldn't that mess up your brilliant theory?
Olderthandirt,
You made reference to the elasticity of tendons in animals which I appreciate because biologists are well aware of how lacking of muscle structure most animals such as horses, gazelles, antelope or others similar in biological makeup of their lower limb structures truly are.
They use tendons with a much greater efficiency than humans do and evolved with very little muscle attached to them. For humans, altering and improving our tendon use requires altering our balance to maximize changing the weight loads and balance skills necessary to utilize our tendons as efficiently as horses, deer, elk, or even rabbits do… Maybe you’ve noticed that very few running quadrupeds have calf muscles as humans do. Even the highest leaping animal in ratio to bodyweight, the grasshopper, doesn’t have a calf muscle… Hopper should know why…
Yeah, because studying and emulating the grasshopper will make us better jumpers. Or does that belong on the NBA thread?
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-09-2007 03:30 PM
quote:
Yeah, because studying and emulating the grasshopper will make us better jumpers. Or does that belong on the NBA thread?
Sadly, to add to all the errors the village idiot has made previously, the grasshopper isn't the best jumper per bodyweight - not even close. The flea used to be considered the best, they are able to produce a force of 135 times their bodyweight, but research has since found the the spittlebug is able to produce a force of 400 times its bodyweight. A grasshopper produces a force of about 8 times its bodyweight; not even in the top ten.
As a researcher he's almost as good as he is a coach - that is to say absolutely useless! His claims about animals wouldn't be so worrying if he didn't claim to be a "biomimeticist". At least that's what he claimed until he was called on it, just like he was called on his "every runner I've coached has improved by 20%" lie - he shut up about that pretty quickly too.
Not to worry, he'll be back shortly with a lie about working with the Nike researchers.
IP: Logged |
sport jester
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-10-2007 03:02 PM
Minor detail hopper,Force production isn’t leaping height. I didn't state highest force generation, but highest leap.
Sarcasm, sarcasm, sarcasm…
Lots of junior high sarcasm, but no real answers… Maybe your answers would pass for a seventh grade mentality, but I’m interested in answers. I’ll have a lot more respect for your opinions of me when you do. I ask how fast you can run, but you can’t answer it even though I post my abilities I ask how fast you can walk, but you can’t answer it even though I post my abilities.
. I ask the difference between the fastest runner on planet earth and all others and you can’t answer it. If you truly understood the biomechanics of running, then you should understand the biomechanics of everything that runs. And you simply don’t. So cheap shots of sarcasm simply overshadow the fact that you really don’t know anything about running at all… All I ask for is the mathematical formula which describes perfect running biomechanics, and you can’t do it.. Give me math… Oh, and by the way, How would you do in this race? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/mid_/6737619.stm [This message has been edited by sport jester (edited Jul-10-2007).]
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-15-2007 04:30 PM
quote:
Force production isn’t leaping height. I didn't state highest force generation, but highest leap.
Are you sure you want to claim that highest force generation per unit body weight does not equal highest leap?
quote:
Sarcasm, sarcasm, sarcasm…
I think you need to look up the definition of sarcasm. I think you'll find that I was not being sarcastic, just abusive.
quote:
I’ll have a lot more respect for your opinions of me when you do.
I simply don't care about your opinion of me, As long as anybody else reading this understands that you are either outright delusional or intentionally deceitful. You don't have any of the educational qualifications you claim, you haven't achieved anything in the sport and you haven't coached anyone to achieve anything either quote:
I ask how fast you can run, but you can’t answer it even though I post my abilitiesI ask how fast you can walk, but you can’t answer it even though I post my abilities.
. I ask the difference between the fastest runner on planet earth and all others and you can’t answer it.
I'm not here to answer questions, only to make fun of you. This is fun for me, and also a public service to the discussion board - warning others about your idiocy.
quote:
If you truly understood the biomechanics of running, then you should understand the biomechanics of everything that runs. And you simply don’t.
What rubbish. As for needing to understand biomechanics in order to run fast, how much biomechanics do you think a cheetah understands?
quote:
So cheap shots of sarcasm simply overshadow the fact that you really don’t know anything about running at all…
All I need to know is that your ideas are pathetically useless.
quote:
All I ask for is the mathematical formula which describes perfect running biomechanics, and you can’t do it..Give me math…
Show me that you are worth taking seriously - give me race results.
Oh, that's right, you can't.
quote:
Oh, and by the way,How would you do in this race? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/mid_/6737619.stm
Better than you.
IP: Logged |
TedAndresen
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-17-2007 07:08 PM
hopper,I think it is truly unfortunate that there isn't a forum where recreational runners can discuss running form, techniques and training regiments, intelligently. BIOMCH-L and the Sport Science list and forums allow researchers to contact other researchers with similar interests, but there doesn’t seem to be a forum for reasonable discussions on issues relating to the recreational runner. I can see where the necessity for a moderator as a gatekeeper would make the time maintenance for such a forum too costly. Ted
IP: Logged |
laker
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-18-2007 11:45 AM
quote:
Originally posted by TedAndresen:
hopper,I think it is truly unfortunate that there isn't a forum where recreational runners can discuss running form, techniques and training regiments, intelligently. Ted
Isn't that pretty much what every forum on this site does for the most part?
[This message has been edited by laker (edited Jul-19-2007).]
IP: Logged |
sport jester
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-20-2007 11:45 PM
Let me get this straight my friend Hopper….You call yourself abusive, but can’t abuse. In fact you graciously amuse….. What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner? Just to point out to you, you took seven days to figure out how to write a few sentences in rebuttal which as always to your voice, say absolutely nothing. What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner? Anyone can walk into any gym in the world to find multiple gym rats capable of leg pressing twice their bodyweight. That’s easy, but none of them can jump twice their body height. What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner? Take Michael Jordan for example, he could jump 42-44 inches in vertical leap and we call him “phenomenal” in accomplishment. Minor detail, that’s only half his body height in ability. What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner?
So when I look at my 9 inch tall cat jump to a 6 foot fence top with ease, that’s the equivalent of MJ jumping three or four stories with the same leaping ratio. As MJ can't jump to the same ratio, then why not?
What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner?
Explain to me how even a domestic housecat with the exact same muscles in their hind legs as a human can out jump a human in ratio to body height? So who's the better jumper, MJ or my cat....
What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner? I’ll even give you a hint, it’s the same reason a cheetah is the world’s fastest runner period… What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner? I ask questions and you can’t answer them (to be fully redundant with you once again). What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner? Give me math my friend…. Oh and education means nothing to me, it doesn't take an education to ask questions. It takes and education to answer them... And until you can answer the questions I post, the sad story is that I can, Prove I'm an idiot by answering the questions I post... Those who can't do, teach.. which is why no teacher can answer my questions either... Trash talk in my eyes equals trash knowledge… [This message has been edited by sport jester (edited Jul-20-2007).]
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-21-2007 03:47 AM
quote:
You call yourself abusive, but can’t abuse. In fact you graciously amuse…..
That's odd, because you don't sound very amused?
If I'm bothering you so much, why do you keep posting? I'm not going to answer any of your silly questions because I don't intend to engage you in serious debate, I'm here just to prevent you from spreading your rubbish around unanswered (you'll notice how my taunting has helped the people who originally took you seriously on this thread to realise that you are a clueless whackjob?).
I'm just a guy on an internet messageboard, wouldn't your time be better spent down at the Nike Research Lab where they all love you? Why does changing my opinion matter so much to you? Every post you make exposes your inadequacy more and more, you'd be better off just walking away from this thread - you have the entire Nike organisation that does take you seriously, so what are you gaining here?
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-21-2007 03:49 AM
laker,
I think my work here is done, sportjester finally admits (again) that he hasn't a clue: quote:
Oh and education means nothing to me, it doesn't take an education to ask questions. It takes and education to answer them...
Not big on logic is he? By his own criteria, since he doesn't have an education, he doesn't have any answers. I'm getting a bit bored of the guy, I think maybe he's lost it? Have you noticed that he only posts on a Friday night? Is there a possibility that he is institutionalised in some way, and only gets access to the internet occasionally?
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-21-2007 04:27 AM
Ted,
It is a strength of internet messageboards that anyone can post, unfortunately it does mean that anyone can post. It is really left up to the reader to sort the wheat from the chaff if you want to have a good conversation - like so much of modern life you need to work to sort out what is ambient noise and what is meaningful. There used to be a lot more good posters around, with a wide depth of knowledge, I could guarantee to learn something every time I visited this site. I think most of them got bored by the loons and PC police who took over.
Running messageboards have had their day as far as being educational tools are concerned, there is only a finite number of times you can respond to "I want to run X minutes faster in a race next week, how do I do it???" without losing your mind, and the depth of knowledge for the sort of discussion you'd like to have isn't here anymore. This used to be a great resource for serious runners sharing knowledge with a bit of banter thrown in, it is a shame that community has moved on.
IP: Logged |
TedAndresen
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-22-2007 02:06 AM
hopper3011,Thank you for your excellent analysis of the present situation. I always wondered if it was always like this. You answered that question. Ted
IP: Logged |
laker
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-23-2007 11:46 AM
quote:
Originally posted by sport jester:
[Explain to me how even a domestic housecat with the exact same muscles in their hind legs as a human can out jump a human in ratio to body height? So who's the better jumper, MJ or my cat....][/B]
A cat and a human have the exact same muscles in their legs? Even by your standards that's a beauty. Hopper,
Time to move on, no need to waste any more time.
IP: Logged |
JimR
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-23-2007 11:57 AM
quote:
Originally posted by sport jester:
What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner?Just to point out to you, you took seven days to figure out how to write a few sentences in rebuttal which as always to your voice, say absolutely nothing.
Huh? July 10-July 15 is 5 days, exactly the same time it took you to respond to Hopper (July 15 to July 20), if that's the response you're referring to. I think some fundamental math skills are required before asking questions about mathematical formulas for runners.
IP: Logged |
tigger
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-23-2007 04:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by sport jester:
What mathematical formula defines the perfect runner?
[This message has been edited by sport jester (edited Jul-20-2007).]
I'll take a crack at this one. Velocity of said runner equals (k)Vx plus (0)Vy plus (0)Vz, where k is speed in the x plane and zero is the speed in the y and z planes. This runner is only "perfect" in a point to point run. If there are any corners then he is no longer "perfect" but rather a lost runner.
IP: Logged |
TedAndresen
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-24-2007 01:23 AM
Tigger,There's actually quite a significant variation in Vx and Vz during the gait cycle. Vx decreases from touch down to mid-stance. Then, it increases through Toe Off. Vz points down then up. Ted
IP: Logged |
tigger
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-24-2007 06:58 AM
quote:
Originally posted by TedAndresen:
Tigger,There's actually quite a significant variation in Vx and Vz during the gait cycle. Vx decreases from touch down to mid-stance. Then, it increases through Toe Off. Vz points down then up. Ted
That may be true but not for the perfect runner. In all cases the only velocity vector that counts is the one in the direction of the finish line.
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-25-2007 04:48 AM
Tigger;
I understand what you are saying, but I have to disagree.
The mathematical formula that describes the perfect runner is a comparative measure, not an absolute. If Runner 1 covers a certain distance in T1 and Runner 2 covers that distance in T2, then if T1<T2 Runner 1 is more "perfect" than Runner 2, and vice versa (we are discussing a sport after all - if it's not comparative then it isn't sport).
IP: Logged |
sport jester
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-27-2007 12:10 AM
Ok, So if X,Y, and Z are your plane measurements, then you’re following my point exactly. The perfect runner as you so describe has no linear rise (vertical lift at push off), no lateral sway (deviation from straight forward motion), and no torso rotation. To what extent you deviate from those measurements is what I’m asking you. That was my point in asking how far you truly travel when you run. Placing you in a lab with a light bulb on your head and a camera next to you can measure how high you push yourself up with each step. A camera above you measures lateral variation from perfectly straight running. Those three planes are measurable and can be graphed.
From such a measurement, it can be extrapolated as to how far your body truly travels for any given distance. So why your problem since you’ve just verified what I teach. Isn’t that what I stated earlier that the faster runner can travel the longer distance in comparison (T1<T2 in your terms) and still lose a race? Your measurements are what I'm asking you.
What makes the women of Kenya so biomechanical efficient is that they can do what you describe is impossible to do. They have absolutely no X, Y, or Z plane variation while carrying the added weight when they walk. And Kenyans dominate distance running because they run with the least amount of X,Y, and Z plane variation in their running forms.
Only I’ve bettered their measurements in biomechanic ability. Anyone who watches me run will tell you that I run “still as a post” which means that my torso has absolutely no variation from center axis of all three planes. I don't push myself up when I walk or run, and I require absolutely no arm swing to counter lateral sway, because I have none when I walk or run. And I utilize no arm swing at all until I reach 6MPH. I walk and run on a perfect X plane measurement. That was the reason I was invited into Nike’s sports lab in the first place. So for any given race, I will travel a shorter distance than you will. Thanks for making my point for me…
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-27-2007 04:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by sport jester:
And Kenyans dominate distance running because they run with the least amount of X,Y, and Z plane variation in their running forms.
Fast Africans:
  
Fast Americans of European descent:
   
It looks to me like the Americans don't get anywhere near the vertical displacement of the Africans - yet they aren't nearly as fast. Why is that?
Tell me, do you enjoy getting your arse handed to you on a plate every time you post? If you bothered to do even a little research you'd realise that your "theories" are gibberish.[This message has been edited by hopper3011 (edited Jul-27-2007).]
IP: Logged |
sport jester
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-27-2007 03:13 PM
Hopper, What you haven’t figured out by now hopper is that I wouldn’t waste my time teaching you because you lack the intelligence to learn. Personal history here. I’ve been teaching for many years. While I prefer one on one training, I’ve taught groups for decades. What a good teacher does is use the dumbest student in their class to do his teaching for him. When I asked you the formula of the perfect runner, you said you wouldn’t debate me. What you really said was that you weren’t smart enough to answer the question. But from my perspective, I was trying to give you the most time to answer the question before the smarter ones did. If intelligence is a race, then Tigger beat you. Ted was second, and the only post you could reply with was a criticism of theirs. You couldn’t even place third… Because they posted an intelligent reply and you couldn't if your life depended on it… Once again, I’ve never met a movie critic that’s ever made a movie…..
So your photos mean little. The top one shows their opponent looking at them, so it was taken probably right after crossing the finish line.
Axis measurements are time based calculations, requiring video to measure, since you have to run to measure them. so still photos are worthless to the arguement. And for a little refinement. X,Y, and Z axis measurements have nothing to do with running biomechanics. They’re end result measurements. You're only measuring a light bulb. The light bulb doesnt matter, the body under it does, which is a separate measurement. The question stands from that point to what measurements of the body produce the most refined axis measurement? [This message has been edited by sport jester (edited Jul-27-2007).]
IP: Logged |
tuscaloosarunner
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-27-2007 03:21 PM
sport jester:what are your PRs? when? Not trying to be an ass, just trying to ascertain pure scientist, or high caliber runner/scientist. Me, I'm a decent, recreational runner, for the record. Thanks, Tusca [This message has been edited by tuscaloosarunner (edited Jul-27-2007).]
IP: Logged |
sport jester
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-27-2007 03:38 PM
PR for me is peak speed. I can walk at 9MPH easily. For running, I can run a 12MPH treadmill at 4.5% incline. Walking I have no bodyweight impact. Running my impact ratio is 25% of my bodyweight compared with traditional running at 4X bodyweight.
IP: Logged |
hopper3011
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-27-2007 04:18 PM
Oh dear, time for another spanking:
  
What's Haile's vertical deviation? What about Kenenisa? Any of your pupils faster than they are? You are nothing but an idiot.
I've worked out why I bother you so much - you simply can't accept the idea that somebody can so easily show the world that you are completely delusional; that someone can rebuff every wacko "theory" you put out. Each time you spout a bit more rubbish I come back with some proof that you are lying, and it is driving you (even more) insane.[This message has been edited by hopper3011 (edited Jul-27-2007).]
IP: Logged |
tuscaloosarunner
Cool Runner |
posted Jul-27-2007 04:19 PM
quote:
Originally posted by sport jester:
PR for me is peak speed. I can walk at 9MPH easily. For running, I can run a 12MPH treadmill at 4.5% incline. Walking I have no bodyweight impact. Running my impact ratio is 25% of my bodyweight compared with traditional running at 4X bodyweight.
All right, let me reframe the question: what is the fastest you've run a certified 5k race?
IP: Logged |
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
