Re: t-and-f: Concrete VS Asphalt (was: Why on the street?)

2002-08-27 Thread picqc

I don't buy it. Fall down on concrete and fall down on asphalt and tell me which on 
hurts the most.
You're wearing shoes that absorb shock and you have insoles that do the same. Drop the 
golf ball on a
piece of foam that is on a layer of air(gel, water, whatever) and see how high the 
ball bounces.
In Boulder you'd take your life into your hands running on some of the sidewalks 
because they were so
uneven, broken, and torn up. In other places the crown of the road was so high it 
would throw your back
out if you ran on it for very long. In other places the traffic was so crazy it was 
life threatening.So,
you take the lesser of the evils and go for it.
JL

Mike Prizy wrote:

 I just did the golf ball drop test and used my mail carrier - who just delivered my 
September 2002
 TFN - as the judge. He said it was difficult to tell, but that the ball seemed to 
bounce higher from
 the sidewalk, though I think the rough asphalt surface made the golf ball take an 
angular path,
 appearing to bounce not quite as high.

 However, that is with two hard objects. I think the difference in variables with a 
runner - shoe
 density, shoe wear, form, mechanics, speed, etc. - will make the differences 
insignificant.

 Grass will make you last.

 Kurt Bray wrote:

  Mike says:
 
  The only asphalt I ever saw that was significantly softer than concrete was
  on
  country roads when I
  ran in college. The only other asphalt I ever saw that was softer than set
  concrete was the asphalt
  just before the steamroller went over it.
 
  Here's a simple experiment you can try.  I did it myself a few minutes ago
  to confirm what I'd heard.  Find a flat area that has both asphalt and
  concrete - say a parking lot with a sidewalk next to it.  Stand on the
  concrete and drop a golf ball held out at shoulder height.  It will rebound
  about up to your waist.  Now step over and do the same on the asphalt, and
  you will see that bounces only up to about a little over your knees.
  Conclusion: there IS a noticeable and measurable difference in the hardness
  of the two surfaces.
 
  Add this difference up over and over again though hundreds of thousands of
  footfalls, and it could make a real difference in injury risk.
 
  I certainly agree with those who say that dirt is even better (the ball
  hardly bounces at all on dirt), and I do the majority of my own running on
  dirt for that very reason.  But if you are running in an urban setting and
  you have only the choice between asphalt and concrete, take the asphalt.
 
  Kurt Bray
 
  _
  Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com





Re: t-and-f: Apology

2002-08-26 Thread picqc

No problem!
You could have done worse, you could have mentioned God. You can't believe
who all  you'd wake up.
John Lunn

Jonas Mureika wrote:

 I would like to publicly apologize to list members for perpetuating the
 thread on Bush running too much.  I realize that such an inappropriate
 discussion has no place on a track and field forum, and regret doing so.
 Whatever their origins, the events of September 11 were a dark day for all
 of us in different ways, and these and their repercussions can be
 discussed or debated at length elsewhere or via private email.

 Let's aim to focus our discussions instead to those who pose significant
 threats to World Records, Golden League Jackpots, etc...  So, let's get
 this list back on track!





t-and-f: FindArticles - Ephedra

2001-09-23 Thread picqc

john lunn [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] thought you'd find this article useful.

Ephedra
http://www.findarticles.com/g2603//260351/p1/article.jhtml



_

FindArticles - The Web's First Articles Archive
http://www.findarticles.com/