Justin wrote:
> Oh come on Brian, at least try to debate intelligently.
>
> Of course it's true that no race can be run in zero time. Limits are above
> zero time, we can all agree on that. Clearly, as we reach the point of
> maximum potential, we will see diminishing returns. As was elegantly shown
> to us all, there is no evidence of diminishing returns in the event you
> chose to highlight, the 10k. The record has come down (in fits and starts)
> by a lap or so every 20 years. That's a rolling stat of course - every
year
> we can compare 20 year periods going back as far as we like and measure
the
> diminishing returns. When we can show that the record is improving by a
> smaller margin with each succeeding 20 yr period, we'll be able to make
some
> intelligent predictions (rather than simple assertions, which is all
you've
> managed so far).
>
> There are two major objections to your limits argument:
>
> 1. For it to be right, literally every single distance runner has to be on
> drugs. There are only two statements about drugs in sport that we know are
> rubbish - that everyone is clean, and that everyone is dirty. If even one
> athlete has been competitive while clean (ie run say 13:00 and 27:10) then
> your argument falls down.
>
> 2. You have to show that we have ALREADY REACHED the natural limits of
human
> potential and that improvements since then are solely down to drugs. In
> fact, you have to argue that we reached human limits before the advent of
> EPO, ie in the late 80s. Damn, if I'd realised that I'd have paid better
> attention!! If even one athlete can be shown to have exceeded late 80s
> standards while clean, again your argument falls down.
>
> Most of us completly buy your contention that EPO and other drugs are rife
> at all levels of the sport. You do not need to use these patently absurd
> arguments to make your point.
>
> Justin
I'm going to throw a different log on the fire of this discussion .. One
thing that hasn't been looked at in the discussion of limits and potential
are youth .. I would like to think that THEY are as close we are going to
come to a group of performers that are totally "clean" .. And perhaps a look
at the progression of youth would give some indication of the "evolution of
us as humans" and therefore how close we may actually be coming to limits ..
I'll start with the year 1976 .. The year I graduated high school so sort of
familiar with what was going on . The first year auto timing really played a
role in times as well as metric distances .. An Olympic year .. And makes
for a nice quarter century .. And excuse me if I mix a couple of close years
in here .. Sprint wise I know Houston McTear ran 10.18, Dwayne Evans ran
20.22, and Tony Darden ran 45.7 .. In the distances I believe Dale Scott ran
1:47.8 a couple of years earlier in 72 or 73, and Rich Kimball had run
around 4:01 and Eric Hulst ran around 8:41 .. Now a quarter century
later(using this past school year as a barometer) today's youth are still
chasing these marks .. I know that the records have all since been broken ..
But not dramatically .. And the elite of the day are still trying to get to
those same marks .. In contrast - while I do not have the specific figures
at hand - do know that the marks for the same events 25 years before that
were no where close .. The implication here being that:
1) We are getting much closer to human limits
2) That there has not been any tremendous change in the basic human being in
the last quarter century
3) That the tremendous changes in world records, consistency at the elite
level, etc is due to forces other than the natural evolution of human beings
towards "perfection of marks" .. And let me say that could mean any number
of things from drugs to better training methods, better equipment, the
"professionalization" of the sport .. But would indicate that the natural
evolution of humans has flattened out ..
Therefore the question seems to be "What outside of the human condition is
responsible for the tremendous "raising of the bar" for performance levels
at the elite end of the spectrum" ?????
Conway Hill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
