My granddad’s resting rate is 0… he’s all skin & bones. Mainly bones come to think of it.
bodhisattva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 58bpm and blah to running. > > I find running boring and I have flat feet and bad > form, What people don’t get is that meditation and yoga are very “boring” too to some people. But it’s the same principal. Once you reach a sort of “critical mass” with your training you can just cruise for hours and let the endorphins flow while your mind just slowly unwinds from sitting in an office and having dry research data crammed in it all day. It’s basically the antithesis of modern life. It’s non-materialistic and minimalist, you strap on your shoes and just roll. On weekends this’ll mean a half day just cruising through single track trails in rugged state forest terrain either solo and self sufficient or maybe in pairs. You just fall into this zen like cadence where you’re surrounded by wilderness and enveloped in your footfalls, breathe in, breathe out and just generally in tune to yourself as your body works together like a tuned Rolex; the way it was supposed to. You also meet some pretty stellar people in the process. I used to box competitively in college before I got injured / messed up in a sparring match and had to undergo minor surgery. That was probably the best condition I’ve ever been in my life, but I was running like 5-10 a day then too. Running’s a different sort of conditioning, but in my mind it’s just a far deeper sport.
how bout bikram yoga? Why do so many fatties love doing this? Its only water weight youre losing, dont fool yourself.
Have to admit, i don’t have much respect for sports that don’t require a skill - like running.
cfa_bombay Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I run 3-5 miles 5 times a week on a hard surface. > My running speed is on the lower side. Also the > arch in my feet isn’t perfect. So I wear shoes > with support. > > You mentioned ‘getting your stride right’ - Do you > have any further information on this? > I know there is more scope to improve as I want to > push myself further than what I currently do. The basic principals of form are to keep your body moving together in a forward back motion. Your arms should not be flailing at your sides, your feet shouldn’t have much horizontal motion. Probably the most important single piece of advice for long distance running without injury is this: make sure your feet land directly beneath you, not out in front. This rule keeps your knees bent properly for max shock absorption. The easiest way to do this is to shorten your stride and maintain a roughly 90 stride per minute count under any pace. A lot of times when people are tired they let their pace slow, or when they want to run fast, they reach forward for a longer stride. This is bad, it means your knees are more straight and absorbing a lot of shock through the skeletal structure rather than through your muscles. In addition, feet forward of your center of gravity means you tend to absorb some of your forward motion, essentially applying the brakes…also adding to the already significant forces on your feet. This concept is in my mind the most important. Another, but mildly less crucial secondary point is to try to land on your mid-foot / slightly forefoot, rather than striking the ground sharply with your heel at each footfall. Doing so will ensure your arch absorbs the impact rather than sending the a shock through your ankles and knees. If you want to know more about this, there are several books on either the POSE method or similarly, Chi running. You can also find some free summaries on both via the web. I haven’t personally gone that far, but it works for a lot of people. Lastly, a lot of people are going crazy for “barefoot” or minimalist running. I think the basic concept they’re on to, voiced in the book “Born to Run” is correct, but I would never encourage someone with a less than perfect stride to jump into it, and I don’t currently run as a minimalist either after some mixed experiences. If you do decide to look into, I’d encourage you to take baby steps. Go from full running shoes to working in either Saucony Kinvara or Brooks Green Silence shoes several days a week. When you can run comfortably in these for most days of your workout, maybe then you could consider playing with a full minimalist shoe several days a week. I currently train in the Kinvaras several days a week and I think I’m much better off for it. Occasionally, I’ll run a few miles in Vibram Five Fingers for fun like once every several weeks, but it’s not a major part of my repetoir. I think they Kinvaras represent about as minimalist as it makes sense to go.
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Have to admit, i don’t have much respect for > sports that don’t require a skill - like running. +100
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Have to admit, i don’t have much respect for > sports that don’t require a skill - like running. You really don’t get running then. At the competitive level there’s tons of skill / strategy involved. In a lot of ways it becomes a mind game given similar levels of conditioning. You could make the same ignorant statement about most sports. Personally, I don’t have much respect for sports that don’t require mental discipline, toughness and ultra high levels of conditioning. Two of the reasons I look at basketball and soccer as sports for girls.
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Have to admit, i don’t have much respect for > sports that don’t require a skill - like running. Yeah, sports like running, volleyball and golf are more pasttimes than sports.
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Have to admit, i don’t have much respect for > sports that don’t require a skill - like running No matter how hard you try to argue it, counterstrike will never be a sport
running is not a sport, end of story. Requires zero skill/talent and minimal athleticism. Most important factor is mental discipline.
brain_wash_your_face Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > comp_sci_kid Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Have to admit, i don’t have much respect for > > sports that don’t require a skill - like > running. > > Yeah, sports like running, volleyball and golf are > more pasttimes than sports. These two points are contradictory, despite your attempt to sound like you’re agreeing: Comp sci is somehow making a case for “skill” as a req per his infallible opinion on running, while you’re saying golf is not a sport despite it being perhaps the most skill based. In the end what we have are just snobs trying to ensure only sports they’re good at / interested in are on the valid sports list as defined by them.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > comp_sci_kid Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Have to admit, i don’t have much respect for > > sports that don’t require a skill - like > running > > No matter how hard you try to argue it, > counterstrike will never be a sport Lies! CS is a sport and more than that, its a cultural event. DE-Dust, FTW. Ok I geeked out a lil too much.
wake2000 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > running is not a sport, end of story. Requires > zero skill/talent and minimal athleticism. Most > important factor is mental discipline. Spoken like a true fatty. One of my friends in my masters program set the Boston College record for a 4:03 mile. You’re right, no talent or athleticism involved there pork chop. Anyone with mental discipline can just force their body to deny physics right.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > wake2000 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > running is not a sport, end of story. Requires > > zero skill/talent and minimal athleticism. Most > > important factor is mental discipline. > > > Spoken like a true fatty. One of my friends in my > masters program set the Boston College record for > a 4:03 mile. You’re right, no talent or > athleticism involved there pork chop. Anyone with > mental discipline can just force their body to > deny physics right. : ( you hurt my feelings Black Swan. Still think running is for midgets who are skin and bones and not athletic.
wake2000 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Still think > running is for midgets that are skin and bones and > not athletic. Hmm, former PA golden gloves boxer in college, started on a varsity ice hockey team in 8th grade, class V whitewater kayaker, former rock climbing instructor, varsity soccer and varsity track sprinter (went to districts). Yeah, your description works.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > wake2000 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Still think > > running is for midgets that are skin and bones > and > > not athletic. > > Hmm, former PA golden gloves boxer in college, > started on a varsity ice hockey team in 8th grade, > class V whitewater kayaker, former rock climbing > instructor, varsity soccer and varsity track > sprinter (went to districts). Yeah, your > description works. Still, you cant make running a skill based sport. It is 99% endurance + 1% skill. Most athletes are excellent at running. Claiming that running is a skill is like solving 2 order polynomyl equations is a skill. Yes it is, but it is so rudimentary that to claim that you are excelleing at it is silly.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > These two points are contradictory, despite your > attempt to sound like you’re agreeing: Comp sci > is somehow making a case for “skill” as a req per > his infallible opinion on running, while you’re > saying golf is not a sport despite it being > perhaps the most skill based. I should have used the sarcasm font. I was just pointing out how arbitrary the argument is. Below an interesting take on differentiating skill and luck in sport. I would take it under consideration that perhaps the less the sport is dependent on luck the more of a “real” sport it is. There are a number of factors that shift activities toward the luck side of the continuum. One, naturally, is simply sample size. A small number of observations make it very difficult to sort skill and luck. Consider observing the outcomes of five plate appearances for the best hitter and the worst hitter in major league baseball. You would have very little to go on. After 500 plate appearances, you would be in a much better position to assess which player has greater skill. People often assume that building sample size is a matter of time. Within an activity that is true, but what really matters is the number of trials. Some activities pack a lot of trials into a short time, and others reflect a few trials over a long time. In investing, a quantitative strategy that generates lots of signals and trades daily would be an illustration of the first, and a low-turnover, concentrated portfolio would be an example of the latter. You can evaluate a high-frequency trading strategy a lot quicker than a buy-and-hold investment approach. One analysis suggests that 12 National Football League games, 36 National Hockey League games, and 69 Major League Baseball games reveal the equivalent amount of skill. Competitive parity also increases the role of luck. The idea is that as the skill levels of the participants converge, the standard deviation of skill narrows and luck becomes more prominent (in activities that allow for luck). 16 Convergence of skill can result from weaker players getting better, the dissemination of cheaper and more uniform information, or from athletes approaching biomechanical limits, slowing the rate of improvement. You might call it the paradox of skill: high and uniform skill levels suggest that luck becomes a larger determinant of outcomes. In activities that have little luck, including running and swimming races, you simply get lots of very close finishes. Some professional sports leagues use tools like salary caps to encourage parity in skill, seeking a more uniform distribution of winners over time. http://www.cscs.umich.edu/documents/Luck.pdf
wake2000 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the guys with the absurdly low resting heart rates > must be 5’8 and below and weigh around a buck > fifty. Nah. I am 6’2" 195.
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Black Swan Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > wake2000 Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Still think > > > running is for midgets that are skin and > bones > > and > > > not athletic. > > > > Hmm, former PA golden gloves boxer in college, > > started on a varsity ice hockey team in 8th > grade, > > class V whitewater kayaker, former rock > climbing > > instructor, varsity soccer and varsity track > > sprinter (went to districts). Yeah, your > > description works. > > Still, you cant make running a skill based sport. > It is 99% endurance + 1% skill. Most athletes are > excellent at running. Claiming that running is a > skill is like solving 2 order polynomyl equations > is a skill. Yes it is, but it is so rudimentary > that to claim that you are excelleing at it is > silly. now we can all thank the lockout for hopefully settling one debate: http://speedendurance.com/2011/03/11/nfl-lockout-update-chris-johnson-wants-to-run-track/ if he beats bolt - running is not a sport
mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > now we can all thank the lockout for hopefully > settling one debate: > > http://speedendurance.com/2011/03/11/nfl-lockout-u > pdate-chris-johnson-wants-to-run-track/ > > if he beats bolt - running is not a sport Sprinting and distance running are completely different. That being said, saying that Chris Johnson beating Bolt makes running not a sport is stupid. Kyle Parker continued to play QB for Clemson, even turning down a $1.2MM MLB contract to do so. I guess baseball must not be a sport either. The point is there are many very talented NFL players that simply chose that sport over others. Florida Gators Jeff Demps held the D1 100M title and does both sports simultaneously. However, I’m sure his future will be with football as it pays more and is honestly more exciting. It’s easy to see the overlap in both positions. How this would make one not a sport is stupid logic. That being said, he will not beat Bolt.