Please be open to feedback and constructive criticism from others, and consider their suggestions and advice when making decisions or forming opinions.
- Manlobbi
Stocks A to Z / Stocks B / Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A)
No. of Recommendations: 3
Superjerk Musk and bigot JK Rowling need multi-billion dollar libel slander reality checks.
"Khelif faced accusations over her gender after it was revealed that she was banned from competing in the 2023 boxing world championships because she failed a gender eligibility test administered by the International Boxing Association (IBA).
But the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has disputed this test, and before the Paris events stripped the IBA of recognition as boxing’s governing body and expelled it from the Olympics over issues including corruption, financial transparency and governance.
Khelif was born female and has never identified as transgender or intersex. Asserting her gender, the IOC said: “Scientifically, this is not a man fighting a woman.”https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/202...
No. of Recommendations: 3
“Scientifically, this is not a man fighting a woman.”
-----------
OK, so it was a Y chromosome beating the crap out of a no Y chromosome. Why is all the sympathy on the side of Y chromosome? At least allow some room for the utter unfairness it was to all the real (purposely provocative, bring it) female boxers whose Olympic dreams were suddenly unattainable through no fault of their own.
No. of Recommendations: 4
"Khelif was born female and has never identified as transgender or intersex. Asserting her gender, the IOC said: “Scientifically, this is not a man fighting a woman.”
==============================
Also noted in the accurate reports is that Khelif....and the Taiwanese boxer Lin Yu-ting.....are genetically/biologically women whose bodies produce a higher level of testosterone than is typical.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Why is all the sympathy on the side of Y chromosome?
Because in the Great Church of Progressivism it’s heresy to admit that the teachings are fallible.
They’re not permitted to admit they’re wrong. Ever.
As far as this goes: something needs to be sacrificed on the Altar of Woke to finally show how absurd their belief system is. Sadly, the thing that will be sacrificed are women’s sports.
In LA in 2028 with any luck we get to witness a team of 7 foot tall bearded Croatians dunking their way to the gold in basketball and similar scenarios in other sports.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Why is all the sympathy on the side of Y chromosome?
She's female. If we didn't have science to tell us about the Y there'd be no questions she's female. She's just a Lola.
I met her in a club down in old Soho
Where you drink champagne and it tastes like Coca-Cola
C-O-L-A, Cola
She walked up to me and she asked me to dance
I asked her her name and in a dark brown voice she said, "Lola"
L-O-L-A, Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Well, I'm not the world's most physical guy
But when she squeezed me tight, she nearly broke my spine
Oh, my Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Well, I'm not dumb, but I can't understand
Why she walks like a woman and talks like a man
Oh, my Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Well, we drank champagne and danced all night
Under electric candlelight
She picked me up and sat me on her knee
She said, "Little boy, won't you come home with me?"
Well, I'm not the world's most passionate guy
But when I looked in her eyes, well, I almost fell for my Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
I pushed her away
I walked to the door
I fell to the floor
I got down on my knees
Well, I looked at her, and she at me
Well, that's the way that I want it to stay
And I always want it to be that way for my Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Girls will be boys and boys will be girls
It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world
Except for Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Well, I'd left home just a week before
And I'd never, ever kissed a woman before
But Lola smiled, took me by the hand
She said, "Little boy, gonna make you a man"
Well, I'm not the world's most masculine man
But I know what I am and I'm glad I'm a man
And so is Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo-Lola
Lola
No. of Recommendations: 2
NO, Dope, we have a dilemma. We, more than Donnie's boys, want to be fair. And fair, right now, means she's a woman at the competitive level. It's just the luck of the draw for anyone who thinks it's unfair at this point. And we might change our minds later. She wouldn't have competed in the first Olympics because she's a woman, and, as far as I know, it was all men.
No. of Recommendations: 2
She's female. If we didn't have science to tell us about the Y there'd be no questions she's female. - Lapsody
-------------------
But we do have the science and it shows she has an unfair advantage over her opponents.
How about making her compete with the boys? Can't do that, she would get the crap beat of her. OK, but that is not much different than her beating the crap of normal females.
One way it is different: If she is in the boys competition and loses as expected, then one athlete has been affected. OTOH, when she beats the crap out of all the normal women she encounters on her way to gold (as both of them did), then a whole bunch of female athletes are negatively impacted.
BTW, nice ref to Lola, that is a great song...
No. of Recommendations: 6
But we do have the science and it shows she has an unfair advantage over her opponents.
No. Her fighting record showed no unfair advantage - you're just stating that to fit your narrative.
So are we gonna measure everyone's hormone levels, analyze those chromosomes, and have make even further classes for men based on hormone production? And for women?
I'm sympathetic with men going trans and then competing as women - I think that's unfair - but I'll put a high bar on breaking down categories by other methods depending on science - you haven't convinced me with your political narrative.
No. of Recommendations: 2
you haven't convinced me with your political narrative. - Lapsody
--------------
Not trying to convince you. Just expressing sympathy and support for the impacted normies who many believe don't deserve it.
No. of Recommendations: 4
But we do have the science and it shows she has an unfair advantage over her opponents.
No. Science says she has more testosterone, but her statistics (science too) didn't show that it gave her an advantage. You completely ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.
Not trying to convince you. Just expressing sympathy and support for the impacted normies who many believe don't deserve it
And you never answered my question - are you going to further break down categories based on hormones produced? Just how are you going to account for all of the variations out there. What if greater than 50% have some abnormality - do we even have a normal?
No. of Recommendations: 8
And you never answered my question - are you going to further break down categories based on hormones produced? Just how are you going to account for all of the variations out there. What if greater than 50% have some abnormality - do we even have a normal?
Not at the Olympics. At that level of competition, in many sports the winners are always going to be athletes that have some degree of genetic advantage over their competitors. None of them are "normal" compared to the population at large.
For example, Katy Ledecky is six feet tall (fewer than 0.5% of women are that tall in the U.S., fewer globally). My wife is only five foot two. Had my wife trained just as hard, with just as good of resources, for just as long as Katy Ledecky from birth, she never could have competed with her (assuming for this hypothetical that they had been contemporaries). Ledecky's genes make her better suited for competing at that level than my wife's.
Is that an "unfair advantage"? We obviously don't sort swimmers by height the way we do martial arts competitors by weight class. We just let the ones that have a genetic framework that gives them an edge take advantage of that genetic edge. We sort on some things (men vs. women) - and then within that framework, if you've got genes that make your body more optimal for your sport than other competitors, then that's perfectly fine.
For many (but certainly not all) sports, the most elite athletes will always have body types that are near-optimal for that sport - genetic advantages that "normies" will not have. We don't really express sympathy or support for the "normies" who have to swim against a Ledecky or a Phelps without having the advantages that their genes give them. All of the athletes at this level engaged in gobsmacking amounts of training and sacrifice and have enormous skill....but in many elite physical competitions, it doesn't matter how hard you work or train if you don't have the accompanying optimal (or near-optimal) body type for that sport.
No. of Recommendations: 1
And you never answered my question - are you going to further break down categories based on hormones produced? - Lapsody
No, that is clearly not workable.
Just how are you going to account for all of the variations out there. - Lapsody
Not all hormones nor all variations. Perhaps a rule that says above x% testosterone level, you compete in the male division. Like how the weigh-in stratifies the competitors into groups that are intend to make it fair(er).
No. of Recommendations: 1
For many (but certainly not all) sports, the most elite athletes will always have body types that are near-optimal for that sport - genetic advantages that "normies" will not have. We don't really express sympathy or support for the "normies" who have to swim against a Ledecky or a Phelps without having the advantages that their genes give them. All of the athletes at this level engaged in gobsmacking amounts of training and sacrifice and have enormous skill....but in many elite physical competitions, it doesn't matter how hard you work or train if you don't have the accompanying optimal (or near-optimal) body type for that sport.
And let's face it, we meet people in our lives that tried, but lacked a genetic advantage for a sport. When I was in High School I knew this short fellow who was densely built and muscular. Wanted to be a pro football player, and played. He was good, but he was short. You knew he wouldn't make it into the pros, but he gave it a shot. I was impressed by his dedication. We admire people who overcome that lack, too.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Not all hormones nor all variations. Perhaps a rule that says above x% testosterone level, you compete in the male division.
Naah, I wouldn't venture down that road.
No. of Recommendations: 10
"Not trying to convince you. Just expressing sympathy and support for the impacted normies who many believe don't deserve it." - BHM
It is not unnoticed how you subtly dig at her by not considering her normal.
Yet another example of how you are an ass.
No. of Recommendations: 2
"Not trying to convince you. Just expressing sympathy and support for the impacted normies who many believe don't deserve it." - BHM
It is not unnoticed how you subtly dig at her by not considering her normal. - Umm
-----------------
I am not opposed to trans people and hope they find a way to live happily in our society. No animus at all. However to claim such people are normal is self delusional and to apply the adjective of the day, "weird".
Yet another example of how you are an ass. - more Umm
Nice talk. And six recs too. If you express any sort of alternate view then you are an ass or a racist in other contexts. The left who claim the high ground of tolerance is often the least tolerant of wrong think.
No. of Recommendations: 9
I am not opposed to trans people and hope they find a way to live happily in our society. No animus at all. However to claim such people are normal is self delusional and to apply the adjective of the day, "weird".
She's not trans.
No. of Recommendations: 4
However to claim such people are normal is self delusional and to apply the adjective of the day, "weird".
Evolution has given homo sapiens a great deal of variation. The people you want to deride may not be 'average' but they are in the genetic mix.
In Nazi Germany jews were not considered normal. We know where that led.
No. of Recommendations: 0
I am not opposed to trans people and hope they find a way to live happily in our society. No animus at all. However to claim such people are normal is self delusional and to apply the adjective of the day, "weird".
She's not trans. - albaby
-------------
Fair enough. Would your position change if she was a real trans?
No. of Recommendations: 6
"I am not opposed to trans people and hope they find a way to live happily in our society. No animus at all. However to claim such people are normal is self delusional and to apply the adjective of the day, "weird"."
There you go again with your subtle digs.
She is not trans. Your ignorance has been taken advantage of again.
Also, she is as normal as you are.
"Nice talk. And six recs too. If you express any sort of alternate view then you are an ass or a racist in other contexts. The left who claim the high ground of tolerance is often the least tolerant of wrong think."
Yes, I am calling you an ass because you are ignorantly insulting other people who do not deserve it. You are trying to make the ole "you are being intolerant of my intolerance" argument.
That is a dumb argument to make. If you don't want to be labeled an ass, then stop acting like one by ignorantly insulting innocent people.
No. of Recommendations: 2
That is a dumb argument to make. If you don't want to be labeled an ass, then stop acting like one by ignorantly insulting innocent people. - Umm
--------------
You are now being dumb by equating my legitimate observation of a statistical anomaly with me accusing them of being guilty of something.
The genuine trans people have not "done" anything, it is simply the way they are and as I said at the very beginning, I bear them no animus. They should enjoy all the great things available in day to day life, friends, family, travel, arts, whatever. Drink deeply and enjoy.
However, things get more complicated when it comes to competitions where for one competitor to win and continue on, another must lose.
Getting back to the trans having done anything, the only they have done is abide the rules established by those governing their sport and do their best. The problem is the governing bodies fear the condemnation for any attempt to make any sort of rule to restore fairness so they treat them all the same, when they are not. And the result is that women's sports are being ruined and no one speaks up about it. So I decided to stimulate a little discussion on the topic.
There is more to it than expressing only admiration for the trans athlete, the broken dreams they leave in their wake deserve a mention now and then.
No. of Recommendations: 8
The genuine trans people have not "done" anything,
Because she's not trans, Mike, so no one was talking trans. And if you flip back to trans it's because you can't really talk about your mistake, and how that mistake will be amplified when you take the stand of "x% of testosterone will compete with men". It just isn't feasible, nor is it right. You simply want to talk trans and won't admit your mistake. Admit it, Mike. You got fed a line that she's trans, since she isn't trans, you must first admit you got lied to and deal with that. Then we can talk trans if you still want to, but I have a feeling you'll change subjects.
No. of Recommendations: 10
Fair enough. Would your position change if she was a real trans?
I didn't state a position....but if you mean my implied contention that you're wrong in your implied contention that it's inaccurate to think trans people are normal, then no it wouldn't change it. Trans people are no less normal than, say, people with green eyes. Very uncommon, but perfectly normal. Which obviously means that no, I don't think it's "weird" to think that trans people are normal - again, any more than it's weird to think that someone who has green eyes is normal.
If you're asking whether it would change my thoughts on a person competing in athletic events that are segregated in to men's and women's sports, that's far more complicated. I'm not sure how I would come down on that - I'm genuinely conflicted, and I think there's compelling arguments on both sides. I don't dismiss the claim that the separation of sports into men's and women's competitions is based on biological sex and not gender - the reason we have separate competitions is in recognition of the biological differences in anatomy that accompany biological sex, and not the social construct that is gender. On the other hand, since we're using "men" and "women" as the divider - and not actually a biological test - it's valid for trans women to argue that they are "women," and thus meet the qualifying standard of participating in that competition.
I don't know how to resolve it, because elite sports almost always involves athletes that have advantageous genetic make-ups competing against athletes that lack those genetic advantages. It's never an "equal" playing field that solely measures who worked the hardest or trained the best - when everyone's working very hard and training very well, the winner is often the person who simply has the best-suited physiology for the competition. It's always an "unfair" competition for the athletes who don't have the optimal biology for the event (leaving aside certain ones where that might not be especially relevant, like the equestrian events). Sex-based divisions are a very crude effort to adjust this broadly - and they are imperfect. I do not know how to solve those imperfections.
No. of Recommendations: 5
With regards trans athletes competing along with the gender with which they identify and have committed, I would leave it up to the doctors and the governing bodies to decide, case by case.
As a physician generalist, the subtleties are too complex even for someone with my somewhat extensive training.
fd
No. of Recommendations: 1
Fair enough. Would your position change if she was a real trans?
Just what is abnormal? I consider that gays, etc., occur frequently enough (4% of the population) and occur around the world and across every culture that I consider them normal abnormalities (humor), and that they are normal to me. So gays are normies to me. Now hermaphrodites occur in 1 out of 2000 births, and to me that might be considered normal too. Hermaphrodites occur across all cultures as far as I know.
So my first question was found by exploration - just what does occur across cultures, is considered abnormal, but actually is normal in that it is present everywhere, and in enough numbers? Answer - gays.
So where do I draw the line? The answer is "I don't know" - but if hermaphrodites, and I have yet to have anyone tell me they're hermaphrodite, exist in those numbers, across the globe, isn't that normal in a way? (We do have interviews of some.) We used to assign them a sex at birth and I think most involved surgery - so we made a permanent decision (sorta).
My biggest unanswered question is, is there a group survival benefit to gays? And I have to say they exist in enough numbers that we should find a group survival benefit. Hermaphrodites a group survival benefit? Not very clear - trending toward no. But gays? Probably yes.
I don't know how frequently trans occur, but in some Pacific Island communities they have a specially recognized position within the community, which means we should REALLY take a good look at that. SNIP Samoa has four cultural genders – female, male, fa'afafine, fa'atama, and Samoa is considered one of the countries with a highly culturally recognised and pronounced trans and gender diverse population. Snip
NEW SNIPNationally, we estimate that 0.6% of those ages 13 and older identify as transgender in the United States, which is about 1.6 million individuals based on current U.S. population size. Among adults, 0.5% (over 1.3 million adults) identify as transgender.SNIP
OK, so at .5% of the populations, that's enough for me to say that sound like a normal abnormality, and we have at least one culture that considers them valuable enough that they have a special place, unless they're prejudiced by normie cultures. So where are we?
No. of Recommendations: 1
Admit it, Mike. You got fed a line that she's trans, since she isn't trans, you must first admit you got lied to and deal with that. Then we can talk trans if you still want to, but I have a feeling you'll change subjects. - Lanbo
---------------
I have said several times my issue is with the negative effect of trans women on women's sports. A condition that I blame of the organizing authorities for the various sports, not the athletes themselves.
The specific female olympic boxer up thread is NOT TRANS!!!!
Using that adjective was a mistake, I admit it, and by doing so, I derailed the conversion I was trying to start. If this was Facebook, my account should be suspended so that the weak minded are not exposed to my dis information.
Now is that enough contrition for you? Enough to get past the individual and express an opinion on the topic of the slow ruination of women's sports? Recall that Title IX was established to create opportunities for women, the whole point of it was the unfairness of forcing women to compete against men for the obvious reasons.
I see why the organizing authorities don't address the issue, the cancel culture will come after you and call you an ass or worse.
No. of Recommendations: 1
If you're asking whether it would change my thoughts on a person competing in athletic events that are segregated in to men's and women's sports, that's far more complicated. I'm not sure how I would come down on that - I'm genuinely conflicted, and I think there's compelling arguments on both sides. I don't dismiss the claim that the separation of sports into men's and women's competitions is based on biological sex and not gender - the reason we have separate competitions is in recognition of the biological differences in anatomy that accompany biological sex, and not the social construct that is gender. - albaby
Thank you albaby. This is the issue I wanted to discuss before the thread went down the rabbit hole.
=====================
On the other hand, since we're using "men" and "women" as the divider - and not actually a biological test - it's valid for trans women to argue that they are "women," and thus meet the qualifying standard of participating in that competition. - albaby
My suggestion was to treat testosterone level as just anther criteria like weight. Above a certain T level, you go into the men's division. After that, for both the men's and women's divisions, apply weight criteria to further stratify the athletes into classes where the individual athletes more or less have equal opportunities for success.
No. of Recommendations: 6
I see why the organizing authorities don't address the issue, the cancel culture will come after you and call you an ass or worse.
I think you're not being called out because you wanted to have a conversation about the thorny issues raised when trans women compete in elite sports.
I think it's because you said it would be delusional for anyone to think that trans people were normal:
However to claim such [trans] people are normal is self delusional and to apply the adjective of the day, "weird".
Trans people are normal. It's just as normal as having green eyes or AB negative blood. Uncommon, but normal. I don't think it's self-delusional or weird to say that.
I think if you address the issue without slipping into negative broadsides against trans people generally, the cancel culture won't come after you and call you an ass. But intimating that trans people are abnormal will get you criticized - and appropriately so.
No. of Recommendations: 1
As a physician generalist, the subtleties are too complex even for someone with my somewhat extensive training.
fd
-----------
A medical degree is not necessary to recognize the effect on women's sports in general.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Trans people are normal. It's just as normal as having green eyes or AB negative blood. Uncommon, but normal. I don't think it's self-delusional or weird to say that.
--------------
I do think it is weird to have your pee pee cut off. However to each his own and if it stopped there fine. But when doing so allows you to gain entry into women's sports, your condition has a negative impact on others so there is more to consider. And you don't really need to get your pee pee cut off, all that is required is an intent to live as a woman.
No. of Recommendations: 5
I do think it is weird to have your pee pee cut off.
There is a difference between one's personal attitudes and whether something is "not normal." For example, I personally think it's weird that people choose to be jabbed thousands of times with tiny needles to have ink injected into their skin; I don't extend that to saying that people with tattoos are not normal.
Saying that something isn't your thing, or activates your own sense of squick, is very different from labeling that thing as not normal.
The former is an expression of personal taste, preference, or choices; the latter is a derogatory statement about other people. They're not the same thing, and they're not saying the same thing. When talking about fraught topics, it's sometimes helpful to pay close attention to what you're actually communicating, especially if you don't want to derail the conversation - or get called out for saying something derogatory if you meant to just express your personal perspective for your own body.
No. of Recommendations: 5
I do think it is weird to have your pee pee cut off. However to each his own and if it stopped there fine. But when doing so allows you to gain entry into women's sports, your condition has a negative impact on others so there is more to consider. And you don't really need to get your pee pee cut off, all that is required is an intent to live as a woman.
Seriously, do you think any male wants their sexual organs removed just for a chance to get a stupid sports medal?
I think the issue goes a little deeper (pun intended) than that.
No. of Recommendations: 5
My suggestion was to treat testosterone level as just anther criteria like weight. Above a certain T level, you go into the men's division. After that, for both the men's and women's divisions, apply weight criteria to further stratify the athletes into classes where the individual athletes more or less have equal opportunities for success.
We already apply weight criteria for the sports where that's appropriate, like boxing or weightlifting or wrestling.
We don't apply any other physiological criteria to segregate athletes that have biological advantages, though. There's no separate division for short swimmers and high jumpers, or tall gymnasts.
Nor, actually, do we apply those standards to many other competitions: there's no weight class for shot put, so you're going up against a 6'7" 320-pound Ryan Crouser in the Olympics. The overwhelming majority of people simply don't have the genetics to be able to meaningfully compete in that even - their genetics have doomed them to lose long before they step onto the field, or even start training.
Which clarifies the issue: all of these things reflect choices that we've made based on what we think is "fair" or "not fair" for a given sport, rather than some universal effort to balance the playing field so that anyone has a chance to win regardless of their genetics. These are all artificial divisions based on judgment calls, rather than the application of some extrinsic scientific assessment.
To bring that back to the main point, there's a baseline question of why (or whether) it is unfair for one female athlete to compete against another female athlete with higher testosterone, but not unfair if she has to compete against another athlete that's three inches taller than her? We don't let athletes take drugs to enhance their performance, but we're almost always perfectly comfortable with the idea that one athlete's natural physiology might give them an advantage over competitors - even an insuperable advantage, as with Michael Phelps' specific physiology (unusually long wingspan and torso, unusually large hands and feet, unusually flexible ankles and remarkably low tannic acid generation). Even though that means many athlete's dreams are crushed before they get in the pool or enter the ring - they're just going up against someone whose physiology gives them an insuperable advantage, but that's not unfair.
No. of Recommendations: 1
remarkably low tannic acid generation
OCD: lactic acid generation. No idea where tannic acid came from.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Define "normal".
Depending on how you define it, even elite athletes aren't "normal" (i.e. they can do stuff no "normal" human can do).
No. of Recommendations: 1
New word!!
"squick"
It's an actual word, and I had never heard it before.
:-)
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Khelif was born female and has never identified as transgender or intersex. Asserting her gender, the IOC said: “Scientifically, this is not a man fighting a woman.”
Also, it was a taller, thinner woman fighting a shorter, squat women in the same weight classification. Obviously, they had different reaches.
As Mike Tyson said, "everyone's plan change when you get hit on the nose".
No. of Recommendations: 4
Using that adjective was a mistake, I admit it, and by doing so, I derailed the conversion I was trying to start
Mike, your sources indicated to you she was trans - isn't that at least a fib? Its been known for some time that she is female, and we discussed the condition, and it seems your sources didn't inform you of that fact. You wanted to have a discussion about trans, by talking about a person who you should've known wasn't trans, but didn't know. That's how conversations go Mike. Rather than the talk focusing on trans, at least part of the conversation has to be on why you believe she's trans when she's not.
And it seems you're unprepared to talk about what might be considered "normal" - which would be a damned good conversation to have. Have you looked around the world at different cultures?
No. of Recommendations: 0
We don't let athletes take drugs to enhance their performance, but we're almost always perfectly comfortable with the idea that one athlete's natural physiology might give them an advantage over competitors - even an insuperable advantage, as with Michael Phelps' specific physiology (unusually long wingspan and torso, unusually large hands and feet, unusually flexible ankles and remarkably low tannic acid generation). Even though that means many athlete's dreams are crushed before they get in the pool or enter the ring - they're just going up against someone whose physiology gives them an insuperable advantage, but that's not unfair.
Exactly. Whish is why I think athletic competition is ultimately pointless. It's just "Colosseum Games" to amuse and distract the pullulating masses.
No. of Recommendations: 1
and remarkably low tannic acid generation
I can't seem to find anything in swimming about this. What advantage in swimming does low tannic acid generations give?
No. of Recommendations: 2
I can't seem to find anything in swimming about this. What advantage in swimming does low tannic acid generations give?I should have written
lactic acid. Not tannic acid. Must have been thinking about wine in the back of my head.
Lactic acid is the stuff that makes your muscles hurt and fatigue when you exercise. Phelps' body apparently produces far less than his competitors' do.
https://www.scienceabc.com/sports/michael-phelps-h...
No. of Recommendations: 3
"Lactic acid is the stuff that makes your muscles hurt and fatigue when you exercise. Phelps' body apparently produces far less than his competitors' do."
Anybody can, over time, improve the way in which their body handles lactic acid buildup. And
everybody, if they push past their anaerobic ( sans oxygen ) threshold, generates lactic acid in their body.
The world class athletes like Phelps have obsessively trained their body to raise their anaerobic
threshold to as high of a physical exertion point as possible, which allows them to push at what seems to be a superhuman level to the rest of us mere mortals. I do xc ski races, and if I stay past the point of my individual anaerobic threshold for too long, my entire body will eventually cramp up, and the only way to clear it is to stop, or be just barely moving. I've had that happen a couple of times, when pushing at too hard of a pace over a 17 mile race. It is very painful, but no lasting ill effects.The trick to being able to exert yourself for long periods of time is to stay just below the anaerobic threshold. But you can train that threshold point to a higher exertion level.
These world class athletes like Phelps have been genetically blessed, but they also work insanely hard at their sport. They truly are fine tuned machines. The rest of us can become fine tuned machines, too, if we're willing to put in the suffering ( training, lol ), but it won't be enough to beat out a superior athlete that is also willing to ride the pain train on a regular basis.
No. of Recommendations: 1
No idea where tannic acid came from. - albaby
-------------
Red Grapes, Green Tea, Persimmons.
