what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
I say aerobic capacity.
Why? Well, you need leg strength to make turns, but you need aerobic capacity to breathe, right? If you don't have leg strength, then you can't turn at high speeds, but if you can't breathe, then you'd be dead. Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Aaron Daniel Gringioni ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
In news:Kurgan Gringioni
typed: I say aerobic capacity. Why? Well, you need leg strength to make turns, but you need aerobic capacity to breathe, right? If you don't have leg strength, then you can't turn at high speeds, but if you can't breathe, then you'd be dead. Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Aaron Daniel Gringioni ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about Looks like this could make the summer quite amusing. ;-) -- Mike __________________________________________________ ______ "Colorado Ski Country, USA" Come often, Ski hard, Spend *lots* of money, Then leave as quickly as you can. Rec.Skiing.Alpine.Moderated is up and working! Join in! |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
"Kurgan Gringioni" wrote in
et: I say aerobic capacity. Why? Well, you need leg strength to make turns, but you need aerobic capacity to breathe, right? If you don't have leg strength, then you can't turn at high speeds, but if you can't breathe, then you'd be dead. Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Aaron Daniel Gringioni ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about Troll-O-Meter 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ^ | |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
your theory is flawed somewhat, dead people in the right vehicle and terrain
are faster than alive in the same terrain. example, dead person inside a box off Yosemite is faster than one alive. the alive person would fight for the first few seconds before being thrown off. the dead person is already traveling at 32.2ft/s /s thus has a 60-90 ft advantage the alive person would never regain. then once they reach their destination the aerobic wouldn't matter due to the longs being collapsed..... "Kurgan Gringioni" wrote in message et... Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Aaron Daniel Gringioni ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
In article , Kurgan
Gringioni wrote: I say aerobic capacity. Why? Well, you need leg strength to make turns, but you need aerobic capacity to breathe, right? If you don't have leg strength, then you can't turn at high speeds, but if you can't breathe, then you'd be dead. Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Downhill requires strong legs to maintain a tuck, do the pre-jumps, and absorb the bumps. Lots of squats done by the best. In a tight tuck there isn't much room to breathe anyway. Alpine skiing is a sport where one can be a fattie before they are a master. -WG Real skiers don't ride chairlifts. |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
"Kurgan Gringioni" wrote in message et... I say aerobic capacity. Why? Well, you need leg strength to make turns, but you need aerobic capacity to breathe, right? If you don't have leg strength, then you can't turn at high speeds, but if you can't breathe, then you'd be dead. Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Well, you're very close, but the actual answer is *anaerobic* capacity. You see at the speeds most downhillers are moving, when they open their mouth to breathe, the venturi effect draws all the air out of their pleural cavity. The better ones use this little known fact to their advantage by collapsing their rib cages, and thus decreasing their cross-sectional area, enabling them to go faster due to the drag reduction. As you might imagine, not breathing at all during two minutes of very high exertion puts quite a strain on the old bloodstream so most downhiller take Geritol every day. ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about You are clearly a very knowledgable person with a PhD. What do your do your dissertation on? I did mine on Biomechanical Implications of Camel Toe. -P |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobiccapacity?
JTN wrote:
your theory is flawed somewhat, dead people in the right vehicle and terrain are faster than alive in the same terrain. example, dead person inside a box off Yosemite is faster than one alive. the alive person would fight for the first few seconds before being thrown off. the dead person is already traveling at 32.2ft/s /s thus has a 60-90 ft advantage the alive person would never regain. then once they reach their destination the aerobic wouldn't matter due to the longs being collapsed..... But you forget aerodynamic considerations. The dead person could not tuck into an efficient shape (which a box certainly is not) and wind resistance would slow him down. If the distance to drop is short, this probably wouldn't matter much. "Kurgan Gringioni" wrote: Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Aaron Daniel Gringioni ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about It is good that you are willing to learn, grasshopper, but one must travel the path to knowledge one step at a time. -- Cheers, Bev ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I never understood why anyone would go to the trouble to write a novel when you can just go out and buy one for a few bucks." -- lpogoda |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 18:54:07 GMT, "Kurgan Gringioni"
wrote: "The Real Bev" wrote in message ... JTN wrote: your theory is flawed somewhat, dead people in the right vehicle and terrain are faster than alive in the same terrain. example, dead person inside a box off Yosemite is faster than one alive. the alive person would fight for the first few seconds before being thrown off. the dead person is already traveling at 32.2ft/s /s thus has a 60-90 ft advantage the alive person would never regain. then once they reach their destination the aerobic wouldn't matter due to the longs being collapsed..... But you forget aerodynamic considerations. The dead person could not tuck into an efficient shape (which a box certainly is not) and wind resistance would slow him down. If the distance to drop is short, this probably wouldn't matter much. "Kurgan Gringioni" wrote: Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Aaron Daniel Gringioni ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about It is good that you are willing to learn, grasshopper, but one must travel the path to knowledge one step at a time. Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. Bully for you. Now you should try hanging out with some really, really good (and heavily credentialed) Usenet posters. bw |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
I say the most important thing in a downhill is a really low IQ.
"Mike Speegle" wrote in message ... In news:Kurgan Gringioni typed: I say aerobic capacity. Why? Well, you need leg strength to make turns, but you need aerobic capacity to breathe, right? If you don't have leg strength, then you can't turn at high speeds, but if you can't breathe, then you'd be dead. Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. Aaron Daniel Gringioni ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about Looks like this could make the summer quite amusing. ;-) -- Mike __________________________________________________ ______ "Colorado Ski Country, USA" Come often, Ski hard, Spend *lots* of money, Then leave as quickly as you can. Rec.Skiing.Alpine.Moderated is up and working! Join in! |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
In news:Tom Kunich typed:
I say the most important thing in a downhill is a really low IQ. *BIG* balls. Tiny brain also helps. ;-) -- Mike __________________________________________________ ______ "Colorado Ski Country, USA" Come often, Ski hard, Spend *lots* of money, Then leave as quickly as you can. Rec.Skiing.Alpine.Moderated is up and working! Join in! |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
In news:Raptor typed:
Mike Speegle wrote: In news:Tom Kunich typed: I say the most important thing in a downhill is a really low IQ. *BIG* balls. Tiny brain also helps. ;-) Guts-wise, it's little different from bombing a canyon or col road at 85+kph, though I haven't yet been able to get myself to tuck down the start of the Grizzly course. Maybe with a groomed, closed course, which I'm never prone to get... (If someone were to go through the trouble of closing the course for little old me, I'd swallow my fear and do the sucker.) All it really takes is a love for speed, g-forces and strong legs (and the necessary ski skill). ...and the sound of the wind as you accelerate. Really cool. ;-) -- Mike __________________________________________________ ______ "Colorado Ski Country, USA" Come often, Ski hard, Spend *lots* of money, Then leave as quickly as you can. Rec.Skiing.Alpine.Moderated is up and working! Join in! |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Cool, I'm always looking for new ski partners. How about you join me for a run down one of my favourite couloirs? Perhaps I could even pick up a few pointers. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. I'm betting on it or more to the point, you'll be betting your life on it. Ciao, Armin |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
"Armin" wrote in message ... Kurgan Gringioni wrote: Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Cool, I'm always looking for new ski partners. How about you join me for a run down one of my favourite couloirs? Perhaps I could even pick up a few pointers. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. I'm betting on it or more to the point, you'll be betting your life on it. I've seen some of those couliers in magazines. Overblown. My studly Cat 3 buddies would leave you in their dust. |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
"Armin" wrote in message ... Kurgan Gringioni wrote: Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Cool, I'm always looking for new ski partners. How about you join me for a run down one of my favourite couloirs? Perhaps I could even pick up a few pointers. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. I'm betting on it or more to the point, you'll be betting your life on it. I've seen some of those couliers in magazines. Overblown. My studly Cat 3 buddies would leave you in their dust. I once saw some pictures of the TdF. Looked like a walk in the park. What they thought was steep wouldn't even make a good beginners hill at the local ski resort. I'm sure any decent skier could leave those gay looking guys wearing day-glo tights in their dust. After all, pictures never lie. Armin |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
Kurgan Gringioni wrote: Dead people are definitely slower than people who lack leg strength. Therefore, I submit that aerobic capacity is more important in the downhill. As has been pointed out, dead people *can* have an advantage in a straight downhill. Even more if rigor mortis has set in. As a related data point, we submit results from the Queenstown winter festival where individuals on cardboard boxes beat mountain bikers on the downhill slopes. So I would express the opinion that a deceased individual on a cardboard box could easily outclass an individual with strong legs in a downhill event. It may however, be difficult to acquire ethical approval for a fully-detailed research study. One of the mountainbikers was also heard to remark that the lack of snow made his event too difficult. I think that is where both rbr and rsa can find agreement. |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
"Armin" wrote in message ... Kurgan Gringioni wrote: "Armin" wrote in message ... Kurgan Gringioni wrote: Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Cool, I'm always looking for new ski partners. How about you join me for a run down one of my favourite couloirs? Perhaps I could even pick up a few pointers. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. I'm betting on it or more to the point, you'll be betting your life on it. I've seen some of those couliers in magazines. Overblown. My studly Cat 3 buddies would leave you in their dust. I once saw some pictures of the TdF. Looked like a walk in the park. What they thought was steep wouldn't even make a good beginners hill at the local ski resort. I'm sure any decent skier could leave those gay looking guys wearing day-glo tights in their dust. I agree. The Sperminator will WIN THE PROLOGUE TOMMORROW!!!!!! You heard it here first. Kurgan Gringioni downhill Xpert |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
In message , Kurgan
Gringioni writes ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about It is good that you are willing to learn, grasshopper, but one must travel the path to knowledge one step at a time. Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. When Grasshopper hang around this ng for a little while, discover that really, really good skiers talk just as much total b*llocks as any other kind of poster... -- Sue ]:(:) |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobiccapacity?
why are you skiers still crossposting here?
Sue wrote: In message , Kurgan Gringioni writes ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about It is good that you are willing to learn, grasshopper, but one must travel the path to knowledge one step at a time. Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. When Grasshopper hang around this ng for a little while, discover that really, really good skiers talk just as much total b*llocks as any other kind of poster... |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 16:52:14 -0600, Fred Marx
wrote: why are you skiers still crossposting here? Hadn't reached the limit. And top-posters ain't keepers. bw Sue wrote: In message , Kurgan Gringioni writes ps. I used to hang out with some skiers once, therefore I know what I'm talking about It is good that you are willing to learn, grasshopper, but one must travel the path to knowledge one step at a time. Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. When Grasshopper hang around this ng for a little while, discover that really, really good skiers talk just as much total b*llocks as any other kind of poster... |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
In message , Fred Marx
writes why are you skiers still crossposting here? I thought the OP was one of yours since I'd never seen him before, but I see he's now claiming to be a skier. Sorry about that - we'll feed him to the trolls over here. -- Sue ]|(:) |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
I know you are trolling but I want to provide you with a little perspective.
Some of those Tour de France stages through the mountains are the equivalent of driving from Sacramento, California up and over the Sierras, down to Lake Tahoe and then finishing at the top of Heavenly (or pick just about any other ski resort in the Lake Tahoe area). That would be similar to the Alps. The roads in the Pyrenees are much steeper.I figure you skiers have either been there or are familiar with the terrain I am talking about. "Armin" wrote in message ... Kurgan Gringioni wrote: "Armin" wrote in message ... Kurgan Gringioni wrote: Uhh . . . the skiers I used to hang with were really, really good. They were about equivalent to Cat 3 bike racers and triathletes and stuff. Cool, I'm always looking for new ski partners. How about you join me for a run down one of my favourite couloirs? Perhaps I could even pick up a few pointers. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about. I'm betting on it or more to the point, you'll be betting your life on it. I've seen some of those couliers in magazines. Overblown. My studly Cat 3 buddies would leave you in their dust. I once saw some pictures of the TdF. Looked like a walk in the park. What they thought was steep wouldn't even make a good beginners hill at the local ski resort. I'm sure any decent skier could leave those gay looking guys wearing day-glo tights in their dust. After all, pictures never lie. Armin |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
In article , Nick Burns
wrote: I know you are trolling but I want to provide you with a little perspective. Some of those Tour de France stages through the mountains are the equivalent of driving from Sacramento, California up and over the Sierras, down to Lake Tahoe and then finishing at the top of Heavenly (or pick just about any other ski resort in the Lake Tahoe area). That would be similar to the Alps. Except the Sierras are at higher altitude. Some of the paved roads going over the Sierra mountain passes are at 7000-9000 feet elevation, but there are no rideable roads to the top of the ski resorts around Lake Tahoe. -WG |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobiccapacity?
I think a US tour should have a finish on the summit of Pike's Peak.
Nick Burns wrote: It depends on which roads are compared to which stages. I need to look it up, but the Tourmalet is around 7000 feet while some of the highways reach about 6000 feet. I know there are no roads in the Ski resorts. I still think it provides perspective for people that know so very little about pro cycling races and its terrain. "warren" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Burns wrote: I know you are trolling but I want to provide you with a little perspective. Some of those Tour de France stages through the mountains are the equivalent of driving from Sacramento, California up and over the Sierras, down to Lake Tahoe and then finishing at the top of Heavenly (or pick just about any other ski resort in the Lake Tahoe area). That would be similar to the Alps. Except the Sierras are at higher altitude. Some of the paved roads going over the Sierra mountain passes are at 7000-9000 feet elevation, but there are no rideable roads to the top of the ski resorts around Lake Tahoe. -WG |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
"David Ryan" wrote in message ... I think a US tour should have a finish on the summit of Pike's Peak. Didn't the Red Zinger go over Loveland Pass, which is just under 12,000 ft? Nick Burns wrote: It depends on which roads are compared to which stages. I need to look it up, but the Tourmalet is around 7000 feet while some of the highways reach about 6000 feet. I know there are no roads in the Ski resorts. I still think it provides perspective for people that know so very little about pro cycling races and its terrain. "warren" wrote in message ... In article , Nick Burns wrote: I know you are trolling but I want to provide you with a little perspective. Some of those Tour de France stages through the mountains are the equivalent of driving from Sacramento, California up and over the Sierras, down to Lake Tahoe and then finishing at the top of Heavenly (or pick just about any other ski resort in the Lake Tahoe area). That would be similar to the Alps. Except the Sierras are at higher altitude. Some of the paved roads going over the Sierra mountain passes are at 7000-9000 feet elevation, but there are no rideable roads to the top of the ski resorts around Lake Tahoe. -WG |
what is more important in downhill, leg strength or aerobic capacity?
Not quite the same elevation as the highest US mountains or the mountains I
described? The Tourmalet is a regular feature in the Tour and it rises to 6995'. There are a few others that go up almost as high. Roads in the Alps typically average no more than 7%. Any roads with regular car traffic try to keep the same or less pitch. "Raptor" wrote in message ... Nick Burns wrote: I know you are trolling but I want to provide you with a little perspective. Some of those Tour de France stages through the mountains are the equivalent of driving from Sacramento, California up and over the Sierras, down to Lake Tahoe and then finishing at the top of Heavenly (or pick just about any other ski resort in the Lake Tahoe area). That would be similar to the Alps. The roads in the Pyrenees are much steeper.I figure you skiers have either been there or are familiar with the terrain I am talking about. But the European mountains don't have quite the same elevation. And, based on the course statistics, it's not hard at all to find similarly steep roads in the States, except for the occasional beat-the-riders-over-the-head climbs like the Angliru and Koppeburg. -- -- Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SkiBanter.com