Rookie's diary part two

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

That article didn't mention protein in exercise, it was protein consumed by those that exercise.

I was going to be pedantic and ask if you didn't think the protein you consumed in your breakfast porridge was of benefit in your lunchtime workout but I got distracted.

tunney

amphkingwest wrote: »

I was going to be pedantic and ask if you didn't think the protein you consumed in your breakfast porridge was of benefit in your lunchtime workout but I got distracted.

I had weetabix today.

I draw a distinction between protein consumed during exercise and not.

TRR

Kurt Godel wrote: »

It's not a statistically significant study, (and I don't even see mention of control groups). We may as well as a priest what he thinks.

but it says P<0.05

It's a **** study

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

I had weetabix today.

I draw a distinction between protein consumed during exercise and not.

I know, I was being facetious.

But that ^^ opens a new discussion.

With the time involved in digesting protein the main benefit (except in really really long sessions) of consuming protein during exercise is going to be in the recovery period rather than in the exercise period. So protein consumed pre-exercise may with proper timing lead to a perceived benefit during exercise, leading to potentially less muscle protein being passed out along with calcium from the bones.

Just a thought. And I know you like to debate.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

YAZOO, get some!

pgibbo

Ares Unsightly Sprawl wrote: »

YAZOO, get some!

I hate milk and most dairy products except ice cream and chocolate

Kurt Godel

TRR wrote: »

but it says P<0.05

It's a **** study

Yeah, and me and tunney are hopping mad curious to know what tests they used to arrive at that conclusion. TBH the vast majority of sports science that I've seen quoted on Boards recently is fundamentally flawed. You can't just take a group of 8 elite bikers, run two separate tests under different conditions, and conclude that the results apply to the rest of elite bikers.

tunney

Kurt Godel wrote: »

Yeah, and me and tunney are hopping mad curious to know what tests they used to arrive at that conclusion. TBH the vast majority of sports science that I've seen quoted on Boards recently is fundamentally flawed. You can't just take a group of 8 elite bikers, run two separate tests under different conditions, and conclude that the results apply to the rest of elite bikers.

Its better than the usual standard of debate where N=1
and 1 is a newbie to exercise.

Kurt Godel

tunney wrote: »

Its better than the usual standard of debate where N=1
and 1 is a newbie to exercise.

Yeah, but that's what pisses me off most about so many "sports science", such as the "study" you quoted (I note its not been published yet). If a newbie says he drank milk and had less upper respiratory tract infections, another internet poster will come along and say the opposite. Sports science should be used to settle the debate, so elites/athletes/cyclists/commuters/freds/whatever can see the association and decide for themselves if its worth a punt to help their training. As it stands, an awful lot of sports science is flawed, and a small step above internet chatter, and thats damaging to science as a whole. The study you quoted pisses me off because it fosters a general belief that science can't be trusted, wait long enough and another group of boffins will come along with a study which "proves" the opposite. Genuine, proper, peer-reviewed sports science helps everyone make informed choices about their training.

Witness this car-crash thread on the running forum, as an example of a valid, large-scale study on cardiac damage to long-term marathoners, and the amount of posters who choose to ignore or debunk it. Bad science fosters this attitude of only choosing to believe what you want.

tunney

Kurt Godel wrote: »

Yeah, but that's what pisses me off most about so many "sports science", such as the "study" you quoted (I note its not been published yet). If a newbie says he drank milk and had less upper respiratory tract infections, another internet poster will come along and say the opposite. Sports science should be used to settle the debate, so elites/athletes/cyclists/commuters/freds/whatever can see the association and decide for themselves if its worth a punt to help their training. As it stands, an awful lot of sports science is flawed, and a small step above internet chatter, and thats damaging to science as a whole. The study you quoted pisses me off because it fosters a general belief that science can't be trusted, wait long enough and another group of boffins will come along with a study which "proves" the opposite. Genuine, proper, peer-reviewed sports science helps everyone make informed choices about their training.

Good point.

I put faith in it as Asker was talking about it

TRR

Kurt Godel wrote: »

Yeah, and me and tunney are hopping mad curious to know what tests they used to arrive at that conclusion. TBH the vast majority of sports science that I've seen quoted on Boards recently is fundamentally flawed. You can't just take a group of 8 elite bikers, run two separate tests under different conditions, and conclude that the results apply to the rest of elite bikers.

I'd go even further than those highlighted on boards. There is a reason that the vast majority of sports science studies similar to this are only found in very specific scientific journals, i.e sports science journals. You'll never see them in high impact journals with a broad scope like PNAS, Nature, Science etc because a lot of them have significant (P<0.05 ) flaws in their methodology.

Anyway Tunney why did this study catch your eye, you need to feckin' train like an elite before its relevant

tunney

Swam last night, first time since my 400m TT I think.

Horrible form, horrible times.

Bad night last night with Eoin. I took the first half of the night, lying on a chair bed soothing him. Second half of the night he was in with Glenda and I was still on the chair bed.

Feck all sleep so didn't get up for swim. Greeted with "The old Dave wouldn't have been such a princess and would have just gone". Harsh but true and fair!

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

Greeted with "The old Dave wouldn't have been such a princess and would have just gone". Harsh but true and fair!

Ah that's not fair.

As you get older the lack of sleep takes it out of you ( ) and if you force yourself to train you will be sicker than a small hospital in no time. Right call and you'll still blast past them in FF anyway!

griffin100

amphkingwest wrote: »

Ah that's not fair.

As you get older the lack of sleep takes it out of you ( ) and if you force yourself to train you will be sicker than a small hospital in no time. Right call and you'll still blast past them in FF anyway!

As I get older I'm finding that I'm needing less sleep, which is a pain as I love my bed and I'm also feeling cheated as after almost 10 years of having one or other of the kids sneaking into our bed at night and ruining my nights sleep I now don't need as much, just as we have just about stopped the littlest doing this On the plus side I've actually gotten up early (before 8am) for runs over the last few weekends which is something I haven't done since the first flush of Ironman enthusiasm over three years ago.

tunney

Anyways ignoring the baiting attempts on the main board I'll retreat back to the sanctity of my own thread....

Eoin back at doctor, chest infection now.................

pgibbo

2 new posts pulled from the FTP thread.

Hope Eoin bounces back quickly

shotgunmcos

pgibbo wrote: »

Hope Eoin bounces back quickly

+1 everything else unimportant

tunney

Is a 0.7m chain long enough to lock a bike to an immoveable object? Just the frame the concern

(Eoin much better, told he slept until 1030 this morning, normally a 0630 riser)

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

Is a 0.7m chain long enough to lock a bike to an immoveable object? Just the frame the concern

(Eoin much better, told he slept until 1030 this morning, normally a 0630 riser)

I have a motorbike chain and padlock, weighs a ton but it is short & perfect for locking to a lamp-post or heavy bar etc. Extremely strong chain.

tunney

amphkingwest wrote: »

I have a motorbike chain and padlock, weighs a ton but it is short & perfect for locking to a lamp-post or heavy bar etc. Extremely strong chain.

Yeah I have a 2.5m one of these at home (http://www.almax-security-chains.co.uk/Almax-Immobiliser-Series-IV/c-1-70/) but its as heavy as me.

Looking at the III version for my good bike for pre work spins (new office and cannot bring bike into office anymore but secure underground but want a good lock).

0.7m II Version or 1.5m III (1m IV exists but the weight!)

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

Yeah I have a 2.5m one of these at home (http://www.almax-security-chains.co.uk/Almax-Immobiliser-Series-IV/c-1-70/) but its as heavy as me.

Looking at the III version for my good bike for pre work spins (new office and cannot bring bike into office anymore but secure underground but want a good lock).

0.7m II Version or 1.5m III (1m IV exists but the weight!)

Cut a piece of string .7m long and see if it is long enough to go round object through frame and to lock through wheels.

I'd overlay the front wheel on the back, pass chain through wheels round frame. You won't need to bring the lock home with you so no issue carrying it is there?

tunney

amphkingwest wrote: »

Cut a piece of string .7m long and see if it is long enough to go round object through frame and to lock through wheels.

I'd overlay the front wheel on the back, pass chain through wheels round frame. You won't need to bring the lock home with you so no issue carrying it is there?

Good point on the carrying............

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

Good point on the carrying............

See, sometimes I can be right too

tunney

amphkingwest wrote: »

See, sometimes I can be right too

usually just about runners though

BennyMul

Not sure if you have seen this,
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/video-dublin-thieves-filmed-stealing-bike-on-city-street-they-make-it-look-easy/

tunney

BennyMul wrote: »

Not sure if you have seen this,
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/video-dublin-thieves-filmed-stealing-bike-on-city-street-they-make-it-look-easy/

Yes.

But I have never thought that the U-locks were secure though!

tunney

Actually got out on the bike at the weekend - Saturday. Met Jamboy at 0630 somewhere between Naul and Ballyboughal. Both of us had an hour in the legs by then. I had dressed for weather just above freezing and even brought spare gear - hat, gloves, buff and space blanket. Jamboy had dressed for a balmy autumn day. Middle 30 km of the ride were pointless due to ice. Ice and listening to Jamboy whinging "I'm cold, I'm cold". "What the fvck did you expect? You're not wearing tights (skinz don't count on the bike), not enough layers, cheap sh1t gloves and no shoe covers". After I'd abused him for dressing stupidly I gave him a spare pair of gloves I had with me. He still whinged though

Cold and ice aside a nice ride and hope at 0845 with 3 hours in the legs.

Winter gear - you can't skimp on it.

mloc123

tunney wrote: »

Actually got out on the bike at the weekend - Saturday. Met Jamboy at 0630 somewhere between Naul and Ballyboughal. Both of us had an hour in the legs by then. I had dressed for weather just above freezing and even brought spare gear - hat, gloves, buff and space blanket. Jamboy had dressed for a balmy autumn day. Middle 30 km of the ride were pointless due to ice. Ice and listening to Jamboy whinging "I'm cold, I'm cold". "What the fvck did you expect? You're not wearing tights (skinz don't count on the bike), not enough layers, cheap sh1t gloves and no shoe covers". After I'd abused him for dressing stupidly I gave him a spare pair of gloves I had with me. He still whinged though

Cold and ice aside a nice ride and hope at 0845 with 3 hours in the legs.

Winter gear - you can't skimp on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siQEIDNebRk

tunney

Weather looks decent for tomorrow mornings stupid o'clock ride with Jamboy. Bet he completely overdresses and gets dehydrated or heat stroke.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

tunney wrote: »

Weather looks decent for tomorrow mornings stupid o'clock ride with Jamboy. Bet he completely overdresses and gets dehydrated or heat stroke.

I bet Ricki Lake will be huffing & puffing up any small incline with the watts per kg ratio of a cream doughnut and a xmas pudding!!
Hopefully we wont have to stop a 100 times for you to adjust the pink ribbons or mudgaurds on the bike, queen of the faffers!!