This is a bold statement to make because, let's face it, it's not something that's exactly open to study. It's an assumption based on the hypothesis that low oxygen availability is a performance limiter (and there's significant challenge to that idea....)I agree that there aren't any official studies (especially involving world-class athletes) but believe me there are plenty of doctors like Ferrari who have the data and know the effects. Not just that, if you've read the accounts of professional racers during the early '90s (like Andy Hampsten) you would hear essentially the same stories. blogs like this can also be enlightening:http://veloclinic.tumblr.com/post/40824936108/phisiology-of-...Isn't that argument a bit reminiscent of Ed Coyle's contention that Armstrong was able to to perform the way he did because of some superhuman, never-before-reported increase in cycling efficiency and change in muscle fibre type due to training (when I first smelt fish, BTW) The data for claims like this need to be very robust. They weren't with Coyle.Only in the sense that there isn't official data from a published study of professional cyclists. Unfortunately, the barriers to this are difficult to overcome. Coyle's claims were incredulous but at least these have scientific merit.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar<