Altitude And Air Resistance

[[old] John Rupp]

Bill,<br /><br />Thanks for pointing that out. <br /><br />Yes I have discovered the "ignore" button, which does work very well.

[[old] John Rupp]

Sir Pirate and David,<br /><br />Thanks for your support.

[[old] John Rupp]

Some break World Records, i.e. Dwayne Adams, Rich Cureton, Eskild Ebbesen, et all. <br /><br />If others are not able to understand me, or them, that is to be expected and is fine with me.

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Feb 23 2005, 01:37 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Feb 23 2005, 01:37 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes I have discovered the "ignore" button, which does work very well.  <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Pretty soon you will have just ignored everyone. Hmm, not sure that's a change from before. <br /><br />You said you stood behind all of your previous statements 100%, even the libelous ones toward me?<br />

[[old] kjgress]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Feb 23 2005, 11:41 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Feb 23 2005, 11:41 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Oh yes the C2 "corrections" for altitude are far too high.  If you think some corrected is deserved, for less than fit rowers, then perhaps but certainly no more than 3-4 seconds for a 2k.<br /><br />However that is based only on o2 consumption and fitness.  Due to the additional advantages and benefits of the low air pressure on the fan, I think that 3-4 seconds is well overcome and there should be no gift of time given to rowers at altitude.  In face if I lived at altitude I would consider it an advantage to do my times there, rather than at sea level.<br /><br />To think otherwise is just fear, and not looking at the reality of what has already been done in other athletic endeavors at altitude. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John: If you would like such a "gift" come to Denver and row a couple of personal bests!<br /><br />I row at altitude every day. Why would I be afraid of rowing here? When I go to sea level I row faster times, not just in a race, but for training also. I have the same fitness level in both places. Are my times in Denver or my times in Long Island an accurate reflection of my ability? They both are, under different circumstances. The lack of oxygen at altitude hinders athletic performance and the low air pressure on the fan isn't even a factor as I have adjusted for it.<br /><br />However, the gift you do get at altitude is the benefit to your aerobic system when you go to sea level, so I rather do like rowing here.

[[old] Porkchop]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Feb 22 2005, 10:00 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Feb 22 2005, 10:00 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Porkchop+Feb 22 2005, 06:39 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Porkchop @ Feb 22 2005, 06:39 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->my suggested test would involve measuring performance by the same individual(s) at at sea level and at altitude.  Wouldn't that measure what the athletes are doing in reality?<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Yes, provided the athlete/s were well trained aerobically, meaning 10k no slower than 2k pace + 5 or so. There is a huge variation of aerobic fitness among rowers. Those who are less fit will of course have less capability to use oxygen at altitude and thus this will be a major factor for them to overcome. For example for those who have a tough time with a 10k at 2k +10 at sea level are going to have a hard time with a 2k at altitude.<br /><br />The difference in o2, however, will not be as much of a factor for those with high aerobic fitness.<br /><br /> </td></tr></table><br />John,<br /><br />This seems rather circular, or maybe question-begging, to me -- you appear define aerobic fitness by reference to ability to utilize oxygen at altitude, the very point you propose to prove. Anyone who doesn't do well at altitude apparently falls out of your sample. That doesn't seem like a very scientific way to prove a point. One can prove anything if one assumes away all contradictory facts.<br /><br />Is there any proof for your last statement (that the difference in o2 will not be as much of a factor for those with high aerobic fitness)? It seems to me that comes out of thin air. (Sorry, I couldn't resist that one.) <br /><br />Are there comparative studies of good and bad swimmers, for example (just to come up with an event in which air resistance is at best a trivial factor), to determine the extent to which performance degrades at altitude depending on aerobic fitness level? <br /><br />Do you have examples of rowers with the 10K times you suggest as differentiating good and less good aerobic fitness? Are those figures really adequate criteria for defining aerobic fitness? If a rower has a 2K pace of 2:40, and a 10K pace of 2:45, I don't think anyone would look at that individual as an exemplar of aerobic fitness. I know that you mentioned the word "elite" earlier, but I don't think we have discussed where the cut-off is.<br /><br />Porkchop

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I row at altitude every day.  Why would I be afraid of rowing here? When I go to sea level I row faster times, not just in a race, but for training also. I have the same fitness level in both places.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Sure you have the same fitness both places. It's not going to change overnight. However, is your 10k PB at 2k + 5? If not, what is it?<br /><br />Basically, fitness extends your more beneficial anerobic component at altitude. This is not to say that less fit rowers will do well as at altitude as at sea level, as most definitely they will not! To the point though, those aiming to qualify for sea level competitions should be held to a higher standard than a less fit population.<br /><br />This is why I feel that any adjustment factor for altitude should either be "zero" or else no more than 3-4 seconds for a 2k.<br /><br />Also, as has been pointed out before, air "flow" through the fan cage is not the same thing as the difference in air pressure at altitude, i.e. moving the lever doesn't change the altitude.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-kjgress+Feb 23 2005, 02:48 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(kjgress @ Feb 23 2005, 02:48 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->John:  If you would like such a "gift" come to Denver and row a couple of personal bests!<br /> </td></tr></table><br />KJ,<br /><br />Thanks for the invitation. I might take you up on that.

[[old] rjw]

Here is a read that would clarify "the fitter the person the better they are at altitude" claim that I read earlier by the person whose name I am too affraid to mention. May explain why Keino did better at altitude than Clarke. Guess it depends on how one defines fitness<br /><br /><a href='http://www.csus.edu/news/032801altitude.html' target='_blank'>http://www.csus.edu/news/032801altitude.html</a><br /><br />In short it "the more oxygen that a person consumes – meaning a high VO2 max – the larger the decrease in their exercise capacity at altitude. But people who can maintain a high steady state intensity for a long time – those with a high lactate threshold – seem to have less decline in exercise capacity at altitude."<br /><br />Is this what that person whose name I am too affraid to mention was getting at? <br /><br />The plot thickens.<br /><br />Raoul<br />

[[old] John Rupp]

Chop,<br /><br />Good questions. I think there is really no specific measureable scientific criteria about who is going to be closer to their sea level 2k time at altitude, other than going the 2k tests and competitions in reality.<br /><br />I agree it is not as easy as saying 2k + 5/6 seconds, or 2k + 5% etc.<br /><br />In the case of the runner Ron Clarke, he was very "fit" as to his times, but really maximizing his o2 already at sea level due to, as we all found out later, his clogged arteries and the subpar health of his system. Thus, in addition to his poor attitude leading up to the Games, he also had no room to spare as regards o2 utilization, from the standpoint of his training and his health.<br /><br />Now we see very fit World Class runners who are able to run within 20-30 seconds of their sea level times, at altitude. Considering times are equivalent at approximately 800 meters, this comes out to no more than 3-4 seconds for a 2k based only on the factor of o2 consumption.<br /><br />Let me also say that I am not trying to "exclude" anyone from any "study". Yes, granted that perhaps "most" people and including the general population will not perform as well at altitude as at sea level. However, I would except fit aerobically trained rowers to do at least as well on an erg at altitude as at sea level.<br /><br />And if not then at least within 3-4 seconds.<br /><br />Anything more than that would, in my opinion, be construed as a lack of fitness. This is appropriate as there should be no "gift" for a lack of fitness, and everyone whether sea level or altitude should be held to the same reasonable standard as anyone else. In the case of altitude if indeed it can't be the same, then at least it should be equivalent.

[[old] TomR/the elder]

This unraveling thread demonstrates some truth about human behavior, but it has nothing to do w/ fitness and altitude. <br /><br />It appears to be that if someone makes a ridiculous assertion and sticks to it, all sorts of people will work determinedly to shake him (or her) from that position, despite all the evidence that reason has no place in the discussion. I can't help but wonder if John cares about anything other than the attention he gets. <br /><br />John's views are like impossibly gaudy lures that despite violating the laws of nature manage to cause the fish to bite. And to bite. And to bite. Imagine if people actually did use the ignore button. Lonely John would troll in the dark water fruitlessly for his daily catch.<br /><br />Tom

[[old] kjgress]

<!--QuoteBegin-Porkchop+Feb 23 2005, 06:29 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Porkchop @ Feb 23 2005, 06:29 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />Are there comparative studies of good and bad swimmers, for example (just to come up with an event in which air resistance is at best a trivial factor), to determine the extent to which performance degrades at altitude depending on aerobic fitness level?  <br /><br /><br />Porkchop <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Porkchop: I don't know about any studies, but my husband lives one week in Denver and one week on Long Island and he is a masters swimmer who trains in both places. He will attest to lower performance here. No, he is not an elite swimmer, but I don't think that matters. Since the topic question is how does altitude help performance (and everyone but John Rupp knows it doesn't) and John's argument seems to be that the lessened air resistance overcomes the lack of O2 and actually improves performance, in the case of the swimmer he doesn't receive the magical benefit of the lessened air resistance and so his performance would be worse (I think this is how John would see it, so I don't think you will convince him with this one).<br /><br />Based on his reply to my post he is also thinking that lessened vertical air pressure somehow plays a part in all this. It has been a long time since physics and I don't have a formula at my fingertips to calculate how much less I weigh here in Denver because there is less air pressing down on me and how much it would help me here.

[[old] John Rupp]

In regards to Raoul's article:<br /><br />vo2 max is a by product of 'work output' and thus not a good predictor of 'performance'. That being said, yes a decline from 90 to 81 is a greater absolute decrease in vo2 than going from 60 to 54, though the percentages of both are the same. Extrapolating this general result to performance, however, is too simplistic and doesn't work in reality as there is a high variation even amongst a pool of similarly talented athletes at sea level and additionally with altitude.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->people who can maintain a high steady state intensity for a long time ? those with a high lactate threshold ? seem to have less decline in exercise capacity at altitude. </td></tr></table><br />Yes as the altitude will assist in prolonging that anerobic component over distance, provided the athlete has the o2 capacity to maintain this in reserve.<br /><br />

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-kjgress+Feb 23 2005, 03:57 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(kjgress @ Feb 23 2005, 03:57 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->my husband lives one week in Denver and one week on Long Island and he is a masters swimmer who trains in both places.  He will attest to lower performance here.  No, he is not an elite swimmer, but I don't think that matters. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Swimming is in water, yes?<br /><br />So that is not the same as reduced air pressure on an ergometer fan or a bicycle.

[[old] NavigationHazard]

Actually you weigh marginally less in Denver because you're farther away from the center of the Earth's mass. Gravitational force for you is about 99.94% of what it is at sea level, meaning that if you weigh 55 kg in New York you weigh a whopping 33 thousands of a kilogram less in Denver.