This is a fascinating piece from the NY Times about body types and the plethora of differences thereof. We know that there are extremes. Nobody expects an NFL lineman to run a sub-4 marathon. And not many cyclists can bench their weight (including bike).
What I found interesting was in the data used to create the overview. Take a close look at some of the numbers, e.g. age + resting HR + BMI + their summation and comments. I think we can draw some conclusions.
Such as: Race your strength and train your weakness. Or. Know thyself. Or. Do what your body has a genetic propensity to do. Or. Cross train for speed, strength, power and stamina. Or. Fuel your training appropriately and accurately. Or. Rest and recover properly. Or. It's about the motor. I could go on or-ing, but you get the idea.
I think it would be a fun exercise to do one of these profiles, except that I haven't done a bench press in about three years and would be totally embarrassed to list my hoist as a buck-ten. But then again I could always claim cyclist category.
"The most difficult thing for me to develop is explosive power. I was born with a lot of lean, slow muscle. With a lot of protein and a lot of strength training, I can manipulate my ‘nature.’" Pictured is Deena Kastor (rhr, 28, bench 65 and a 2:19 marathon PR). Go get 'em Deena!!!!!
4 comments:
not procrastinating, finding time
Or, whatever it takes.
My body was not optimized for basketball or crew, but I enjoyed playing and rowing anyway. In cycling, my body is not optimized for climbing or sprinting, but I enjoy both regardless. My DNA seems to do best on rolling terrain over long distances, FWIW. It would have been nice to know that 30 years ago.
It might be a process of elimination. If I try them all, surely I will find something I am good at. Was talking with one of our runners last night about the strange paradox of me (my body) doing MUCH better in short distance than in long. But I like the long so much more. Go figure.
Post a Comment