Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] distance, rate, time

On 9/29/2011 9:14 PM, Price Daniel S. wrote:

Dr. Denker's comments (below) remind me of something I mention to runners that I coach/advise: everybody in the race is working equally hard, but the fastest runners hurt for a lot less time than everyone else.



--------------------------
The singularity in equation [2] can be taken as a
warning. If you are trying to finish a race in the
least amount of time, going slowly even for a rather
short distance is devastating. This is actually
true, and quite noticeable if you do the experiment.

To say the same thing in slightly more positive terms,
if there is a fast half of the course and a slow half
of the course (perhaps due to hills) you can gain a
lot more by speeding up the slow half by 1 mph than
you can by speeding up the fast half by 1 mph. Also
true and quite noticeable.

====================

This occasionally comes in handy as an answer to the
athlete who thinks physics equations could not possibly
explain anything he is interested it.

On the other hand - just got off the phone with my younger son - who rode an annual 66 mile bike race last weekend at Corpus.
He did three ten mile prep rides which for him is the epitome of preparation.
He bade his friend who is in competitive shape, to pull away from him as soon as he needed to - which he did, so that at one point his friend was about an hour ahead of him. My son chose a group of sporting rather than competitive riders for his cohort. He remarked that at the end of the ride, his fast friend was a mere 15 minutes ahead of him. He took energy bars, drinks etc., etc. and paced it. His friend stayed with a very competitive pack and blew up 3/4 the way home. Which I guess means that pacing counts for a lot - or too fast gets to be too slow before the end.

Brian W