He's 16
Ursus wrote:Scary stuff.
Big for age, but in no way over developed yet; plenty of scope for him to develop physically. The ever reliable Wikipedia had him last year at 1.88 & 96 kg.![]()
Very dynamic although also seems plenty of room for technical improvement.
Very early days, but the potential seems virtually unlimited. Will watch with interest.
Javelin Sam wrote:And still managed 20.96m. Got to wonder what the point was though. Surely the full recovery of the finger is more important non?
readtherules wrote:Thus,cant work out when we are being lied to by incompetant coaches to fit with the politically correct non drug perspective on coaching.
sidelined wrote:readtherules wrote:Thus,cant work out when we are being lied to by incompetant coaches to fit with the politically correct non drug perspective on coaching.
sidelined wrote:readtherules wrote:Thus,cant work out when we are being lied to by incompetant coaches to fit with the politically correct non drug perspective on coaching.
readtherules: are you incapable of posting without going on about the wonders of drugs? The "non drug perspective on coaching" isn't "politically correct", it's CORRECT. If you really think drugs have a place in coaching then I don't think there's a place for you on this forum.
sidelined wrote:readtherules wrote:Thus,cant work out when we are being lied to by incompetant coaches to fit with the politically correct non drug perspective on coaching.
readtherules: are you incapable of posting without going on about the wonders of drugs? The "non drug perspective on coaching" isn't "politically correct", it's CORRECT. If you really think drugs have a place in coaching then I don't think there's a place for you on this forum.
readtherules wrote:Kermit.
This sort of thing was being done 40 yrs ago.
It is not clear the relationship of effort and importance between special stuff and normal stuff.
I recall within the last two years seeing two of our top throws coaches bringing their athletes to demonstate special stuff.It was utterly clear that the athletes had never done the majority of the special stuff.
Thus,cant work out when we are being lied to by incompetant coaches to fit with the politically correct non drug perspective on coaching.
trickstat wrote:sidelined wrote:readtherules wrote:Thus,cant work out when we are being lied to by incompetant coaches to fit with the politically correct non drug perspective on coaching.
readtherules: are you incapable of posting without going on about the wonders of drugs? The "non drug perspective on coaching" isn't "politically correct", it's CORRECT. If you really think drugs have a place in coaching then I don't think there's a place for you on this forum.
Totally agree.
Are the drugs concerned hallucinogenic in read the rules' case?
bevone wrote:Drugs and JAcko Gill! why are these in the same sentence or even on this site? If ever there was an advert for a guy not taking drugs but throwing a long long way it is this 92kg 6' 3" guy who frankly looks like a 16 year old swimmer - and not the stereotypical shot putter. If anyone is going to cast aspersions at this guy then you have it all wrong. He is challenging the theory that little guys cant throw far - we actually they can!
This guy gets it, he can throw, he feel it and good on him. He also seems a bit of a head case as well if you watch his FB and you tube clips but what a great character to inspire - he is a breath of fresh air and an I CAN guy and he inspires my throwers as well. There is nothing negative about this guy just shock and awe!!!! It seems impossible but he just does it. Good on yer Jacko!!!!!!!!!!
d pickup wrote:readtherules
I armchair read astronomy and the number of ideas put forward to explain this and that is mind-boggling; plenty have their 15-minutes of fame and then fall back into oblivion for ever - well most of them. Meanwhile the accumulative 'pretty-sound' knowledge re space steadily grows.
Coaching athletics is the same. The modern indulgence in the activity over the last 150 years or so has accummulated a core of 'pretty sound' knowledge. Yes, we have moved on from drink a pint of salty water every day and no sex a week before your event. However we want to further refine our knowledge of how to prepare a human frame for sporting excellence. New ideas abound. Some will prove to be useless, others require further looking into, and some are worthwhile ... and some will be drug-linked.
Finally it must be added that the human body and mind is a bit more complex than outerspace so it will take a tad longer to be totally rational when it comes to being on the coaching field directing the athletes.
readtherules wrote:However when political pressure is brought to the problem then any understanding becomes even harder as we get lied to.
Yes,lets try and find ways of matching performances from decades ago but lets accept the role of drugs in the vast vast majority of cases in these performances.Also lets not forget that Howman from WADA has made it clear that only the stupid now get caught.
I agree that there is much to lean but what knowledge we have should not be tainted by political pressure.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest