Running at the Mouth

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics

Some whackjob scientists, ignoring physiology to slavishly follow numbers, seem to think that female sprinters will be faster than men in about 150 years, the Telegraph reports:

After applying different mathematical models to the [best 100m times for men and women since 1928], the team concluded that the improvements in male and female performance fitted a straight line on a graph, and that the gap between them would continue to narrow for the foreseeable future.

Crucially, they found no evidence that improvements in times were smaller or reaching a plateau.

If the trend continues, women will be running faster than men by 2156, said Dr Tatem. "We are not saying categorically that women will overtake the men, but we think there is a chance and we have put this up for discussion," he said.

I may not be a scientist, but I am a sentient being, and that's really all I need to be to know that this is crap. For example, look at this graph plotting the best marathon times for men and women. The data from the last ten years suggests that women will catch men in the next five years. The fundamental flaw, of course, is that the physiological differences between men and women is completely ignored. More from the Telegraph piece:

Dr Greg White, the director of science and research at the English Institute of Sport, challenged the findings. His own study of results from all track and field results suggests that athletics may be reaching a high point. "If you look at the data we are reaching the peak of human performance - the rate of improvement is not as great as it has been in the past," he said.

Female athletes are catching up with men, but mostly because they only recently got access to the training, sponsorship and events available to men, he said. The women's Olympic 100m did not start until the 1920s, while the women's marathon began in the 1980s, he said.

"Women are certainly progressing at a faster rate than men, so it may appear that one day they will run as fast as men," said Dr White.

"But in reality there are fundamental physiological differences between men and women, particularly when it comes to sprints."

Physiology never misleads. Statistics sometimes do.

Debate Strategy

George Will has some interesting thoughts on Bush's best strategy for tonight's debate:

President Bush knows that the more Kerry talks about Iraq, the more he, Bush, prospers. This is because anything Kerry says about Iraq contradicts something else he has emphatically said -- and irritates either his liberal base or an American majority. So Bush might serve national understanding -- and himself -- if, early on tonight, he says: "Everyone in the solar system knows my thinking on Iraq. But no one, probably not even anyone on my opponent's campaign plane, knows his thinking, as of now, 9:17 p.m. Eastern time. So, I invite him to take my time -- all of it -- and tell a bewildered nation what he thinks, at least tonight, at least between 9 and 10:30 p.m. Specifically, he says we must 'succeed' in Iraq. What would he call success? What is more important, success or meeting his deadline of removing U.S. forces in four years? What, aside from the allure of his personality, makes him think 'the world' will help?"

These would be great questions, though I doubt they'll be asked. The fact of the matter is, these questions should have been asked many dozen times already by the mainstream media, the folks who get John Kerry's undivided attention. But they wouldn't dare, for to ask such questions would be to lame the horse to which they've so completely hitched their cart.

Blood Doping Explained

Terrific article in VeloNews explaining performance enhancement through blood transfusions, which is the heart of the Tyler Hamilton controversy.

For SI, Guilt By Association is Enough

I guess Sports Illustrated's Tim Layden is a firm believer in the adage, "One bad apple spoils the bunch." Or something like that. This week he engages in what has become common yellow journalism in sports reporting, advancing the proposition that because some athletes use performance enhancing drugs, all athletes -- especially the really good ones -- must be too. Layden seems to think that every unbeatable performance happened before steroids and EPO, so subsequent, better performances must have been due to drugs. Which is a repugnant, though somewhat typical, baby boomer sentiment. He starts with the Tyler Hamilton scandal (which I admit sounds bad for Tyler yet still strikes me as unlikely), then quickly jumps to trashing Barry Bonds and Lance Armstrong, two athletes who have never tested positive for any performance enhancing substance. Here's Layden's "evidence" against Big Tex:

But it's inescapable that Armstrong is the greatest performer in history in a sport -- and an event -- with a long history of doping offenses. It's also inescapable that sources keep emerging, claiming Armstrong has used drugs. On Wednesday, SCA Promotions, a company that owes Armstrong $5 million for winning his sixth Tour said that it is withholding payment until it sees Armstrong's medical records, citing claims of using banned performance-enhancing drugs in the book L.A. Confidential, the Secrets of Lance Armstrong by David Walsh and Pierre Ballester. Armstrong has long and vigorously denied doping and has sued SCA, claiming it doesn't have the right to question Armstrong's victories. (And maybe SCA is just trying to duck paying the $5 mil).

First, does it stretch the imagination at all that an insurance company like SCA would be reluctant to fork over $5 million? SCA actions have no weight. Layden's sole evidence is comprised of oft-repeated but wholly unsupported allegations by disgruntled former employees (over which Armstrong is suing). If I kept repeating "Tim Layden is a pederast and I know because he abused me," would that make it true? Would anybody take me seriously? Of course not.

Putting aside his assertions about Armstrong, Bonds and the other athletes as guilty by association, the essence of Layden's piece is that today's athletes cannot possibly do better than their forbears unless they cheat. Which is not only pitiable -- and it is -- but is also patently absurd. It's absurd because that theory fails to recognize that Armstrong and Bonds could simply have built a better mousetrap. It's possible, nay probable, that Armstrong is better than his peers (and greater than any cyclist in history except perhaps Eddy Merckx) because he trains smarter and harder. While racing, Armstrong spins a higher pedal cadence, both uphill and on the flats, than any other rider. He trains at the same high cadence. He does endless technical testing of clothes and gear. He is fanatical about his diet. And he's always been an extraordinary talent (in fact, that was always the knock on him before he got cancer; great talent, no drive). Same with Bonds: he's a workout and diet fiend. He's extremely disciplined at the plate, i.e., he doesn't swing at a pitch unless he can hit it hard. He studies every pitcher he'll face. Taken to its logical extreme, the proposition that Bonds and Armstrong must be cheating because they are so much better than both their peers and anyone who came before them would also apply to Jim Brown, Babe Ruth, Jesse Owens, Michael Jordan, Bobby Howe, Karch Kiraly, Eddy Merckx, and Pele.

Finally, Layden's asks, as sort of a throw-away question, whether we care if athletes use drugs. For me, anyway, the answer is "yes." I'm a sports fan because there is something noble and beautiful about an athlete that achieves as a result of determination and hard work, without taking shortcuts or the easy road. I realize how corny and romantic that is, and I don't care. Sports are so trivial relative to most things; what's the harm in romanticizing?

Wish It Were Sooner

The NYT reports that Conan O'Brien will take over the Tonight show from the catastrophically unfunny Jay Leno. In 2009. So if you actually want to, you know, laugh, tune in in five years.

ASIDE: Does anyone remember how bad Conan was his first year on TV? I was a freshman in college during his first season, and Josh from Atlanta and I used to marvel at how badly he sucked. Then he found his rhythm the next season and made everyone remember that he was the guy who wrote Marge vs. The Monorail. An inspiring success story.

Dogs: Is There Anything They Can't Do?

I don't think there is (except maybe hold a pencil). Case in point: this dog got hit by a car, then checked himself into St. Francis hospital (how apropos):

Tokio, an 8-month-old boxer, had just been hit on S. 16th St. by a car that sped away.

Rather than hide somewhere and lick his wounds, he limped through the doors of St. Francis Hospital - that's St. Francis as in friend to all animals, but also St. Francis as in we mostly treat humans here.

And he collapsed in front of the registration desk, a few feet from the saint's statue.

He had to get through two sets of automatic doors to get to the front desk. Remarkably, Tokio had only cuts and bruises; no broken bones, no internal injuries. (Link via Bud Norton, via The Anomalist.)

Dogs can also raise children, apparently:

A Mowgli-like wild boy who appears to have been raised by a dog since he was three months old has been discovered living in a remote part of Siberia seven years after he was abandoned by his parents.

Andrei Tolstyk was discovered three weeks ago by social workers who wondered why the seven-year-old had not enrolled at his local school in the beautiful Siberian region of Altai.

Deprived of human contact for so long, Andrei could not talk and had adopted many dog-like traits, including walking on all fours, biting people, sniffing his food before he ate it and general feral behaviour.

I meet and talk to a lot of people on a daily basis, and, frankly, I don't think the dog did any worse than most parents. In fact, we have a shorthand note we use at work (which reminds me, I need to update my bio; I don't practice law anymore): "rbw," as in "raised by wolves." That's how we tag the rude, abrupt, obnoxious and unfriendly. The aforementioned Bud Norton uses it at his firm whenever someone eats someone else's food out of the refrigerator or otherwise leaves an unholy mess in the common kitchen (he also feels most of his neighbors are rbw, but those hilarious tales are his to tell).

Real Live Ninjas

Paul Hamm ain't shit compared to these guys. Just take three minutes and see what I'm talking about. (Links via the Mugblog.)

Why the Shirts?

Okay, pay attention, because there's a lot going on in this story. Two guys on motorcycles were pulling wheelies on the freeway. A third guy was in a car next to them filming the whole thing (remember, kids, it's always a good idea to videotape yourself breaking the law). But here's the part that catapult's this story into the pantheon:

Both men were wearing helmets, shirts and shoes, but neither was wearing pants or underwear, police said.

One of the half-naked, wheelie-pulling marauders hit a parked tow truck and died. The other one lived (thus partially thwarting natural selection) and was charged with reckless driving, negligent driving, and driving with a learner's permit without proper supervision.

Ultimate Frisby

Lou Holtz is apparently trying to find players he can still relate to. Tim Frisby, the world's oldest living freshman at 39 years old, will suit up for the South Carolina Gamecocks. Of course, it helps that Frisby is also a certified badass:

Frisby, nicknamed Pops by his teammates, recently retired after 20 years in the U.S. Army, where he was Ranger-qualified with the 82nd Airborne. He served in Desert Storm and the Kosovo conflict.

Godspeed, Pops.

Rat Bastards

SCA Promotions, Inc., a Dallas insurance company that agreed to pay Lance Armstrong $5 million for winning the TdF this year, ain't payin'. It claims that the uncorroborated and unsubstantiated (read: crackpot) claims of whackjob Emma O'Reilly made in a French book -- over which Armstrong is suing on a libel cause of action -- allow it to breach its contract:

Chris Compton, an attorney for SCA, said the company wants to see Armstrong's medical records before releasing the money.

"We've requested (drug) test results to disprove the allegations - clean test results that should be easily attainable," Compton said Thursday. "We're not planning on releasing them to the media or doing anything other than verifying that they exist."

What a douchebag. Apparently the stringent doping tests performed by the ICI and WADA during the TdF -- all of which Armstrong passed with nary a suspicion -- aren't enough.

Typical effin' insurance company. They're happy to spend your monthly premiums, but as soon as you want a little of the coverage you've paid for they squeeze your nuts 'til they're purple.